51% of americans don't pay taxes - debunked?

reply to post by neo96



Nice to see we all seem to have in general the same feeling towards the fed. Is there anyone who actually supports the butchering of our dollar value in order to increase the size and scope of our government?

reply to post by Gmoneycricket





Here is the chart you were looking for.

reply to post by no time


I know,Graphs should represent Life
Not just arbitrary things like money, growth, etc.
I believe we all should respond to graphs with questions.
Like planting a tree next to a rain gauge and measure the rain and tree growth.

reply to post by boncho


Your response isn't very revealing... as you've failed to identify job titles, skill levels and total hours worked. I wouldn't expect a dishwasher to receive the same hourly wage as the head cook working at the same restaurant. They may be both putting in the same hours... but the head cook's takehome is going to be considerably higher than the dishwasher's. Another factor you haven't considered is overall frugality. The problem you're describing probably has more to do with salaried employees... yes/no???

These graphs explain the real issue.

Higher taxes for "the rich" is not punitive.

It is simply a fundamental part of Capitalism.

They benefit so much more than everyone else from "the government" so it is fair that they pay a larger percentage.But the real issuing is preventing the destruction of the environment and the enslavement of the masses.

reply to post by Universer


You are very much correct. Wages are not suppose to be taxed because you did not gain anything. It is suppose to be capital gains that were taxed (money made off investment or gambling). People have tried taking this to court but the courts sided with the government most of the time.

Originally posted by crimvelvet
51% of Americans don't pay taxes - debunked?

That is correct.

29% of wage earners paying 97% of the income taxes.

I get the feeling you were hoping to debunk it in the other direction. If you include sales tax or hidden taxes then everyone of course pays tax.

This applies ONLY to overt federal tax on earnings:
50% of WAGE EARNERS pay less than 3% of the taxes. The Employment-Population Ratio was 58.2% in Jun 2011.

You are looking at 29% of wage earners paying 97% of the income taxes.


The Civilian Labor Force Participation Rate was 64.1% in Jun 2011

The labor force is the sum of employed and unemployed persons. ( includes those 16 years and over who work) The labor force participation rate is the labor force as a percent of the civilian non-institutional population. [Not in prison etc.]


Not in the labor force: Persons who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force. This category includes retired persons, students, those taking care of children or other family members, and others who are neither working nor seeking work. Information is collected on their desire for and availability for work, job search activity in the prior year, and reasons for not currently searching.

This was 83,941,000 in 2010. In 2010 1,173,000 listed Discouragement over job prospects up from 778,000 in 2009.

The Employment-Population Ratio was 58.2% in Jun 2011

Information from Bureau of Labor Statistics and Tax Policy Center (Democrats)

This is exactly why we have this problem. Your telling me that giving me an AVERAGE, including ALL THE TAXES PAID, is an accurate representation of the data. Yes, and No.

This article should show you NOTHING but how disproportionate the income for that 29% is compared to the rest of us. Think about it. I know I can't be the only one that sees this.

OF COURSE THE RICH PAY A DISPROPORTIONATE AMOUNT OF TAXES, BECAUSE THEY ARE TAKING HOME A DISPROPORTIONATE AMOUNT OF INCOME. When you take into account that they are hardly paying a larger percentage of their total income to taxes than the poor, how can you not see that this accurately proves MY POINT. not yours.


EDIT: If you have 1000 apples and I have 10 the average amount of apples we both have is 505. Is 505 a good representation of either one of us? No. And this is why average = propaganda.

reply to post by no time

I also believe that the federal reserve should be scrapped for regional banking systems regulated by states....

I really hate the Fed. However this seems to be a "Do able" compromise. for the short term.

CAMPAIGNING FOR STATE-OWNED BANKS

While bank bailouts fatten Wall Street, states continue to battle the credit crisis. In the search for innovative solutions, some political candidates are proposing that states generate their own credit by setting up their own banks.....

Amanda Paulson, writing in The Christian Science Monitor, quotes Arturo Pérez, fiscal analyst with the National Conference of State Legislatures, which released its survey of state budget situations in December:

“Unless you’re North Dakota, you’re probably a state that has had some degree of difficulty or crisis involving finances. It’s the worst situation states have faced in decades, perhaps going as far back as the Great Depression in some states.”

“Unless you’re North Dakota” – a state with a sizeable budget surplus, and the only state that is adding jobs when other states are losing them...

Candidates Across the Political Spectrum Pick Up on the Public Bank Model

In the quest to find ways to divorce the well-being of their states from the financial sector, a growing number of candidates are picking up on the public bank alternative. Florida, Illinois, Oregon, Massachusetts, Idaho and California all have candidates whose platforms contain this proposed solution to the credit crisis.

A publicly-owned bank has also been proposed on the federal level. Nationalizing the Federal Reserve (which is not actually federal but is owned by a consortium of private banks) was advocated by 2008 Presidential candidates Dennis Kucinich, a Democrat, and Cynthia McKinney, the Green Party candidate. In 2009, Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz said the government would have been better off funding a federally-owned bank than doling out trillions of dollars to private investment banks and CEOs who speculated their way into bankruptcy....

Even with a state run bank we still have to get rid of "fractional (zero) Reserve Banking"

So is the reason that we are all talking about this is because of a megachurch preacher?

wonkette.com...

Originally posted by spyder550
So is the reason that we are all talking about this is because of a megachurch preacher?

wonkette.com...

I don't think so. I think it was a major headline recently. A headline that preacher must have picked up on? Maybe he reads ats.

i am going to post this agian and for those who do not like this link all anyone has to do is use google and tax calculator and go to the irs,gove site to see just how many tax breaks there are and multiply that by how ever many millions of americans that acutally work.

www.moneychimp.com...

the more you make they more you pay and that is a fact.

reply to post by no time

Nice to see we all seem to have in general the same feeling towards the fed. Is there anyone who actually supports the butchering of our dollar value in order to increase the size and scope of our government?

I have run into a few, either here or on other blogs.

They were either Economics Profs, who believe the Keynesian position on economics or Wall Street types making a killing on "derivatives"

I and others had a LONGGGgg discussion about different economic models on this THREAD (pg6)
memarf1 says he is an economics prof. with a link to his web page.

I am currently slogging through 900 pgs written by Mises (UGH!)

reply to post by neo96


Absolutely is a fact. However, 8-10% of a multi-billionaire's income is pocket change, 8-10% of a poor mans' income is pretty life changing. So if that extra 8-10% stresses them out as much as a poor-man then I would agree wholeheartedly. Their tax burden isn't a "burden" however, at all.

reply to post by no time


any wealthy person can be wiped out in a matter of minutes and the moment anyone loses sight of the value of 1 dollar they are not going to stay that way for long.

but to say money doesnt mean as much as it does to anyone else is disingeous.

hell even warren buffet could go broke in a matter of minutes thats the thing about wealth buffets wealth only exists in "Cyberspace" and has no value other than what the market dictates.

and that problem is compounded by people and government always trying to regulate and tax his wealth out of existence.

the fact is accumulation of wealth isnt easy and it takes a lot of work to keep and maintain it.

i used buffet as an example but that pertians to anyone

reply to post by Jezus

It is simply a fundamental part of Capitalism.

It is NOT Capitalism!

Let's be VERY clear. As usual the elite are playing mind games with us. To start with Their "Free Market" is NOT a real free Market, where there is a FREE (willing) exchange of products, services and labor.

If my neighbors and I meet at the weekly market and swap eggs for milk or veggies or some lamb chops THAT is an actual FREE market. I set the value of my lamb chops, Dale sets the value on his eggs, Mike sets the value on his veggies and Cindy set the value on her beef. We either agree to the swaps or we do not. (These are real products and people BTW)


In the Elite "Free Market" we have the central BANKS setting currency exchange rates and corporations setting wage scales in one country and prices in another. There is NOTHING "free" about that situation at all.

Do I get to swap a lamb for a Chinese made solar cell??? (true free market capitalism) NO! We now have Monosony (one buyer ) for farm products and the guy(s) in china have no say at all about their wages and American are now in the same boat as the Chinese with no room for wage negotiation.

Here is how Americans and the rest of the world is being herded into the position of being a "Captive labor force" and a "Captive Customer base"
History, HACCP and the Food Safety Con Job shows how the American free market was intentionally trashed by the CED.

America saw its agricultural system intentionally subjected to political policies that radically transformed it....

Composed of chief executive officers and chairmen from the federal reserve, the banking industry, private equity firms, insurance companies,... CED determined that the problem with American agriculture was that there were too many farmers. But the CED had a "solution" millions of farmers would just have to be eliminated.

In a number of reports written over a few decades, CED recommended that farming "resources" " that is, farmers" be reduced. In its 1945 report Agriculture in an Expanding Economy, CED complained that "the excess of human resources engaged in agriculture is probably the most important single factor in the ˜farm problem’" and describes how agricultural production can be better organized to fit to business needs...

The human cost of CED’s plans were exacting and enormous.

CED’s plans resulted in widespread social upheaval throughout rural America, ripping apart the fabric of its society destroying its local economies. They also resulted in a massive migration to larger cities....

...

Think about it.
1. The loss of our farming communities here and in third world countries meant a large pool of CHEAP desperate labor for business.
2. Fiat money, printed on the spot drove out true "wealth" backed "capital"

Yes it was done intentionally by bankers and large corporations. NO it is NOT capitalism although bankers would LOVE to have you think it was because they HATE capitalism and have been trying to stomp it out for CENTURIES! Capitalists are FREE individuals not captive "Serfs"

capitalism
–noun
an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals... dictionary.reference.com...

The operative words are "private individual" and "wealth" WEALTH not fiat money. And that is the key. Reinvesting of WEALTH produces more wealth for the entire community. A Fiat money only STEALS wealth from the laborer/customer to FINANCE banker and corporate investment.

Again this explains how the fiat money used to finance big Corporations is actually WEALTH STOLEN from customers and wage earners. It is in no way CAPITAL (wealth) reinvestment it is THEFT!

New money does not appear magically in equal percentages in all people's bank accounts or under their mattresses. Money spreads unevenly, and this process has varying effects on individuals, depending on whether they receive early or late access to the new money. This was one of Mises's original contributions to monetary theory, one that is ignored by all other schools of economic analysis.... Mises argued that the losses of the late-coming losers are the source of income for the early arrival winners....

...This indicates a fundamental aspect of Mises's monetary theory that is rarely mentioned: the expansion or contraction of money is a zero-sum game.... The economic benefits obtained by the early users of new money, even gold, are made at the expense of those who gain access to it after it has altered the array of prices.... www.lewrockwell.com...

I hope I was able to explain the concept clearly enough because it is one of the biggest lies told by the Bankers and mega-corporations intent in installing "Global Governance"

reply to post by neo96


I agree to disagree. While your point is valid, I have yet to see any TRULY rich people bite the bullet.

If you can tell me that $40 to a person making $400 week, means as much as $4,000 to a person making $40,000 a week, then I'll agree. But in earnest the $40 actually has a REAL effect on the poor man's ability to live a modest decent life, while the 4,000 has no measurable effect on the quality of life for that individual. The value of a man's work should never have been allowed to sink below the ability to live without credit. You cannot say that it should have unless you think that a man/women's labor isn't worth anything.

I think a person working 40 hours a week should be able to afford the things they need without the use of credit. Credit should be used in cases of future upward mobility potential. But if your saying a skilled laborer, should pay more in taxes when he cannot save for his retirement or pay for his child's education, then I say you are just misrepresenting the problem so you can say all people who aren't financially minded market savvy individuals should just be slaves.

the reason their wealth cannot be wiped out is while the stock exchange and derivative markets are focusing on the value of the debt they have, the truly rich have all the tangible assets that keep them rich regardless of circumstances. Show me ONE individual in the actual top 10% of income earners in the united states that is no longer rich and I will submit.

reply to post by no time

the truly rich have all the tangible assets that keep them rich regardless of circumstances.

you mean like stocks or bonds or homes? and someone else wasnt wiped out in the same process.

the financial crisis was a great object lesson of how wealth gets wiped out and what is considered wealth.

and a lot of middle income families who did invest and pensions were extremely effected.

when a wealthy person or extremely wealthy person takes a hit that does translate down the line to many others.

i look at wealth as the 6 degrees of seperation that snowballs.


but as you say i dont have any problems here agreeing to disagree.

reply to post by no time

....Show me ONE individual in the actual top 10% of income earners in the united states that is no longer rich and I will submit.

Actually he was a Canadian...

I really have to write up the true story and post it. A self-made Canadian I once worked for managed to royally tick off not only the British Royal Family but the Royal family of Netherlands over a couple of oil company deals.

They colluded to wipe him off the map, although they did not quite succeed in completely bankrupting him.

So yeah, not all of the wealthy are "Insiders" and belong to the "club" and if they get in the way they are "Fair Game" The Canadian is not the only one.

I talked to a guy who worked for a small grain trader. Cargill intentionally wiped them off the map.

There is this humorously told story too: Five Minutes With John Munsell & A Trip To The Woodshed With The USDA.

.....An inspector, armed with many official looking pieces of paper, looked Big John in the eye and said, “Assume the position!”

John was frisked. The authorities stopped just short of a full body cavity search. It was a very thorough exam.

“Wait,” protested Big John. “The meat came in with bad stuff already on it. I didn’t put it there. Go after the people who sent it to me!”

“Obviously you don’t understand the way we do things around here,” chuckled the inspector who was amused by Big John’s apparent naivety....

reply to post by neo96



I mean tangible as in real. Property, cash, metals, people, patents - things that will have value even after all financial markets fail. they did not have to leverage these assets in order to grow their wealth, which means they will not be affected by any financial downturn, depression, or collapse. They stand to be waiting to purchase everything that has a TANGIBLE value when this happens for pennies on the dollar. then once they have these tangible assets they continue to rinse and repeat till all tangible wealth is concentrated into the hands of the few. They then work tirelessly to consolidate power using their tangible assets as leverage to get what they want.

I get that rich people fail, but the top $ in this country will not be harmed in any collapse. they want the collapse.

reply to post by no time

This is exactly why we have this problem. Your telling me that giving me an AVERAGE, including ALL THE TAXES PAID, is an accurate representation of the data. Yes, and No.

This article should show you NOTHING but how disproportionate the income for that 29% is compared to the rest of us. Think about it. I know I can't be the only one that sees this.

I did not feel like scrounging around for the actual chart.

30.06% or about one third of the taxes are paid by those FAMILIES (possible two incomes) making less than $113,800.. (That is two middle class professionals.) Accountants, computer types, QC engineers....

Here is the break down of income and percent TAXES paid:

Top 50% - $33,048 (and up) pay 97.30% of the taxes

Top 25% - $67,280 (and up) pay 86.34 % of the taxes

Top 10% - $113,799 (and up) pay 69.94 % of the taxes

Bottom 50% less than $33,048 pay 2.7 % of the taxes
modified chart from ntu.org...