47% of Americans do not Pay Federal Income Tax?

[guido911]

So it disgusts you that I got back more then I put in, so there for I was able to buy my kids some birthday presents this year, or that I was able to get some of my back child support paid from when I wasn't working?  It disgusts you that I have ended up at the bottom of the economic structure, and as I fight to get a leg up I get money back on my taxes that can help me on the way?  Perhaps it also disgusts you that I am taking advantage of financial aid to get my school paid for so I can have a chance of getting somewhere?  While I'm sure that there are plenty who have taken advantage of the system because they just want something for nothing, I would suggest taking a moment to think about the entire emcompassment of a comment.

Got it. It doesn't bother you one bit that government is forcing others at the threat of arrest and jail to hand over their money to you. Or do you lack the humility and are okay with that. As for buying your kids' birthday presents, assistance with school tuition, and getting some of your child support back; you're welcome.

I have no problem with my comment, as with every large number of losers that take advantage of the system there are the legit hard luck stories. I am simply not wired in such a way wherein I could seriously try to convince someone that taking someone else's property because I am having hard times is justified. Oh, and in case you do not know, no one died and left me a ton of money nor did I open my front door one morning to find a pile of cash. Everything I have I have earned through hard work and sacrifice. But feel free to take the position, which some in this forum refer to in loser speak that "I got mine", to take what I have "gotten".

BTW, I kinda like Drudge's Headline "Rob thy Neighbor"

[custosnox]

Got it. It doesn't bother you one bit that government is forcing others at the threat of arrest and jail to hand over their money to you. Or do you lack the humility and are okay with that. As for buying your kids' birthday presents, assistance with school tuition, and getting some of your child support back; you're welcome.

I have no problem with my comment, as with every large number of losers that take advantage of the system there are the legit hard luck stories. I am simply not wired in such a way wherein I could seriously try to convince someone that taking someone else's property because I am having hard times is justified. Oh, and in case you do not know, no one died and left me a ton of money nor did I open my front door one morning to find a pile of cash. Everything I have I have earned through hard work and sacrifice. But feel free to take the position, which some in this forum refer to in loser speak that "I got mine", to take what I have "gotten".

BTW, I kinda like Drudge's Headline "Rob thy Neighbor"

I'm guessing it also rubs you the wrong way that all those people are retiring on your dime.  That damn Social Security thing was all designed to take from your pocket and spread the wealth.

[nathanm]

Everything I have I have earned through hard work and sacrifice.

And not a small amount of help from society, I'm sure. Add a dash of luck, and presto!

Seriously, those four things are absolutely required for business success. Sometimes you can get there with no hard work or sacrifice, but that generally requires a heaping dollop of luck rather than a mere dash.

[JeffM]

Wealth, Income, and Power
by G. William Domhoff
September 2005 (updated February 2010)
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

"As of 2007, income inequality in the United States was at an all-time high for the past 95 years, with the top 0.01% -- that's one-hundredth of one percent -- receiving 6% of all U.S. wages, which is double what it was for that tiny slice in 2000; the top 10% received 49.7%, the highest since 1917 (Saez, 2009)."[/i]



Table 6: Distribution of income in the United States, 1982-2006
    Income
        Top 1 percent   Next 19 percent   Bottom 80 percent
1982       12.8%                 39.1%                    48.1%
1988       16.6%                 38.9%                    44.5%
1991       15.7%                 40.7%                    43.7%
1994       14.4%                 40.8%                    44.9%
1997       16.6%                 39.6%                    43.8%
2000       20.0%                 38.7%                    41.4%
2003       17.0%                 40.8%                    42.2%
2006       21.3%                 40.1%                    38.6%

From Wolff (2009).

Is Our Tax System Helping Us Create Wealth?
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/is_our_tax_system_helping_us_create_wealth.pdf

Imagine that all you had to live on was the amount of tax you saved in your best year because of the many tax rate cuts Congress has put into place since 1964, when President Johnson signed into law the Kennedy tax cuts.

     For most Americans, living off income tax savings would mean starvation.  Their income tax savings have been minor, and when looked at over a long period, say since 1961, increases in payroll taxes have more than offset their slight income tax reductions.

     But for the very few who have gained the most from living in the United States, the story is quite different.  Their tax savings alone from a single year, invested to earn just 5% annually, would be enough to provide a lifetime income at nearly twice the income threshold for being in the top tenth of one percent.

[heironymouspasparagus]

We haven't been taking from the wealthy to give to the poor. 

Since 2001 we have been taking from the poor and giving to the rich.

And even such notables as Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, and John Bogle have talked about that for years.  (But then, how can you trust a billionaire like Gates whose company has been in and convicted in courts all around the world...)


Here's a thought;  How would you like to trade places with any of those bottom 40%??  You wouldn't have to pay any taxes!!

But then you wouldn't enjoy those Bush/Cheney tax cuts, either.  Sadness ensues.

[Red Arrow]

So, why, if we've been effectively redistributing our income, has the gap between the rich and the rest of us increased so much?  If we've been striving for economic equality by taking from the wealthy and giving to the poor, why has inequality increased? 

We obviously haven't taken enough from the rich.  We need to bring them down to the middle class level.  Then we can lower the middle class to the lower economic levels.  One step at a time.  You can't hurry it.  Don't be so impatient.

[guido911]

I'm guessing it also rubs you the wrong way that all those people are retiring on your dime.  That damn Social Security thing was all designed to take from your pocket and spread the wealth.

If you must know, I wish social security never became what it is today, a substitute for pensions and retirement. I would prefer the government allow me to invest my money as I see fit. I also wish the government had allowed you to do the same. In any case, from what I am hearing, there's not going to be anything left when we reach social security retirement age (what will it be in 30 years, 90?). Seriously, what exactly do you find meritorious about taking and using other people's money. I know you are hurting, and others I have respect for in here are hurting, but my gosh the flippant, even arrogant, mentality that you are entitled to look at someone who has given their sweat and personal/family sacrifice (and maybe lived on rice and beans to achieve) and say "gimme yours" is something I just cannot get my arms around conceptually.

[Red Arrow]

So it disgusts you that I got back more then I put in, so there for I was able to buy my kids some birthday presents this year, or that I was able to get some of my back child support paid from when I wasn't working?  It disgusts you that I have ended up at the bottom of the economic structure, and as I fight to get a leg up I get money back on my taxes that can help me on the way?  Perhaps it also disgusts you that I am taking advantage of financial aid to get my school paid for so I can have a chance of getting somewhere?  While I'm sure that there are plenty who have taken advantage of the system because they just want something for nothing, I would suggest taking a moment to think about the entire emcompassment of a comment.

Evidently a judge somewhere felt you were rich enough to afford the payments for your kids. How's it feel to be (formerly) rich?

[guido911]

We haven't been taking from the wealthy to give to the poor. 

Since 2001 we have been taking from the poor and giving to the rich.

And even such notables as Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, and John Bogle have talked about that for years.  (But then, how can you trust a billionaire like Gates whose company has been in and convicted in courts all around the world...)


Here's a thought;  How would you like to trade places with any of those bottom 40%??  You wouldn't have to pay any taxes!!

First, tell me, how are the poor bailing out the rich if 47% are not paying taxes? As for trading places, there was a time where I was earning just over minimum wage at a full time job while I went to college full time. I've been dirt poor, but the government always managed to take money from me in taxes.

[guido911]

And not a small amount of help from society, I'm sure. Add a dash of luck, and presto!

We have fought on several occasions on many issues, but do not insult what I went through to get to where I am with that bs.

[custosnox]

If you must know, I wish social security never became what it is today, a substitute for pensions and retirement. I would prefer the government allow me to invest my money as I see fit. I also wish the government had allowed you to do the same. In any case, from what I am hearing, there's not going to be anything left when we reach social security retirement age (what will it be in 30 years, 90?). Seriously, what exactly do you find meritorious about taking and using other people's money. I know you are hurting, and others I have respect for in here are hurting, but my gosh the flippant, even arrogant, mentality that you are entitled to look at someone who has given their sweat and personal/family sacrifice (and maybe lived on rice and beans to achieve) and say "gimme yours" is something I just cannot get my arms around conceptually.

What exactly do you find meritorious about all but calling someone a theif because they use governmental credits put in place to help those who are down in order to become a more more productive member of society? 

[heironymouspasparagus]

It was your good buddy Reagan that advocated and signed changes to pension law that allowed companies to get out of them by substituting company stock for real money contributions.  REAL pensions were good for employees AND the companies.  It was a win-win.  

Now there is the 401k, IRA's, etc.

So we have taken the investment and planning out of the hands of the professional pension managers and put it into YOUR hands.  And the catastrophe that is in the works WILL be what causes the financial collapse.

There are big, dark clouds on the horizon that are just very recently being reported on about the total failure of the whole "self retirement" thing.  The average 401k plan balance is about $65,000 (Fidelity news).  That is the reality of retirement in this country.  You have had smoke blown up your backside about "how to" save so much at 10% for so many years and you too can be a millionaire.

Except at the same time, the currency is being inflated at about 6% average.  So you are making about what a savings account would nominally pay...if it paid anything at all.

If you are around 30, you may actually have a chance, but that's counting on the big bust not happening before end of century.  Older?  You are screwed.

Just another reason to grow more marijuana to make all the ethanol we need to fuel and oil our cars, planes, and trains so we can keep our cash here in this country instead of shipping it to Saudi and Russia.


I was making a "salary" 4 1/2 years ago that worked out to the equivalent of about $4.25 per hour.  Same as I made in 1974.  And then got a better job at $10 - part time.  Same as 1979.  Then got a better one than that where now I have to pay taxes.

And someone has been listening to the Cheney/Rove/Murdoch AM radio lies about poor people not paying taxes.  I will refer you to Warren Buffet for the in depth analysis, but suffice it to say that those same poor people who "don't pay taxes" actually pay a much bigger percentage of their pay in taxes than you likely do.  And if you are one of those blessed who make over $250,000 per year, then you get the biggest break of all.  Want the details?

[custosnox]

Evidently a judge somewhere felt you were rich enough to afford the payments for your kids. How's it feel to be (formerly) rich?

I have never been rich.  I was able to raise an entire family, lazy unworking wife included, on less then half of what I have to earn now to pay child support and have enough to make it by on.  I'm still trying to figure out how these national standards on child support got established in the first place.  

[Red Arrow]

I have never been rich.  I was able to raise an entire family, lazy unworking wife included, on less then half of what I have to earn now to pay child support and have enough to make it by on.  I'm still trying to figure out how these national standards on child support got established in the first place.  

Rich is relative. I won't argue with the inequity of the divorce and child support laws.  According to the law, some judge decided you could afford it. By some legal  standard, you were rich compared to your ex and "taxed" accordingly.

[YoungTulsan]

The problem isn't that the rich aren't taxed enough.  The problem is how government money is spent.  Wealth is redistributed, but the lions share is redistributed upward, not downward.  The amount of welfare and handouts to the poor that exist today cause outrage, while the amount of money being awarded corporations that have lobbyists and bought-off congressmen doesn't cause nearly the same amount of hatred.

Look at various components of government spending and tell me how a majority of it was a redistribution DOWNWARD and not Upward or just pure waste.

Social Security:

Social security isn't a handout, it is a pyramid scheme that had its surpluses raided in the past Bernie Madoff style, and is now about to go bankrupt - but the people who are now receiving benefits DID pay into it, so it is hard to flatly call it a "handout".  The possibility looms that full payment of benefits previously promised will not occur, which means poor and middle class Americans actually had wealth taken away, not given to them - especially considering the interest or investment potential of what was paid in to the system over past decades.

Defense Spending:

At over $1 trillion per year, defense spending is the largest chunk of spending we currently have.  It does not go to the poor unless you count poor folks who join the military because there is no opportunity for them in the economy.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States

Military Personnel    $154.2 billion
Total Spending    $1.003–$1.223 trillion

That means about 1/8th of defense spending goes to the people in the service (redistribution to the lower and middle class), and the other 7/8ths are being spent in lucrative contracts that lobbyists earn their special interests (redistribution to the super wealthy).

Debt Service

When we accumulate national debt, we have to pay interest to the parties who fronted us the dough.

Look at this real quick: http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm

All of that money is going to private banks, foreign governments, or individuals who had enough spare cash to make the investment.  Redistribution:  Upward

If you look at the debt service over the years you may notice it goes up and down from year to year even though our debt is always increasing.  That is because interest rates are ridiculously low right now.   That means if the Fed has to raise interest rates to curb inflation, we'll just pay astronomically more in debt service on our huge deficits.  Either way the poor and middle class are going to be fleeced.

Medical spending (Medicare/ Medicaid)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_federal_budget
$453 billion (+6.6%) – Medicare
$290 billion (+12.0%) – Medicaid

This is more of an economic theory of mine, since the federal government has been so ensconced in the health care sector for decades, it is hard to even have a means for comparison in modernized medicine, however, my theory is this:

When the federal government throws 3/4ths of a Trillion into the medical system, it gobbles that up as a subsidy.  Less benefit is reaching the people, more dollars following the same services, higher prices and profits for the upper crust.  Government spending in a nutshell.

Discretionary Spending

About $700 billion when you take away the Dept. of Defense and throw it into a separate category.  Basically all of the "Department of ..."'s in the federal government are this category.  Most of these "departments" are an ominous overseer of things which should really be handled on a local community level.  Education is a good thing, no one will disagree.  Sending $700 billion to the federal government to handle community concerns creates a huge layer of waste.  Once that layer of waste sucks away billions of dollars, the lobbyists get to decide how the remainder is spent, rather than the community itself, which is more down to earth and accountable.  In this category of federal government spending, some of the money is actually used to help the lower and middle class.  So while not a complete failure in helping the little guy, the "Departments" provide less help than the same dollar would buy if it just stayed in the community the whole time.

My conclusion is the less federal spending the better.  The little guy seldom benefits from massive federal spending programs, no matter if they are sold as doing such or not.  They have managed to create a huge backlash against the poor as the receivers of "wealth redistribution" while the exact opposite is precisely what happens with big government spending.

Cut the spending, then the debt, THEN taxes.