So much for the 10 percenters not carrying the water

[Value Buy]

for the Treasury Department and the Federal Government

cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/cbotop-40-paid-1062-income-taxes-bottom-40-paid-91-got-average-18950

Top 40 percent of income earners paying over 100 percent of income taxes in 2010.

Take a guess where the bottom 40 percent land in this equation.

Please do not knock the article because of the source, as being rightwing.

Look who issued the data.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

WOW! I knew it was bad- and getting worse. But jeeze-- how long before the top 40% says, "Screw this!" and joins the bottom 40%?

[Value Buy]

Dec 10, 2013 9:44:43 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

WOW! I knew it was bad- and getting worse. But jeeze-- how long before the top 40% says, "Screw this!" and joins the bottom 40%?

I am working on that thesis as we speak.

By the way, I have to give credit for finding this data at the Investing: basics & beyond board.

[The Captain]

The top 40% is still far better off than the bottowm 40%, don't be obtuse. 

We all know there is a huge disparity in wealth and earnings in this country, the reasons for which are up for debate.  

Personally, I think everyone should have some skin in the game.  However things like the EITC did much more to get people off of pure welfare and onto workfare, thus contributing to society - I can only see that as a move in the right direction and a good thing.  Does anyone disagree?

For me the real question is how to shrink the percentage of those who are net negative contributors so that we have a greater percentage of society helping to support it.

Outsourcing and automation have reduced the number of solid well-paying blue collar jobs in this country.  In what way do we replace those so that more folks can truly be self-sufficient?

[Value Buy]

Dec 10, 2013 9:53:56 GMT -5 The Captain said:

The top 40% is still far better off than the bottowm 40%, don't be obtuse. 

We all know there is a huge disparity in wealth and earnings in this country, the reasons for which are up for debate.  

Personally, I think everyone should have some skin in the game.  However things like the EITC did much more to get people off of pure welfare and onto workfare, thus contributing to society - I can only see that as a move in the right direction and a good thing.  Does anyone disagree?

For me the real question is how to shrink the percentage of those who are net negative contributors so that we have a greater percentage of society helping to support it.

Outsourcing and automation have reduced the number of solid well-paying blue collar jobs in this country.  In what way do we replace those so that more folks can truly be self-sufficient?

I do not disagree.

My problem is the Democrat politicians claiming the ten per-centers are not carrying the ball for the country.

They are.

Unfortunately the bottom 60 percent bought the Democrat dogma 110 percent that they are not.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 10, 2013 9:44:43 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

WOW! I knew it was bad- and getting worse. But jeeze-- how long before the top 40% says, "Screw this!" and joins the bottom 40%?

how, pray would they do that?  by losing their income?  by moving to a place with higher taxes?

does your ridiculousness know even fewer boundaries than your physical self?

[djAdvocate]

Dec 10, 2013 10:01:09 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Dec 10, 2013 9:53:56 GMT -5 The Captain said:

The top 40% is still far better off than the bottowm 40%, don't be obtuse. 

We all know there is a huge disparity in wealth and earnings in this country, the reasons for which are up for debate.  

Personally, I think everyone should have some skin in the game.  However things like the EITC did much more to get people off of pure welfare and onto workfare, thus contributing to society - I can only see that as a move in the right direction and a good thing.  Does anyone disagree?

For me the real question is how to shrink the percentage of those who are net negative contributors so that we have a greater percentage of society helping to support it.

Outsourcing and automation have reduced the number of solid well-paying blue collar jobs in this country.  In what way do we replace those so that more folks can truly be self-sufficient?

I do not disagree.

My problem is the Democrat...

pejorative.  Democratic.

[Phoenix84]

Interesting.  Thecaptain made some good points.  It is true there is a vast difference in wealth and income in this country, so a large difference in the amount of taxes to be paid should differ drastically as well.

But like Valueby, I think the biggest problem with all this isn't necessarily the numbers themselves, but the Democratic Party's message that the rich aren't doing "their fair share."

Another thing to keep in mind is that the "poor" or those in the bottem two quintiles, still likely paid other forms of taxes.  Like sales tax, gas tax, social security, state tax, vehicle registration fees, ect.  So I'm not sure you can really argue the poor pay "nothing." 

[djAdvocate]

Dec 10, 2013 13:59:15 GMT -5 Phoenix84 said:

Interesting.  Thecaptain made some good points.  It is true there is a vast difference in wealth and income in this country, so a large difference in the amount of taxes to be paid should differ drastically as well.

But like Valueby, I think the biggest problem with all this isn't necessarily the numbers themselves, but the democrat

Democratic.  pejorative.

[Deleted]

Eliminate all the "special" exemptions, and exclusions, and shelters, and deductions enjoyed by the "10percenters" (and NOT available to the other 90%) and you'll have enough revenue to turn things around dramatically.

[billisonboard]

Dec 10, 2013 13:59:15 GMT -5 Phoenix84 said:

I...

Another thing to keep in mind is that the "poor" or those in the bottem two quintiles, still likely paid other forms of taxes.  Like sales tax, gas tax, social security, state tax, vehicle registration fees, ect.  So I'm not sure you can really argue the poor pay "nothing." 

The link in the OP addresses this:

Although they paid negative federal income taxes on average in 2010, Americans in the bottom 40 percent of households did end up paying some taxes to the federal government that year, according to the CBO.

[Deleted]

Dec 10, 2013 14:09:17 GMT -5 @patiencetried said:

Eliminate all the "special" exemptions, and exclusions, and shelters, and deductions enjoyed by the "10percenters" (and NOT available to the other 90%) and you'll have enough revenue to turn things around dramatically.

Such as?

I'm asking in all seriousness. What are these "special" exemptions, exclusions, shelters and deductions that the bottom 90% can never have access to?

On that note...how about we eliminate some of those "special" exemptions, exclusions, shelters and deductions that those in the 90% have access to? I don't think there are many people in the top 10% getting EITC.

Just pointing out that each side gets things the other side doesn't.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 10, 2013 14:15:14 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

I am lucky enough to be in the top 10% (barely) that you speak of.

I don't worry about how much tax the lowest 40% pay.  I damn sure am not going to trade places with them for their tax bill!

bingo. 

besides, my taxes have never been lower.  if there was a time to complain about it, it was a long long time ago.

[Deleted]

Top 40 percent of income earners paying over 100 percent of income taxes in 2010.

Take a guess where the bottom 40 percent land in this equation.

Where to start?
1. How do you pay more than 100%?

2. By definition the people that claimed the most earned income pay the most income tax. I don't see a way around that.

3. The top 40% of income earners does not translate to the top 10% of whatever your OP refers to.

[Deleted]

Dec 10, 2013 14:50:07 GMT -5 laterbloomer said:

Top 40 percent of income earners paying over 100 percent of income taxes in 2010.

Take a guess where the bottom 40 percent land in this equation.

Where to start?
1. How do you pay more than 100%?

2. By definition the people that claimed the most earned income pay the most income tax. I don't see a way around that.

3. The top 40% of income earners does not translate to the top 10% of whatever your OP refers to.

If NET taxes collected is $10 and the top 40% pay $11, then the bottom 60% pay -$1.  In that hypothetical example, the top 40% pay 110% of the total amount of taxes collected.

[Deleted]

Dec 10, 2013 14:22:33 GMT -5 @financialtexan said:

Dec 10, 2013 14:09:17 GMT -5 @patiencetried said:

Eliminate all the "special" exemptions, and exclusions, and shelters, and deductions enjoyed by the "10percenters" (and NOT available to the other 90%) and you'll have enough revenue to turn things around dramatically.

Such as?

I'm asking in all seriousness. What are these "special" exemptions, exclusions, shelters and deductions that the bottom 90% can never have access to?

On that note...how about we eliminate some of those "special" exemptions, exclusions, shelters and deductions that those in the 90% have access to? I don't think there are many people in the top 10% getting EITC.

Just pointing out that each side gets things the other side doesn't.

Don't hold your breath.  I cannot think of a single time patiencetried has responded to a request to validate a statement.

[Deleted]

Dec 10, 2013 14:56:20 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

Dec 10, 2013 14:50:07 GMT -5 laterbloomer said:

Where to start?
1. How do you pay more than 100%?

2. By definition the people that claimed the most earned income pay the most income tax. I don't see a way around that.

3. The top 40% of income earners does not translate to the top 10% of whatever your OP refers to.

If NET taxes collected is $10 and the top 40% pay $11, then the bottom 60% pay -$1.  In that hypothetical example, the top 10% pay 110% of the total amount of taxes collected.

I read the article. They were counting things like EI payments as tax transfers. EI is not paid out of income tax.

[Deleted]

I was just explaining how.  What do you mean "not paid out of income tax"?  It's money they get based on their income level and other qualifications, isn't it?  Isn't it called a tax credit?

[Deleted]

Dec 10, 2013 9:53:56 GMT -5 The Captain said:

The top 40% is still far better off than the bottowm 40%, don't be obtuse. 

We all know there is a huge disparity in wealth and earnings in this country, the reasons for which are up for debate.  

Personally, I think everyone should have some skin in the game.  However things like the EITC did much more to get people off of pure welfare and onto workfare, thus contributing to society - I can only see that as a move in the right direction and a good thing.  Does anyone disagree?

For me the real question is how to shrink the percentage of those who are net negative contributors so that we have a greater percentage of society helping to support it.

Outsourcing and automation have reduced the number of solid well-paying blue collar jobs in this country.  In what way do we replace those so that more folks can truly be self-sufficient?

 You mean we CAN'T be a nation of 400,000,000 CEOs, doctors, lawyers and stock brokers?

[The Captain]

@patiencetried

PLEASE do not forget the small business owners accountants...

If I'm going to be vilified I at least want to be included correctly on all lists.

[rockon]

The 2006 economic survey also found that households in the top two income quintiles, those with an annual household income exceeding $60,000, had a median of two income earners while those in the lower quintiles (2nd and middle quintile) had median of only one income earner per household. Overall, the United States followed the trend of other developed nations with a relatively large population of relatively affluent households outnumbering the poor. Among those in between the extremes of the income strata are a large number of households with moderately high middle class incomes[11] and an even larger number of households with moderately low incomes.[8]




  Household income can be affected by more than just wage changes. Two people can continue making the same wage but move to a very different quintile just by living in the same house. Or you could maintain the same wage but move to a much lower quintile because a child moved out. As noted in the 2006 link above, we followed the trend of other developed nations.

[Deleted]

Dec 10, 2013 15:03:31 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

I was just explaining how.  What do you mean "not paid out of income tax"?  It's money they get based on their income level and other qualifications, isn't it?  Isn't it called a tax credit?

Ahhh, here EI is Employment Insurance. My mistake. 

[Phoenix84]

"Having two workers in a household makes a huge difference."

Or even one. 

[Deleted]

Dec 10, 2013 14:57:46 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

Don't hold your breath.  I cannot think of a single time patiencetried has responded to a request to validate a statement.

Trust me....I wasn't planning on it.

[EVT1]

Dec 10, 2013 9:44:43 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

WOW! I knew it was bad- and getting worse. But jeeze-- how long before the top 40% says, "Screw this!" and joins the bottom 40%?

Those lucky bastards!  I am going to go and find me a low paying shit job tommorrow- the hell with paying taxes.  I can't wait to be poor and live the tax free good life.

[Deleted]

Dec 10, 2013 15:52:03 GMT -5 laterbloomer said:

Dec 10, 2013 15:03:31 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

I was just explaining how.  What do you mean "not paid out of income tax"?  It's money they get based on their income level and other qualifications, isn't it?  Isn't it called a tax credit?

Ahhh, here EI is Employment Insurance. My mistake. 

Sorry, I thought you were talking about EITC.  Yeah, I don't see how unemployment could be counted as reverse income tax.  That is silly.

[Deleted]

 What Tax advantages do the 10percenters have?
 let's figure...
Joe Sixpack doesn't get to deduct the costs of his Lamborghini or his $5,000 suits... as a "business expense".
 Joe Sixpack doesn't have a "Blind Trust" or  a"Limited Liability Corporation". Joe Sixpack rarely invests in Municipal bonds for the tax break.
 Joe Sixpack doesn't even have an accountant to juggle the books and cook the numbers. 

[Deleted]

@investorbob this is the part that makes me antsy about how they are presenting this stuff

The CBO’s calculation of before-tax income included both the money a household earned and the money it got from the government.

“Before-tax income is the sum of market income and government transfers,” said CBO. “Market income is composed of labor income, business income, capital gains, capital income (excluding capital gains), income received in retirement for past services, and other sources of income. Government transfers are cash payments and in-kind benefits from social insurance and other government assistance programs."

The households in the bottom 40 percent of income—which on average paid negative federal income taxes—were on average receiving many thousands of dollars in what the report calls “government transfers.” These transfers included, among other things, benefits from unemployment insurance, Medicare and Social Security, as well as from means-tested programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps), and Medicaid.
- See more at: cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/cbotop-40-paid-1062-income-taxes-bottom-40-paid-91-got-average-18950#sthash.a8kLb95y.dpuf

[Deleted]

Dec 10, 2013 16:54:15 GMT -5 @financialtexan said:

Dec 10, 2013 14:57:46 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

Don't hold your breath.  I cannot think of a single time patiencetried has responded to a request to validate a statement.

Trust me....I wasn't planning on it.

I should have been more specific.  Patiencetried has never responded to one wild statement with anything but more wild statements....

[zibazinski]

Sure the bottom feeders pay taxes but with whose money? Not their own but money they stole from taxpayers to begin with.