The Top 10% of income earners paid 71% of federal income tax

reply to post by Eurisko2012

It would take away - credibility - from the Heritage Foundation if they simply dreamed up

bogus numbers.

What credibility? The Heritage Foundation has none. It has long been known as a right wing think tank that puts out total garbage. The op link is total garbage, two sentences and a very poorly defined chart, and links to huge pile of information you would have to spend large amounts of time researching to come up with facts. The average hoaxer on ATS does a better job.

The whole thread should be tossed in the hoax bin.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Eurisko2012

 

It would take away - credibility - from the Heritage Foundation if they simply dreamed up

bogus numbers.

What credibility? The Heritage Foundation has none. It has long been known as a right wing think tank that puts out total garbage. The op link is total garbage, two sentences and a very poorly defined chart, and links to huge pile of information you would have to spend large amounts of time researching to come up with facts. The average hoaxer on ATS does a better job.

The whole thread should be tossed in the hoax bin.

Media Matters is the one losing credibility.

They are feeding talking points to NBC.

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by Eurisko2012

 

Funny story. The poorer classes can't pay more percentage of taxes overall because they don't have the money. If the poor classes got taxed more, then they would not be able to maintain a home or feed themselves, and then you would see their income disappear completely, which means even less tax revenue. The rich classes always have money to contribute to taxes, and smaller percentages make for a larger gross percentage. It's that simple. The rich are who run the country financially, and while some don't want to admit it, we need them, and we do need them to pay more taxes and build more businesses here, where the people need it.

Agreed with the first part, disagree with the second part. We need the filthy rich (millions a year) about as much as a person need leeches in order to create new blood cells. A parasite is a parasite.

reply to post by Eurisko2012


I don't know about media matters, but I do know that the Heritage Foundation has less cred than Mother Jones, or the typical tabloid journal.

The op link is pathetic, pure propaganda garbage.

If you don't believe me, than dig through their links and provide the missing information that back up their claims.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Eurisko2012

 

I don't know about media matters, but I do know that the Heritage Foundation has less cred than Mother Jones, or the typical tabloid journal.

The op link is pathetic, pure propaganda garbage.

If you don't believe me, than dig through their links and provide the missing information that back up their claims.

Media Matter: David Brock - stinks to high heaven.
Hiring private investigators to go after Fox News employees.


David Brock runs for cover. Now HE is the story. Tax Exempt Organization?????
----

reply to post by Kali74

What bias are you accusing Schuyler of having in his CLEAR compilation of the IRS figures. It doesn't get any simpler. Stop accusing others of bias and wrongdoing simply because you can't or refuse to accept the facts. If you can disprove it then great, I'm on your side.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Eurisko2012

 

I don't know about media matters, but I do know that the Heritage Foundation has less cred than Mother Jones, or the typical tabloid journal.

The op link is pathetic, pure propaganda garbage.

If you don't believe me, than dig through their links and provide the missing information that back up their claims.

Seriously Poet.

Before I got into politics I never realized how bad this was with these people.
I try to tell my friends how truly insane and twisted the large cross section of
the population seems to be. It is like a compulsive liar that can't stop lying
or making up stories because they understand how to manipulate and get what
they want.

This thread really says it all, in the end every thing boils down to protecting
the rich from the people (citizens) who are tired being abused by the elites.
Notice that you never see a thread that focuses on the little guy?

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
reply to post by Kali74

 

What bias are you accusing Schuyler of having in his CLEAR compilation of the IRS figures. It doesn't get any simpler. Stop accusing others of bias and wrongdoing simply because you can't or refuse to accept the facts. If you can disprove it then great, I'm on your side.

I talked about this earlier. They twist themselves into a pretzel trying to disprove

clear facts. It's really sad.

ATTENTION:

Just a reminder......this thread has gone on for many pages, may be time to repeat the topic...please do try to post about it:

The Top 10% of income earners paid 71% of federal income tax

reply to post by poet1b


OK you don't trust Heritage. Fine. Look at it like this. I am stating that in 2010 the top 10% of income earners paid almost 70% of total income tax paid and also pay a disproportionately higher amount in that their 45.77% of total AGI accounts for 69.94% of total income tax paid. These are facts substantiated by

Schuylers Post

Top 10% is determined by...SURPRISE!!!!, the top 10% of RETURNS FILED.

Who are these people who pay no taxes?

Now I have Seinfeld's voice stuck in my head. Anyway, those would be the people whose incomes are so##### low that they are exempt from federal taxes and pay only payroll ( SS/FICA and Medicare) and may qualify for EIC as well. How I FEEL about this matter is separate from the facts of the stats.

In the US, the richest country in the world, 400 individuals own more than the bottom 150 MILLION. Nuff freaking said. The bottom 150 million are fighting and killing themselves for scraps when they should be uniting and fixing this broken system that allows such a gross injustice to take place. The system is crumbling, which side will you be on?

Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe

ATTENTION:

Just a reminder......this thread has gone on for many pages, may be time to repeat the topic...please do try to post about it:

The Top 10% of income earners paid 71% of federal income tax

I've got the perfect graphic to describe this thread:

reply to post by DenyObfuscation


Except Schuyler doesn't provide a link to back up his claims. Why not? If he went to all the trouble to find this info, why doesn't he or she provide a link so that we can check it out. Why isn't it listed as EXternal info?

Looks like the information was interpreted.

If you follow a link posted above, and then on to the IRS data, you will find this statement.

www.irs.gov...=133521,00.html

Individual Income Tax Returns with Modified Taxable Income - MTI is a term used to describe "income subject to tax", the actual base on which tax is computed. For current-year returns, MTI is identical to taxable income. For prior-year returns, taxable income is modified to equal an amount necessary to generate the tax actually shown on these returns using current-year rates.

Interest on savings accounts is "INCOME SUBJECT TO TAX". I researched it a long time ago, and if I remember right, Income earners include grade schoolers with savings accounts, based on returns from banks. It all gets pretty fuzzy, but kids working part time jobs are required to file tax returns. Even if you ignore kids who aren't filing tax returns, aren't working part time jobs, working students and seniors make up most of the bottom 50%, and then there are the disabled, most with legit disabilities.

I know I started paying income taxes in Jr High when I worked in the summer de-tasseling corn.

The charts are bogus. They ignore who the bottom 50% of income tax earners are.

reply to post by poet1b


Come out and say what you want to say.

Looks like the information was interpreted.

Categorized, yes. You saying he's lying?

Interest on savings accounts is "INCOME SUBJECT TO TAX". I researched it a long time ago, and if I remember right, Income earners include grade schoolers with savings accounts, based on returns from banks. It all gets pretty fuzzy, but kids working part time jobs are required to file tax returns. Even if you ignore kids who aren't filing tax returns, aren't working part time jobs, working students and seniors make up most of the bottom 50%, and then there are the disabled, most with legit disabilities.

Get off of this bogus argument. An "income earner" is meaningless unless filing a separate return. Your whole argument is bogus. Numbers presented, prove them wrong. Quit whining "bogus", prove it. Counter with pertinent facts instead of "kids have savings accounts".

ETA: Your argument could look something like this:

National Taxpayer Union

Are they bogus too?

reply to post by DenyObfuscation


I'm not accusing anyone of anything, you're the one dragging justifications out of me, I said, I don't know how many times now, that I would prefer to do the math myself once/if I figure out how, it is my own shortcomings and no one else's that's preventing me from doing it right now. I didn't accuse a poster of bias, I was referring to the site linked in the OP. Now are you satisfied? Or are you going to keep grilling me?

reply to post by Kali74


Namaste.

reply to post by DenyObfuscation


Quit Obfuscating.

Don't you understand the meaning of the word "interpreting"?

I provided evidence that backs up my claim, which is something you have yet to do.

All income is counted as income subject to tax, so everyone with reportable income is reported to the IRS as income earners.

This means the op is counting school kids and retirees as people who don't pay enough taxes, and that is plain wrong. Its just a sleazy propaganda claim.

Figures you would refuse to admit you are wrong when proven wrong.

reply to post by mastahunta


It is really sad when large number of people have become convinced that greed is good.

Doing whatever to get what you want should not be considered a good thing.

reply to post by poet1b


Do you deny the stats from the link i just provided from the National Taxpayers Union for 2009?

Do you deny that if 150 million returns are filed in a year then the top 10% refers to the top 15 million returns?

Can you verify how many tax returns are filed separately by children with savings account interest as income (think about that one)?

It's one thing to challenge the veracity of the OP and another to interpret it. Which are you attempting to do?

reply to post by DenyObfuscation


What is reported as tax returns is all taxable incomes. I provided a link with that info, see above. Children don't have to file taxes to be considered income earners subject to tax. Their income is report by the banks.

In addition, kids who work jobs file tax returns independent of their parents, and are reported independent of their parents.

Which means claims about the bottom fifty percent are bogus. Almost all of the bottom 50% of income earners spend their adult lives paying much higher percentages of taxes.