• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Republican civil war is just getting started

Uh, sorry to the burst the big bubble in your crainum, but the percentages at the bottom of that chart does not quote the pct. of taxes paid. . .

a fact which becomes brutally obvious when adding up all the percentages at the bottom and seeing that it doesn't total to 100% ?!

You're right...now get back to me on the data in post #384...from an 'official' source...:lamo
 
'authoritative' =/= 'official'...try again

ps: many 'Tea Party' groups are 501(c)...does that make them 'authoritative'?

Probably not, considering that unlike the ITEP, their data isn't based on and doesn't cite actual tax tables from the various and the IRS.
 
You're right...now get back to me on the data in post #384...from an 'official' source...:lamo

Can't, still laughing at td's apparent failure to comprehend basic arithmetic.
 
Actually, nothing is as hilarious as you desperately that payroll taxes ARE NOT income taxes, even though it's money taken by the federal govt. based on income that IS NOT given back to the taxpayer.

To make an even more pathetic point. There is a catalog for domestic assistance...to facilitate 'money taken by the federal govt. based on income that IS (sic)given back to the taxpayer'...:

Catalog for Domestic Assistance
 
Probably not, considering that unlike the ITEP, their data isn't based on and doesn't cite actual tax tables from the various and the IRS.

But I DID use the IRS tables in #384...why are you dodging that data...from THE 'OFFICIAL' SOURCE?
 
Can't, still laughing at td's apparent failure to comprehend basic arithmetic.

Why? Do you feel it the mature thing to do to ridicule someone else? Is that the 'Libertarian' thing to do?
 
Can't, still laughing at td's apparent failure to comprehend basic arithmetic.

I think everyone can see you are getting destroyed on the math.
 
So following your supposition, the 95%er's payroll taxes are included in the general fund for use by the government...? Ok now how much of that is returned to those same folks in the form of:



And I especially liked the next sentence:


US Welfare System - Help for US Citizens

Are these not 'given back to the taxpayer'...based on income?

The US gov't always claims that all taxpayer monies are redistributed in a way that benefits the taxpayer, but any real Libertarian worth her salt knows that's usually a crock of ****.

If you were a real Libertarian, instead of some tp limbaugh hack, you'd know that.
 
The US gov't always claims that all taxpayer monies are redistributed in a way that benefits the taxpayer, but any real Libertarian worth her salt knows that's usually a crock of ****.

If you were a real Libertarian, instead of some tp limbaugh hack, you'd know that.

AH, and this was predicted MANY years ago...

“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.” ― Socrates

Unless you have something valuable to contribute...carry on...:lamo
 
Why? Do you feel it the mature thing to do to ridicule someone else? Is that the 'Libertarian' thing to do?

Not from this libertarian-the guy who actually was an official part of the Clark Campaign in 1980 and authorized to speak on behalf of the campaign in New Haven and Greater Hartford. I haven't seen a thing from Solletica that suggests any libertarian views. claiming the rich don't pay enough sounds socialist to me or worse yet, populist. Populism-which tends to be a benighted reactionary hatred of the educated and the successful often masquerades as libertarian. It as actually one of the conflicts in both the GOP and the DNC. Populists hate the well educated elites who run the DNC-people like Kerry and the Kennedys and the Rockefellers . The same reactionary populists in the GOP were the people who stayed home because Romney is a Mormon and went to Harvard and is very wealthy. They also whined about GHWB being in the "trilateral commission". They are the heirs to the nativist "know nothings" who constantly whined about "Papist influences" and the "Jew Rothchild" running our banks.
 
AH, and this was predicted MANY years ago...

Ah, so Dickieboy actually believes the federal govt. about how it claims it intends to use taxpayer money

lmfao.gif
lmfao.gif
lmfao.gif
 
Ah, so Dickieboy actually believes the federal govt. about how it claims it intends to use taxpayer money

Strawman...

Why are you now attacking me? Can you not respond to the data provided in #384? Can you not respond to the FACT that SOME of the monies that you claim are being paid in by the 95%ers IS in FACT coming back to them as welfare/entitlements?

Perhaps just admit you were wrong and move along...
 
Strawman...

Why are you now attacking me? Can you not respond to the data provided in #384? Can you not respond to the FACT that SOME of the monies that you claim are being paid in by the 95%ers IS in FACT coming back to them as welfare/entitlements?

Ah, I get it. So the FICA taxes aren't really a tax because the feds are saying that those monies will be used to benefit those who pay it. . .

and Dickieboy, the self-proclaimed "Libertarian" believes the govt.! :lol:

Man, this thread just gets better every post :)
 
Ah, I get it. So the FICA taxes aren't really a tax because the feds are saying that those monies will be used to benefit those who pay it. . .

and Dickieboy, the self-proclaimed "Libertarian" believes the govt.! :lol:

Man, this thread just gets better every post :)

so you have abandoned the dishonest claim that FICA charges are part of the FEDERAL INCOME TAX and now saying it is really some kind of TAX.

we are getting somewhere. and as someone who actually was officially part of the Libertarian party, Dickieboy's posts are in line with the movement. Yours appear to be reactionary populist, the descendent of the Know Nothing Movement more than a century ago
 
Can't, still laughing at td's apparent failure to comprehend basic arithmetic.

Let’s do some basic arithmetic…
so Federal revenue is ~$3,100b (2012, which includes PR taxes)
95%ers share (from previous post) 43% = $1,333b
Social Security disbursements = $772
Medicare = $530b
Medicaid = $405
SNAP = $80b
I’ll just stop there as you can see that the total of these 4 DIRECT RETURNS of income taxes (including PR as you desire) equals more than what the 95%ers paid…should I continue?
 
...and Dickieboy, the self-proclaimed "Libertarian" believes the govt.! :lol:

Again, why are you attacking me? My 'lean' is based on that cheesy political calculator and nothing more. My views on the various topic range across the ENTIRE political spectrum...but this discussion is not about ME or MY LEAN...please try to stay on topic and address the questions asked of you...

And yes, I have voted for candidates from a wide plethora of party affiliations over the years...
 
Ah, I get it. So the FICA taxes aren't really a tax because the feds are saying that those monies will be used to benefit those who pay it. . .

another strawman...why are you being obtuse?
 
so you have abandoned the dishonest claim that FICA charges are part of the FEDERAL INCOME TAX and now saying it is really some kind of TAX.

we are getting somewhere. and as someone who actually was officially part of the Libertarian party, Dickieboy's posts are in line with the movement. Yours appear to be reactionary populist, the descendent of the Know Nothing Movement more than a century ago

Let's not go overboard here. I am not 'part of the Libertarian party', never have been. As stated previously my positions vary across the political spectrum but the 'political compass' thingy said what it said...?
 
and I was not making any argument other than noting that the top 5% pay more than half of the FEDERAL INCOME TAX.

Federal tax is just one form of tax. It's like quoting statistics for something but only looking at data on Sunday....

The Congressional Budget Office breaks down the 2007 share of the tax burden according to each segment of the population as follows:[19]
The highest quintile in total earned 55.9% of all income. It paid 86.0% of federal income taxes and 68.9% of all federal taxes
The top 1% earned 19.4% of all income. It paid 39.5% of income taxes and 28.1% of all federal taxes
The next 4% earned 12.9% of income. It paid 21.5%. of income taxes and 16.2% of all federal taxes
The next 5% earned 9.7% of income. It paid 11.7% of income taxes and 10.7% of all federal taxes
The next 10% earned 13.9% of income. It paid 13.3% of income taxes and 13.9% of all federal taxes.
The fourth quintile earned 19.3% of income. It paid 12.7% of income taxes and 16.5 of all federal taxes.
The third quintile earned 13.1% of income. It paid 4.6% of income taxes and 9.2% of all federal taxes.
The second quintile earned 8.4%. It paid a net -0.3% of income taxes, meaning in aggregate this quintile received slightly more back in income tax credits than it paid in income taxes. It paid 4.4% of all federal taxes.
The lowest quintile earned 4.0% of all income and received a net -3.0% income tax credits. It paid 1.0% of all federal taxes.

Source: Tax Foundation

That's INCOME, now Wealth:



Income is earned each year and is turned into wealth, which in turn can be used to generate more wealth as demonstrated here:



Now regardless of what you think about taxes, clearly this model is unsustainable.

The Cons and Libertarians gripe about all the benefits paid to low income families and yet those at the top keep increasing their share of the wealth.

The fact is that the top 400 people have more wealth than the bottom 160,000,000 people. The top 400 can't consume enough cars, houses, Washers, TV's, vacations and all the everyday items that people buy to keep the people at the bottom employed.

As a result those at the bottom have to decrease their standard of living.

China has a more balanced distribution of income!!!

http://monthlyreview.org/docs/0705tbl3-4.pdf

The bottom line is that people need money to buy things from those at the top that want to supply it. As income becomes more uneven more and more people are limited to necessities the discretionary income becomes increasingly limited. In turn those industries that furnish items other than food, gas, clothing, housing, electricity, water ect will see decreased demand leading to inevitable layoffs only exacerbating the problem.

When a super wealthy individual buys a 10 million dollar Van Gogh, how many people does that employ? Think about it.

No matter how you look at this problem and where you point the finger, it is the increasing share of income and wealth in the top 20% that is creating the problem (not that I blame the top 20% for trying to make it mind you). People at the bottom have, since 1983, had less and less money to spend, leading to fewer jobs and less money to spend. To some degree this has been made up though an increase in credit, which has increasingly made those at the bottom slaves to their debt and in turn to their low wage jobs, that, for the bottom 50% have been decreasing in pay since the 1980's.
 
You said that historians argue about who is more Liberal, Washington, or Lincoln.

Post a link to those docs, or just admit that you lied through your teeth about the whole issue. Thanks...case closed.
Except I didn't? I specifically mentioned which study I was talking about, quoted from the study, and then showed you a graph relating modern day political figures. Don't blame me for your willful ignorance on a subject when I've given you all the information you need.
 
I don't tend to cater to the demands of posters whose posts are generally dishonest and fail to honestly address the issue

In debate, when you make claims of fact, it is right and proper for others to ask you to support them with verifiable evidence. Why would you consistently eschew providing evidence for your claims and then even brag about it? How does that further debate?
 
so you have abandoned the dishonest claim that FICA charges are part of the FEDERAL INCOME TAX and now saying it is really some kind of TAX.

You have already been given plenty of verifiable evidence that FICA is indeed a tax. Why would you ask somebody if FICA is a tax when that is a well established fact?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FICA

Federal Insurance Contributions Act tax
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) tax /ˈfaɪkə/ is a United States Federal payroll (or employment) tax[1] imposed on both employees and employers to fund Social Security and Medicare[2] —federal programs that provide benefits for retirees, the disabled, and children of deceased workers. Social Security benefits include old-age, survivors, and disability insurance (OASDI); Medicare provides hospital insurance benefits for the elderly. The amount that one pays in payroll taxes throughout one's working career is associated indirectly with the social security benefits annuity that one receives as a retiree.

and more

http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/392

Social Security payroll taxes are collected under the authority of the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA). The payroll taxes are sometimes even called FICA taxes.

and more

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc751.html

The Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) tax includes two separate taxes. One is social security tax and the other is Medicare tax. Different rates apply for each of these.

The current tax rate for social security is 6.2% for the employer and 6.2% for the employee, or 12.4% total. The current rate for Medicare is 1.45% for the employer and 1.45% for the employee, or 2.9% total. Refer to Publication 15, (Circular E), Employer's Tax Guide, Chapter 6, for more information, or for agricultural employers refer to Publication 51, (Circular A), Agricultural Employer’s Tax Guide, Chapter 5.

fact of life: FICA is a tax.
 
Last edited:
In debate, when you make claims of fact, it is right and proper for others to ask you to support them with verifiable evidence. Why would you consistently eschew providing evidence for your claims and then even brag about it? How does that further debate?

Because, that's all he's got.
 
The problem is the Tea Party movement was never about that. It was a direct reaction to Obama's election. They had no problem with growing debt for 30 years. They suddenly have a problem with it when Obama gets elected.

You're wrong, it was a reaction to George Bush and all his spending.
 
Back
Top Bottom