Bush Tax Cuts- Let them Expire or Renew?

You're conveniently leaving out two key pieces of information required to put that graph into proper perspective. First, The graph is only showing percentages of Federal Income taxes. It does not take FICA or Medicare taxes into account (which on a percentage basis affects the lower income levels much, much more than the higher income levels). also missing are other taxes that the lower income folks pay a disproportionally larger percent of their incomes on; such as property taxes, sales taxes, franchise taxes, etc. The second, or more important point is that it is true the top 5% and/or 25% pay the greatest share of income taxes.. but I think you will find that the top 5% of the earners are earning around 60% of all the income earned in the US and the top 25% are, in total, earning over 90% of all the income being earned in the US. Recognizing that, when you take the total income taxes paid vs. the total amount of income being taxed... you will find the top earners are actually paying a little less in income tax than the lower earners. Originally Posted by trukeeper

Please provide links to support your arguments btw.

Question the first -- Who is it that benefits from Medicare?

Now if it were possible- perhaps Obama and his economic team can find a way to give tax breaks to everyone across the line, but to just continue to give tax breaks to the wealthiest 2% is totally wrong.
After Nov mid term elections I really want to see if the TEA party shows their true identity. if the TEA party are who they say they are then the TEA party should call out every Republican and/or Democrat who wants to keep the Bush taxes going. If the Tea party remains silent and the Bush taxes do not expire then they are a fraud. It is my belief that one of the TEA party's biggest goals is to stop all this government waste and taxation and hey if the government is taxing the crap out of you and not giving you any tax breaks then hello Tea party you need to be protesting.
If anyone cares to read how is a lengthy illustration about who pays the most taxes and what percentage of it goes where: http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sr151.pdf

Please provide links to support your arguments btw.

Question the first -- Who is it that benefits from Medicare? Originally Posted by SillyGirl

Sillygirl the link I provided details everything to a tee: http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sr151.pdf

Well you should word as how does the tax break help me and those who are not rich. The answer is more money to spend and to save, but generally one can assume that if the middle class is given a significant tax break they are going to use that money in was that will help the economy ie- remodeling their home, spending on a car, shopping etc- all of those 3 will help the economy and could create jobs which is what we need. However, how does give given Bill Gates and Warren Buffet- and I am just throwing those names out because they are well know billionaires and they are great guys who give a lot especially Bill Gates so I don't want to chastise those 2, but the wealthiest tend to just sit on their wealth and they don't tend to spend it.
What's going to take us out of the recession and get us back to normal is people are going to have to SPEND money- there have first got to be jobs to make money but if the obs become more available and people are not spending we are going to be stagnant. A lot of people right now are holding back spending because the fear of the unknown. Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

You weren't talking about tax cuts for the non-wealthy, you were talking about tax cuts for the wealthy - and my question still remains unanswered.

How does a tax increase on a wealthy person benefit you directly, other than making you feel good?

Excellent job btw getting through one whole paragraph. Originally Posted by SillyGirl

If you noticed the two reasons why I liked Veblen, you would have been able to deduce that I read more than one paragraph.

"Although Veblen was sympathetic to state ownership of industry, he had a low opinion of workers and the labor movement and was hostile toward Marxism. "

Sympathetic != Socialism.

I am severely anti-socialist. Veblen represents a middle ground between Marxists and Randites. His affection for those who produce is a tenet of objectivist capitalism, however his views are a little more palatable for those who still believe in altruism.

I chose him specifically as opposed to Rand (because the knee-jerk reaction to her is appalling) or Mises because of the negative feelings so many people unfamiliar with their work feel the need to express as soon as the name pops up. Originally Posted by SillyGirl

SG, I think there is little doubt he was a socialist, but not a Marxist socialist. It is comparable to there being three levels of Democrats or Republicans (liberal, moderate, or conservative). Not all fall under the same umbrella, although many try to force them under the same one. Because of this, I would not call Thorstein's views as necessarily being a middle ground of the Marxist/Capitalist scale. His Wikipedia page (and I know it is not gospel) makes mention of his socialistic views:

"Veblen had a penchant for socialism and believed that technological developments would eventually lead toward a socialistic organization of economic affairs. However, his views regarding socialism and the nature of the evolutionary process of economics differed sharply from that of Karl Marx; while Marx saw socialism as the ultimate goal for civilization and saw the working-class as the group that would establish it, Veblen saw socialism as one intermediate phase in an ongoing evolutionary process in society that would be brought about by the natural decay of the business enterprise system and by the inventiveness of engineers."

By all means, lets not let them have a tax cut, can't let that free ride end. Are there a ton of other factors? Well of course. But what it boils down to is that our economy is in the shitter thanks to the lower-middle and middle class being incredibly irresponsible with income they do have. Living on credit, subprime mortgages, etc etc. Is it easy to blame the banks for this? Surely, and while a fat lot of blame does need to set at the feet of the people offering up this sort of credit, why don't we instead look at the people who were so caught up "something for nothing" that they damn near broke our economy. Originally Posted by SillyGirl

I didn't realize the lower and middle class set the banking regulations and the process for determining the lending criteria the banks used. I guess the lower and middle class also were the ones to market derivatives that were essentially worthless and sold them on the market. The lower and middle class were the ones to continually swapping mortgages on the open market creating the "ultimate storm"?

The middle class is not the "backbone" of this country. The producers are. I have no sympathy for the common man. He shouldn't have been living above his means in the first place. But we are all entitled to live however we so choose right? Even if that choice means just not paying the mortgage anymore because the banks are too busy to get to foreclosing on you any time soon. Originally Posted by SillyGirl

Would you give me an example of a "producer" and of a "common man"?

As far as living beyond one's means, don't forget it takes two to Tango.

Personally, I have no sympathy for the banks. These institutions have all the information at their disposal when it comes to credit worthiness, yet they continued to approve loan after loan they knew the lendee would not have the ability to pay. These same institutions were literally falsifying customer wage/salary information in order to approve the customer for more money. The same banks continued to send credit card after credit card to people that if the cards were maxed out, the borrower would not be able to pay. The banks essentially ignored the debt-to-income ratio that is the standard for lending.

I also don't have sympathy for the borrower that KNEW he wouldn't be able to pay his mortgage. However, SG, it seems as if you are indicating this is the the main cause of the foreclosures. Many lost their homes as a result of job loss, not because their had a adjustable rate or interest only loan that was set to change. I do have sympathy for the homeowner and his/her family that lost their home as a result of job loss. Even if he or she is just a "common man".

Sillygirl the link I provided details everything to a tee: http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sr151.pdf Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

Do you really expect anyone to read all of that? A more effective argument would be to quote parts of the report and then cite the report as your reference. But to put the whole thing as a source is counter productive.

You can google and find hundreds of links, but here's one just to get you started.

http://unclefed.com/Tax-News/2009/nr09-17.html

My initial assertions was not exact, but close enough and the I stand behind my initial statements. Your original graph is EXTREMELY misleading since it does not take ALL taxes into account nor does it take into account the percent of total income the top earners collect vs. the great unwashed. Another key point is that your chart is comparing AGI amounts (Adjusted Gross Income) as reported to the IRS (in 2007, I might add). AGI is the amount remaining AFTER you DEDUCT various business expenses, moving expenses, IRA deductions, and a whole litany of other so-called "expenses" that are typically the domain of the, shall we say... "better off" crowd?

Do you really expect anyone to read all of that? A more effective argument would be to quote parts of the report and then cite the report as your reference. But to put the whole thing as a source is counter productive. Originally Posted by kcbigpapa

Well it explains everything unlike SG who only posted a chart that was very misleading. I also want to know SG who are the "producers" are these the CEO's in white shirts that are doing all the labor? Who are the "producers"? Again are these just the billionaire guys that are keeping these economy running? So do you mean at all the plants like GM and any other plant you can think of- the workers are not the ones that are "producing"? So basically if we get rid of all the middle class common man from all the factory jobs- the rich CEOS would still be having this economy booming? Does that hold true for construction as well- let's get rid of the hard working contrsuction workers that work from 9 to 5- the hell with them because somehow they are not the one that are really "producing" and building the homes- it's actually the people in their white shirt and tie in an air conditioned room that are doing all the hard work right? Let's go a step further-during slave period the slaves weren't actually doing all the physical work or producing the crops it was basically the master that was picking all the cotton and crops and doing all the hard work right?

SG's chart was not misleading. It purported to address federal taxes. The Bush tax cuts are federal taxes. To add in the other taxes is comparing apples and oranges. Certainly the middle class is the backbone of our economy, but the rich are the ones who provide the means for the middle class to operate. They invest in the companies that allow the middle class to work. If the rich begin to think they are being mistreated in this country, they will move their businesses and jobs to a more friendly venue. Taxing them more will not teach them a lesson, or raise much revenue. It will drive them away.

Besides, until congressional spending is under control, taxes are irrelevant. There is no way we can tax away the national debt. Congress simply has to stop spending so much.

SG's chart was not misleading. It purported to address federal taxes. The Bush tax cuts are federal taxes. To add in the other taxes is comparing apples and oranges. Certainly the middle class is the backbone of our economy, but the rich are the ones who provide the means for the middle class to operate. They invest in the companies that allow the middle class to work. If the rich begin to think they are being mistreated in this country, they will move their businesses and jobs to a more friendly venue. Taxing them more will not teach them a lesson, or raise much revenue. It will drive them away.

Besides, until congressional spending is under control, taxes are irrelevant. There is no way we can tax away the national debt. Congress simply has to stop spending so much. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I agree that this was very true during the Reagan years with the Trickled down economics, but look at the current stats this is no longer true. The wealthy are not investing and creating jobs as they did during the Trickle down economics era of Reagan.
I agree the government can't just keep spending and expect something great to happen. however, Congress has to go a step further and get some relief for the middle class- if the Republicans don't want another stimulus package then they should opt for tax breaks for the middle class and also opt for helping small business owners get the relief they need- which by the way a great majority of Republicans in congress rejected. Obama also is about to introduce another bill that will give a tax break to companies that don't ship jobs across seas- I will wait and see how politicians vote on this issue. There are basically a lot of politicians both Republicans and Democrats who basically don't give a fuck about the economy.

Blah, blah, blah, blah same old argument same old reasoning, this entire thread is a total waste of time. The Bush tax cuts are Federal tax cuts, therefore they should not be linked into all of the other taxes such as state income, property, sales etc. When you answer Fritz question which was how will terminating the Federal Bush tax cuts affect you as an individual. THe answer is it wont, its just a reasoning tool you use to redistrubute the wealth in this country just as Obama said he would. I am done, please do not respond to this because I will not reply back, this is the same old bullshit over and over and over........... You want to talk politics, lets discuss the efforts being made at the Federal level to produce jobs, rather than discussing taxes that you dont pay and that you are not affected by. The more they make the more they spend. PEACE I AM OUT.

" the hell with them because somehow they are not the one that are really "producing" and building the homes- it's actually the people in their white shirt and tie in an air conditioned room that are doing all the hard work right? Let's go a step further-during slave period the slaves weren't actually doing all the physical work or producing the crops it was basically the master that was picking all the cotton and crops and doing all the hard work right?"

Give me a freaking break................... now trhe Bush tax cuts are racially motivated.

I am done, please do not respond to this because I will not reply back, this is the same old bullshit over and over and over...... PEACE I AM OUT. Originally Posted by dirty dog

You've got a habit of saying that you're taking your ball and going home and then posting again. I've just never seen you post right after said it. Are you slippin'?

This was the best chart that I could find. The top 5% are paying more than half of the taxes, QUITE OFTEN, WITH MONEY THEY SWINDLED FROM THE LOWER 95%. Originally Posted by SillyGirl

Fixed.


Just look at the bills in your mailbox. Which ones aren't some kind of racket? Healthcare? Credit cards? Cell phones? Cable TV? They all pay lobbyists and politicians to fix the rules so the consumer gets overcharged and screwed. If you'd like to REWARD that "HARD WORK" with lowering their tax rate, then I'm not on your side.

Since the chart is all about percentages, maybe she can produce another chart to show who bares the majority of the blame for the recession? I think she'll find that the common folk that were heavily encouraged to live beyond their means are the minority. In fact, the minority of the minority is what that political stance is all about...not all conservatives are racists, but I'll be a whole bunch of racists are conservatives. (not meaning that she's racist at all, just that the people that started the "blame the welfare mommas buying homes they know they can't afford" are) The majority of the blame goes closer to Wall Street than Main Street.

The real key to this whole thing is the answer to the question, "How do we steal from the future?" The answer is exactly what happened. Like I said, most of the blame goes to Wall Street...less to people trying to buy a home. Pretty much all of them were Baby Boomers. That's just what Baby Boomers do...they suck resources from everything and everyone around them. Even the unborn. The rest of us will be paying for their greedy actions for decades.

Right now Baby Boomers are OLD and some of them are wealthy. A rich, OLD Baby Boomer is one of the most greedy, treacherous creatures on Earth. Watch your ass! LOL

" the hell with them because somehow they are not the one that are really "producing" and building the homes- it's actually the people in their white shirt and tie in an air conditioned room that are doing all the hard work right? Let's go a step further-during slave period the slaves weren't actually doing all the physical work or producing the crops it was basically the master that was picking all the cotton and crops and doing all the hard work right?"

Give me a freaking break................... now trhe Bush tax cuts are racially motivated. Originally Posted by dirty dog

DirtY Dog- I bet if I started a Thread saying we need Peace in this world you would respond back that I am so wrong and we need to have war and people should die. You seem to have an issue with everything I said- and no one but you made a reference about the Bush cuts being racially motivated- i was given an analogy of who the workers and producers whom a 6th grader can tell you that the bread basket of America are the middle class workers- are not the majority of people you see working in construction, transportation, factories, etc the "producers"? The clothes that you wear , the food that you eat, the car you drive were produced by whom? The CEOS's and the Billionaires? You will come off as a fool if you agree with SG that the middle class are not the producers. Your problem DD is that you are so obsessed with going against my threads that you often are stuck with your foot in your mouth- hence the thread about not saving a guys house over a 75 bill- you got blasted(rightfully) so when you try to contradict. Wise up DD and have your own view instead of trying to demonize me because of your insecurities. Look at every thread I posted in this forum you take the extreme opposite view no matter how outlandish it may be or how wrong or foolish you look. I on the other hand can think and learn to agree to disagree. You want to paint me as this Obama loving liberal when I have told you a 100 million times I am not liberal. however, if Obama tries to pass a law that I think it's good i will support him- if he passes a law that I think is bad I will call him out- same goes with any other politician regardless of their party. You however, think just like a Tea party person- if Obama were to discover a cure for cancer you would have a problem with that and perhaps say that we shouldn't cure everyone for cancer because it cost too much tax paying dollars.
I highly assume you don't make over 250k a year DD so you tell me how Obama's tax plan for the middle class does not benefit you? DD I gues your health care plan is excellent so I won't make any assumptions there. Finally, you tell me how given a tax break to the wealthiest 2% is fair to the other 98% of the working class? DD do you like paying your taxes or do you feel that you don't need a tax break? Either DD you are happy with the taxes you are paying or you are a hyprcrit which I think you are. DD are you telling me if the govt calle you and said :"hey we got a choice to make today either we are going to give you a tax break or we are going to give Warren Buffet a tax break... Are you going to say well I don't need a tax break go ahead and give Warren buffet and the richest 2% a tax break I will pass? DD you know how you would answer so in the future IF YOU DON'T LIKE MY TOPICS PLEASE DON'T RESPOND TO THEM- have a good day!