The elite super wealthy and social justice

[bri89]

About the 47%- Politicususa

The truth is that the talking point that half of all Americans pay no taxes is a misrepresentation. Here is the full quote from the Tax Policy Center,

“The fraction of tax units paying no income tax varies widely by filing status and type of unit. About 47 percent of single filers will owe no tax, compared with 38 percent of joint filers and 72 percent of heads of household. More than half of elderly tax units and tax units with children will pay no income tax this year.”

The 47% statistic is not all Americans pay no taxes, but single filers who will pay no federal income taxes. According to the Center On Budget and Policy Priorities the real reason why 47%-51% of Americans paid no federal income taxes in 2009 is,

“The 51 percent figure is an anomaly that reflects the unique circumstances of 2009, when the recession greatly swelled the number of Americans with low incomes and when temporary tax cuts created by the 2009 Recovery Act — including the “Making Work Pay” tax credit and an exclusion from tax of the first $2,400 in unemployment benefits — were in effect. Together, these developments removed millions of Americans from the federal income tax rolls. Both of these temporary tax measures have since expired.”

The combination of the recession and the Obama stimulus cut taxes to low and middle income Americans led to fewer Americans owing federal income tax in 2009.

The Tax Policy Center has tried to correct Fox News and the right wing media’s misuse of their research. In April 2010, Howard Glickman of the TPC wrote,

“Let me explain—repeat actually—what this means: About half of taxpayers paid no federal income tax last year. It does not mean they paid no tax at all. Many shelled out Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes. In fact, only 14 percent of Americans didn’t pay either income or payroll taxes. Some paid property taxes and, it is fair to say, just about all of them paid sales taxes of one kind or another. So to say they pay no taxes is flat wrong.”

However, this class warfare-like rhetoric plays to a perception that the income tax is a chump tax: Only hard-working folks like us pay it. The welfare queens don’t. The super-rich don’t. It is a powerful emotional argument. It is also flat wrong.

The actual number of Americans who don’t pay any taxes isn’t half, but 14%. This group of non-taxpayers of any kind is largely composed of the elderly and disabled. The people who don’t pay taxes do so because they can’t work.

The myth that the wealthy are carrying the tax burden for America is used to justify tax cuts for the rich. Conservatives use the inaccurate statistic hand in hand with their, “wealthy are the job creators argument.” One statistic that was intended to demonstrate the loss of income due to the recession, along with the impact of the Obama tax cuts has been distorted and misused to justify a policy of not asking the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share.

The truth is that 86% of Americans pay taxes. In one recession strapped year (2009), less than half of single filer taxpayers paid federal income taxes.

 

[Ridgerunner]

About the 47%- Politicususa

The truth is that the talking point that half of all Americans pay no taxes is a misrepresentation. Here is the full quote from the Tax Policy Center,

“The fraction of tax units paying no income tax varies widely by filing status and type of unit. About 47 percent of single filers will owe no tax, compared with 38 percent of joint filers and 72 percent of heads of household. More than half of elderly tax units and tax units with children will pay no income tax this year.”

The 47% statistic is not all Americans pay no taxes, but single filers who will pay no federal income taxes. According to the Center On Budget and Policy Priorities the real reason why 47%-51% of Americans paid no federal income taxes in 2009 is,

“The 51 percent figure is an anomaly that reflects the unique circumstances of 2009, when the recession greatly swelled the number of Americans with low incomes and when temporary tax cuts created by the 2009 Recovery Act — including the “Making Work Pay” tax credit and an exclusion from tax of the first $2,400 in unemployment benefits — were in effect. Together, these developments removed millions of Americans from the federal income tax rolls. Both of these temporary tax measures have since expired.”

The combination of the recession and the Obama stimulus cut taxes to low and middle income Americans led to fewer Americans owing federal income tax in 2009.

The Tax Policy Center has tried to correct Fox News and the right wing media’s misuse of their research. In April 2010, Howard Glickman of the TPC wrote,

“Let me explain—repeat actually—what this means: About half of taxpayers paid no federal income tax last year. It does not mean they paid no tax at all. Many shelled out Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes. In fact, only 14 percent of Americans didn’t pay either income or payroll taxes. Some paid property taxes and, it is fair to say, just about all of them paid sales taxes of one kind or another. So to say they pay no taxes is flat wrong.”

However, this class warfare-like rhetoric plays to a perception that the income tax is a chump tax: Only hard-working folks like us pay it. The welfare queens don’t. The super-rich don’t. It is a powerful emotional argument. It is also flat wrong.

The actual number of Americans who don’t pay any taxes isn’t half, but 14%. This group of non-taxpayers of any kind is largely composed of the elderly and disabled. The people who don’t pay taxes do so because they can’t work.

The myth that the wealthy are carrying the tax burden for America is used to justify tax cuts for the rich. Conservatives use the inaccurate statistic hand in hand with their, “wealthy are the job creators argument.” One statistic that was intended to demonstrate the loss of income due to the recession, along with the impact of the Obama tax cuts has been distorted and misused to justify a policy of not asking the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share.

The truth is that 86% of Americans pay taxes. In one recession strapped year (2009), less than half of single filer taxpayers paid federal income taxes.

Absolutely Clintonesque.

In other words, other than SS and Medicare, both of which are (mythically) considered a sort of “savings account”, not “income taxes” at all, about half of the citizenry doesn’t pay income taxes. We already know that.

What we ought to be wondering about is not why, exactly, that’s true (yes, yes, we know about the recession…how could we not?) but why this administration has done nothing to improve employment but has done much to impede it.

 

[cynic]

Very little money is “not invested” in this country.

True - we all purchase goods and services - low paid employees also, and what is left is invested via a bank. Funny then how economic liberals only consider money a good thing when in the hands of the wealthy but wasted if given to anyone else.

 

[Ridgerunner]

True - we all purchase goods and services - low paid employees also, and what is left is invested via a bank. Funny then how economic liberals only consider money a good thing when in the hands of the wealthy but wasted if given to anyone else.

You are surely using the word “liberal” in the NZ sense of the term.

The money of some that is left over after consumption is put in banks, yes. For others, it may be used to invest in land, buildings, production of some kind.

I don’t think anyone really thinks money is wasted in the hands of the non-wealthy. I certainly don’t. The problem isn’t that. The problem is a government that encourages the idea that productivity doesn’t matter when it comes to the expenditure of money; that it is all just fine if people are paid to do nothing or, perhaps worse in a way, paid some pittance for political loyalty. (like the HHS mandate here)

And it is no value to a society to encourage people to think that idleness on their part is morally virtuous while those who worked to produce are somehow immoral because of it.

 

[Captain_America]

There is a real problem in discussing such issues because we all have an immediate tendency to knee-jerk on it, to wit:

LIBERALS talking about Big Money tend to forget that owners have rights. They have choices about what to do with their money.

CONSERVATIVES use such a topic as an occasion to Bash Government. (Well, government—and business, too—is bashable; certainly both business and government inadvertantly waste resources in their control).

CONSERVATIVES also feel threatened, since they believe that liberals want to use government to “steal” money through taxation.

CONSERVATIVES tend to float away from the subject and generalize about how God-awful guv’mint is.

CONSERVATIVES then trot out the hoary, old libertarian economics, which has long been discredited as inadequate. (But certainly its good to show the defects of Keynesianism).

LIBERALS tend to forget to present that argument that a rentier class really doesn’t contribute as much to the economy as entrepreneurs would (one early argument made by capitalists against big business was that big business was TOO conservative in holding/spending funds).

BOTH LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES forget to make the simple point that a man can only wear so many pairs of pants and eat so many steaks. Wealth itself can become so large and abstract that a billionaire can hand a million to a bum and never feel it.

 

[austenbosten]

There is a real problem in discussing such issues because we all have an immediate tendency to knee-jerk on it, to wit:

LIBERALS talking about Big Money tend to forget that owners have rights. They have choices about what to do with their money.

True

CONSERVATIVES use such a topic as an occasion to Bash Government. (Well, government—and business, too—is bashable; certainly both business and government inadvertantly waste resources in their control).

True business can be wasteful and can act just as dumb as government, but at least under capitalism the dumb, wasteful and lazy businesses go out of business and the people who run their business with greed and waste are eventually shuffled out of the system…government just continues to roll along and greedy and wasteful politicians are merely shuffled around government.

CONSERVATIVES also feel threatened, since they believe that liberals want to use government to “steal” money through taxation.

And should be, since when have liberals advocated anything other than taxation and wealth redistribution?

CONSERVATIVES tend to float away from the subject and generalize about how God-awful guv’mint is.

$6 Trillion blown in 4 years…can you really blame them?

CONSERVATIVES then trot out the hoary, old libertarian economics, which has long been discredited as inadequate. (But certainly its good to show the defects of Keynesianism)

.

FALSE!

When and by who? As far as I’m concerned most economic textbooks still adhere to the classical economic theories that you find discreditable and lets be honest Keynesianism has a lot more defects for it to be discredited as inadequate than orthodox economics.

LIBERALS tend to forget to present that argument that a rentier class really doesn’t contribute as much to the economy as entrepreneurs would (one early argument made by capitalists against big business was that big business was TOO conservative in holding/spending funds)

.

Rent-seekers don’t contribute anything since they demand wealth to be shifted via fiat from other parties to their own.

As for Big Business the problem wasn’t they were too conservative with their investments, on the contrary American Telephone and Telegraph was a monopoly on the telephone business and they invested a lot into projects. Especially Bell Labs which invented the transistor, Unix, C programming, solar panels, and made the first communication satellite. The problem with big business is government dominance in the market when the government develops a monopoly on certain sectors of the market (as it has with the pharmaceutical market via FDA) and the big businesses seek to collect their revenues from dealings with government and not with the consumers. Businesses begin to seek rent instead of seeking business.

BOTH LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES forget to make the simple point that a man can only wear so many pairs of pants and eat so many steaks. Wealth itself can become so large and abstract that a billionaire can hand a million to a bum and never feel it.

So you’re presenting the argument for the Liberals…nice way of trying to act like staying above the fray when still in the thick of it.

 

[PeterGStanley]

My small donations over the year is massively more a percentage of my income than any amount a rich person donates in most cases and I’m doing it to actually help people rather than going for the tax break or get my name put on a building . If you didn’t get a tax break on charitable donation do you think these people would do it? I’m sure a few would but most would fall away without the incentive.

 

[Bill_7154]

why don’t YOU feed him,instead of engaging in detraction by posting everyone else’s sins?

Feed who? Joe? That hypothetical I believe I asked what should “HE” do. I didn’t say he was hungry. I didn’t say he didn’t have access to food. So wherever your coming from, I suggest you either learn to actually read what is written and pay attention to that, or if that is not your problem, I request that you stop making assumptions about me and what my beliefs, desires, intentions, etc are.

And if people happen to feel guilt by reading any part of this thread it was not my intention. And I certainly didn’t realize I was in the company of people worth 1/2 a billion dollars or so on this forum.

I am only responsible for what I say, not for what others might think I mean. I have pointed out on more than one occasion where people in this thread have either mischaracterized what I was saying, and in one post outright lying about my beliefs.

Where are you coming up with me ‘posting about everyone else’s sins’? Are you yet another poster making assumptions about what is in my heart and mind?

If your interested in knowing what I think, believe, etc on one or more topics feel free to make a thread devoted to ASKING ME. If you don’t want to do that I request that when I do not specifically STATE something, that you not ASSUME you know what I think or believe on a topic and ASK ME. I have nothing to hide.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[Bill_7154]

Also,

I would like to ask people, if they can, to stay away from discussing taxes in this thread. There are other threads that exist, or can be created, to disucss that.

I specifically and repeatedly, over and over asserted I was interested in discussing CHARITY, in particular CHARITY from the super rich (worth several hundred million or more).

Taxes are NOT charity. They are monies that people are forced to pay with various threats levelled against them if they do not. That is very different than charity.

I would like this thread to stay focused charity and the uber wealthy elite (like the 1 in 100 million or so people or whatever). People’s opinions on THAT. Not on what so and so (middle class, upper class, whatever class pays in taxes).

Thanks and God Bless,
Bill

 

[april32010]

Also,

I would like to ask people, if they can, to stay away from discussing taxes in this thread. There are other threads that exist, or can be created, to disucss that.

I specifically and repeatedly, over and over asserted I was interested in discussing CHARITY, in particular CHARITY from the super rich (worth several hundred million or more).

Taxes are NOT charity. They are monies that people are forced to pay with various threats levelled against them if they do not. That is very different than charity.

I would like this thread to stay focused charity and the uber wealthy elite (like the 1 in 100 million or so people or whatever). People’s opinions on THAT. Not on what so and so (middle class, upper class, whatever class pays in taxes).

Thanks and God Bless,
Bill

and taxes are monies that one could have been given to a charity of ones choice if they hadn’t been taken and redistributed elsewhere and they are part of this discussion.

 

[Bill_7154]

and taxes are monies that one could have been given to a charity of ones choice if they hadn’t been taken and redistributed elsewhere and they are part of this discussion.

I myself have asserted in posts on this website on a number of occasions that taxes could be given to charity if not taken and redistributed and have stated my opposition to this and also my postion that those monies would be used much more effectively by charities.

So if you presume anything other than that when it comes to me and my view of taxes you couldn’t be more wrong.

I started the thread and want to discuss charity separate than redistribution of wealth. Since I presume we are in agreement on that issue there is no ‘discussion’ between me and you on that subject other than “yes, I agree with you.”

If you want to debate someone who holds a different postion than both you and I do on the matter I think another thread is the place to do that.

Unless of course you want to make the case why it makes more sense for you and poster x (someone other than me posting in this thread) have a debate/discussion in this thread that I started about wealth redistribution in this thread rather than some other thread. And I can’t really see how you could really make that case. It muddies up this thread and both you and I, again, hold the SAME position on that topic.

A lot of posters in this thread have made incorrect assumptions about me and my postions. Were you assuming that I held some other postion on that topic than I stated here? If so I find that hard to beleive. If you can support it with some actual EVIDENCE I would be interested in hearing that.

So rather than you and I both stating we agree with one another on the topic of wealth redistribtuon in this thread over and over and over and over again…again I ask that this thread focus on people’s ideas, thoughts, opinions, etc as it relates to the super wealthy and CHARITY.

And to ALL: It would be nice to get an apology from those of you who have asserted postions attributed to me that I do NOT hold. In particular it would be appreciated if I got an apology for things such as being called a Marxist or holding socialist views when I do not, have never posted I do, and have made numerous posts (go search my posting history) about how I am basically against the way government runs things in relation to the poor, in extention government tax policies, etc…

As an Anarcho-Capitalist it would be pretty much the EXACT OPPOSITE of my belief system. But rather than go on what I post, people over and over again choose to make assumptions about my belief system and then argue against that. This makes no sense. Understand yet?

I would like to think that as someone who has recently discovered my faith, that Catholics on this website could set a positive example for me and apologize for making postings accusing me of things I do not believe. And I myself, if I have done such a thing towards any other poster on this website am more than willing to correct such errors. I believe it is the correct thing to do.
I joined this website and got away from other websites where similar topics (social policies, etc) are discussed in part because people make arguments and then when caught in inconsistencies, or worse, outright falsehoods, simply duck and avoid taking responsibility for their behavior towards others they are communicating with. Maybe my expectations were set too high but I still have faith that people can state when they were wrong and possibly apologize as well.

Thank you and God Bless,
Bill