According to administration data, the median effective tax rate for the middle 20 percent of U.S. taxpayers is 13.3 percent, including income, payroll and corporate taxes. For the top 1 percent of taxpayers, the rate is 29.6 percent, according to the 2012 Economic Report of the President.http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaki...post1060406047 (Senate fails to advance Buffett rule)
You keep forgetting what I already showed you, you don't read the links and you keep asking the same questions over and over again. Further, you keep denying that a flat tax doesn't increase the burden for all, you keep switching back and forth between "everyone needs to pay more" and "the lower earners need to pay more". If you want everyone to pay more, a flat tax won't do it. If you want to increase wealth inequality, a flat tax will do that.....because (for the upteenth time) it would double the rate for mid and triple it for the bottom quintiles.
You are arguing for the tripling of the burden for low quintile earners, the total swallowing of their disposable income while their state tax burden remains the same. You are pushing them into poverty while not changing the tax burden for the top. Again, you increase wealth inequality.They would have to pay part of their disposable income. It is not right to put the full burden on some. Every American needs to step up here.
Again, you said you wanted to pay more, so go ahead and do it...no one is stopping you. If you can afford it...do it.You are not even listening or attempting to. Until you can stop making things up I am once again not going to bother with you.
Freedom isn't free, the wealthy do not volunteer for the armed services anywhere near the rate that the poor do, the wealthy have earned their wealth off the labor of the poor.But please, keep arguing that the rich need to pay more for excessive federal spending.
Since SS and Medicare are self funded trusts, what you have left over is military spending and regulatory. Clearly, the wealthy depend on that portion of spending far more than the poor.
Had President Bush not cut taxes while simultaneously prosecuting two foreign wars and adopting other programs without paying for them, the current deficit would be only 4.7 percent of gross domestic product this year, instead of the eye-catching 11.2 percentódespite the weak economy and the costly efforts taken to restore it. In 2010, the deficit would be 3.2 percent instead of 9.6 percent.
Maybe you can just put "Blame Bush " in your signature line. So it'll always be there
"The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."
-- Adam Smith
Fail much ?