• 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!

Walker takes broad swipe at public employee unions

Status
Not open for further replies.
haymarket said:
That was the worst sort of racist comment and far over the line. Even for the likes of you.

I do take offense and I see that others do also. This is the worst sort of trolling and baiting.
Click to expand...


That's all his posts ever have, just start ignoring them and move on to posts with substance. That's what I've started doing.
 
Conservative said:
Ok, I'll bite, what is racist in Turtle's comment?
Click to expand...

Bite?????? You racist, you!!!! We'll have none of that on DP. This is beyond the pale even for you. ;-)

Catawba said:
That's all his posts ever have, just start ignoring them and move on to posts with substance. That's what I've started doing.
Click to expand...

OMG, I've been doing THAT for pages.
 
Conservative said:
Ok, I'll bite, what is racist in Turtle's comment?
Click to expand...

It clearly describes some people - his bottom 10% as animals. You do not have to a rocket scientist to put together his past posts where he mentions just who those people are to put one and one together and get two. And he knows it and did it intentionally.

But beyond that, this is the worst sort of baiting and trolling.
 
TurtleDude said:
its the stock response when all the other answers on the libchip no longer work
Click to expand...

It was your intention from the beginning. You purposely used words that are applied to animals and not to human beings. You made sure to include who you were talking about. Its easy to put it together and that is what you wanted people to do. It gives you some sort of cred with the radical right zealots.
 
MaggieD said:
Bite?????? You racist, you!!!! We'll have none of that on DP. This is beyond the pale even for you. ;-)



OMG, I've been doing THAT for pages.
Click to expand...

some arent smart enough to understand sarcasm. one poster suggested that taxing the rich more and more is OK as long as it helps society. The point was there are lots of nasty violations of peoples' rights we can do that can arguably help society

but some take offense as a way of not dealing with the infirmaties of their own side's emotional weakness.
 
CriticalThought said:
That chart where you got your figures was the Internal Revenue Service was from 2004. That is not the latest data. Let's look at the IRS data from 2006.

Distribution of Income - Top 1%=21.3%, Next 19%=40.1%, Bottom 80%=38.6%.

The Bush tax cuts were very, very kind to the wealthy and they certainly did pay off for us, didn't they? Look at all the jobs the Bush tax cuts created.

Source: http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_589.pdf
Click to expand...

Who pays taxes - and how much? A tax day perennial. - Apr. 15, 2009

The top fifth of households made 56% of pre-tax income in 2006 but paid 86% of all individual income tax revenue collected, according to the most recent data available from the Congressional Budget Office.

Narrowing in further: The top 1% of households, which made 19% of pre-tax income, paid 39% of all individual income taxes.

The trend is similar if you count income taxes, social insurance taxes, excise taxes and corporate income taxes (such as capital gains) combined. The top fifth of households paid 69% of all federal taxes. The top 1% paid 28%.


Nearly half of US households escape fed income tax - Yahoo! Finance

The result is a tax system that exempts almost half the country from paying for programs that benefit everyone, including national defense, public safety, infrastructure and education. It is a system in which the top 10 percent of earners -- households making an average of $366,400 in 2006 -- paid about 73 percent of the income taxes collected by the federal government.

The bottom 40 percent, on average, make a profit from the federal income tax, meaning they get more money in tax credits than they would otherwise owe in taxes. For those people, the government sends them a payment.

"We have 50 percent of people who are getting something for nothing," said Curtis Dubay, senior tax policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation.
 
haymarket said:
It clearly describes some people - his bottom 10% as animals. You do not have to a rocket scientist to put together his past posts where he mentions just who those people are to put one and one together and get two. And he knows it and did it intentionally.

But beyond that, this is the worst sort of baiting and trolling.
Click to expand...

I don't see racist in that comment at all unless all the bottom 10% are one race. Explain the racist element? I have never heard being compared to an animal as being racist.
 
Jesus. I get a warning for telling people they are hypocritical for watching CNN and then criticizing Fox (or vice versa) and for telling someone who told me I have no balls they are childish, and we have some guy who gets to run around talking about chopping off the balls of poor people. I hope the other conservatives on this board are slowly backing away from this "Turtledude".

Conservative said:
I don't see racist in that comment at all unless all the bottom 10% are one race. Explain the racist element? I have never heard being compared to an animal as being racist.
Click to expand...

I think he mixed up racist with stupid. It wasn't a racist comment, it was a useless, stupid comment.
 
Last edited:
whysoserious said:
Jesus. I get a warning for telling people they are hypocritical for watching CNN and then criticizing Fox (or vice versa) and for telling someone who told me I have no balls they are childish, and we have some guy who gets to run around talking about chopping off the balls of poor people. I hope the other conservatives on this board are slowly backing away from this "Turtledude".
Click to expand...

the smart people understand the point

the kids and hysterics don't

the college kids are most befuddled.
 
whysoserious said:
Just go away. No one wants to debate anything with you.
Click to expand...

gee lets take poll newbie

and you don't have the standing to tell anyone to go away

I cannot help it if you cannot understand the point I was making or you buy into Haymarket's hysterics

I also note you have a quote of mine as your signature

figure out how that makes your comment look even more stupid
 
Last edited:
whysoserious said:
Just go away. No one wants to debate anything with you.
Click to expand...

Actually, the poster in question never debates anything. He simply pontificates and outright refuses to support his belief statements with any evidence. And the n from tiem to time weget the baitingand trolling just like he has done here. Its sad.
 
TurtleDude said:
gee lets take poll newbie

and you don't have the standing to tell anyone to go away

I cannot help it if you cannot understand the point I was making or you buy into Haymarket's hysterics

I also note you have a quote of mine as your signature

figure out how that makes your comment look even more stupid
Click to expand...

Well sir, now that you have called me stupid, called liberals sloths who can't use guns (see my signature), and decided whose can keep their balls in this country, what's next on your agenda? You've had a big night buddy.

Look, only a lunatic would think that raising taxes is wealth redistribution and socialism and then the next day mention that they think its a good idea to chop off poor people's balls. Good day. :)
 
whysoserious said:
Well sir, now that you have called me stupid, called liberals sloths who can't use guns (see my signature), and decided whose can keep their balls in this country, what's next on your agenda? You've had a big night buddy.

Look, only a lunatic would think that raising taxes is wealth redistribution and socialism and then the next day mention that they think its a good idea to chop off poor people's balls. Good day. :)
Click to expand...

But I didn't say that as the smart people realize

I was noting that just because something might help society according to some, doesn't mean its right if its unfair
 
haymarket said:
Actually, the poster in question never debates anything. He simply pontificates and outright refuses to support his belief statements with any evidence. And the n from tiem to time weget the baitingand trolling just like he has done here. Its sad.
Click to expand...

you and a few other far lefties seem to be the only ones getting so upset
 
Catawba said:
What statistics?
Click to expand...

The statistics that reveal most private and charter schools are very open to accepting students regardless of their ability to pay or their overall GPA. Just take a look at the thousands of different Internet schools and independent study groups that have flourished over the years. Their entire existence is based on reaching out to kids to need a little extra help or need an alternative based education and then tailoring the learning process to fit their individual needs and wants. By golly, it's been going on for decades. When my father kept dropping out of school and doing poorly on his exams, the school board gave him a choice. He could straighten out his school career at the public school immediately or he can enroll himself into an alternative, vocation-based technical school. He chose to learn to fly airplanes and almost received his pilot license. Of course, he ended up taking a completely different path as a nurse anesthetist in the Air-Force but his example just goes to prove my point. There are other options. I've been to two different high schools in extremely different parts of the country. Both had a system where troubled and under-performing youths could find an alternative at a technical school and immediately begin to learn a trade while simultaneously finishing their high school degree. I almost felt jealous of my friends who were learning carpentry and masonry while I was stuck learning theoretical concepts.

Was your grandfather African American?
Click to expand...

What does that have anything to do with it? Some of the absolute best high schools in our history were all-black private schools that served the African-American community who were excluded from the mainstream public schools. Some of the absolute best colleges and universities to date are HBCUs.

How many different ethnic groups
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting a person's ethnicity has an immediate effect on their learning capabilities?

and individuals with learning disabilities attended his school,
Click to expand...

I really don't know the answer to that question, but I can't imagine they would turn students down simply for a learning disability. Learning disabilities are a fairly newly discovered phenomenon and people in my grandfather's generation never really understood or acknowledged such conditions. The answer today is just to drug the kids and turn them into zombies. Or, the learning staff and parents can take the more difficult method of patiently spending more time and energy tutoring them. With such a small teacher-to-student ratio, such extended tutoring is quite possible.

what were the class sizes,
Click to expand...

Generally small as they should be. The difference between private and public schools is that the private schools have all the freedom in the world to build as many educational centers as humanely possible. The public schools are extremely restricted in the manner of constructing new schools. They'll overspend their budget to produce lavish buildings filled with administrators and empty departments with a shortage of teaching staff, but they're bureaucrats! What do you expect? The major difference is the amount of money wasted in the public school as opposed to the amount of money wisely utilized in a private school.

and was the church subsidizing some of the cost?
Click to expand...

Of course they were! My grandfather, as much of a stern liberal democrat he is, can thank private charity 100% for his wonderful and empowering primary and secondary education.

You have to look at all the factors involved with the task that underfunded public schools must deal with.
Click to expand...

Underfunded?! We've doubled the amount spent per pupil (AFTER adjusting for inflation) over the past twenty years and we've seen nothing but flat line results. When we're spending, on average, close to 12 thousand dollars per public school student with no real results, I'd say you're going to have to qualify your use of the term "underfunded." Little private schools in the deepest part of an inner-city will spend a third of what the general public school spends per pupil and will get twice or triple the level of performance results.

You can send your child anywhere you want to under our present system.
Click to expand...

Bull****. It is completely based on the wealth of the parents. If you're wealthy, you can send your child anywhere you want, either by spending twice for their eduction (once in taxes for an education they don't receive and second in tuition for the education they do receive), or by moving your entire family to an area with a higher-performing public school. If you're middle class or working class, you're screwed. Your zip code will dictate your child's education. I don't believe that is fair.

You get what you pay for. You put as much money per student into public schools you would get the same results.
Click to expand...

As I've already mentioned, private schools spend far less per pupil than general public schools while producing far greater results. Many even allocate a large portion of their revenue to hire competent, experienced teachers and to pay them more.



I have never said that, nor do I think that. But, I do believe a college education is a minimum requirement for teaching our children, and I don't expect a teacher, who has one of the most important, and most difficult jobs in our country to be paid less than a college educated professional would be paid in any other field.
Click to expand...

You're missing the tremendous benefits of being a teacher. It is a privilege to be a teacher or a professor. This profession, more so than other in this nation, has the ability to shape the entire personality of the next generation. It's not easy, but the rewards are very fulfilling. This is why some of the best teachers are found in private schools that happen to pay them less than public schools and who don't offer them tenure. Despite the lower pay and the fear of competition, these remarkable teachers live to teach. Since a large portion of WI kids in the public schools are currently on leave because their teachers care more about their pay and their tenure than they do about teaching, we can see who possesses the genuine passion for teaching.

And your expectation that educated teachers ought not to be paid any less than a college educated professional in any other field is absolutely ludicrous. Take a citizen with a degree in soft science philosophical pondering like sociology and compare him to a citizen with a degree in hard science engineering or mathematics. You honestly believe a person with a bachelor's degree in sociology should automatically receive the same or near-equal pay of a person with a bachelor's degree in civil engineering? Heck, I don't even think a person with a PhD in sociology has the same entitlement to the salary of a person with a bachelor's in civil engineering. They both have very radically different backgrounds and skills. These skills produce very radically different results of invention and innovation. Just because a student sat in class for four extra years and wrote a dissertation does not automatically entitle him or her to the wages of an equally educated student. Degrees produce different real results and your idea stems from the equalization of education and wages.

That is NOT a straw man. Let me quote what you said: " I don't expect a teacher...to be paid less than a college educated professional would be paid in any other field."

You're proposing the equalization of education and wages. It's no different than claiming ALL citizens with a certain kind of degree (be it a high school diploma, bachelor's degree or PhD) must be paid the same wages regardless of their job, their skills, or the specific degree they pursued. That's a very socialistic tendency, don't you think?
 
CriticalThought said:
I don't know of any study which determines the degree to which private and charter schools engage in this practice but from my experience I think it would be most of them. We will have to agree to disagree until the facts come to light, but what is clear is that you lack the evidence to support the assertions that private schools do any better.
Click to expand...

It is amazing that you actually deny the very obvious fact that private schools generally provide a better education at lower costs than a public school. Even the more informed debaters who absolutely disagree with me on the circumstances surrounding the topic acknowledge that the private schools perform better than the public schools. They would just like to control for things like classroom sizes and demographic/economic backgrounds.

I'm not so much in favor of continuing a debate that focuses exclusively on degrading public schools and boosting private schools. Rather, I would like to propose that education be a voluntary, free-choice initiative made by parents, their children, and the schools involved. I don't believe in immediately abolishing public education but rather tying the allocated funds directly to the child so that the child and the parent can come together with a variety of schools and decide for themselves which is best suited for their child's needs and wants. I am completely against an imposed, standardized one-size-fits-all system of education that treats everyone the same. Education is an individual pursuit that must be tailored to the individual needs of the student. Students, and their parents, must be free to decide the place and general subject of their learning while retaining their rights to opt-out of traditional, mainstream-based education. As it stands right now, the system is a form of slavery that allows only the richest and most well-informed to opt-out for any sort of alternative.

I believe my proposed system of education will see a Renaissance period like no other before it. Schools based around the subject of music and/or arts will flourish to enhance the musical abilities of the most gifted youth. Other young adults will receive less stigma from society after they choose a more technical education based around hands-on learning. The bookish students can continue to pursue a more scholarly education and even advance to special schools that teach a very focused area of expertise. The possibilities are endless in my mind.
 
ElijahGalt said:
You have just named three major differences that private schools offer as an alternative to public schools. First of all, small class sizes are a good thing. If a private company is over flooded with an excess number of students, they have the capability and power to build another school. Second, I believe we've already agreed that bad behavior should no tbe tolerated anywhere, regardless of public or private affiliations. There's no changes in the private sector necessary to meet this standard. If you would like to see public schools discriminating against bad behavior, then you'll need to take the issue up with your local bureaucrats. But both of have agreed in the past that discriminating against bad behavior is a step in the right direction, and if students refuse to learn than so be it. Finally, more parental involvement in the education of students is quite positive. It is, after all, the parent's child and not the schools.
Click to expand...

Yes, difference that can't be in the public school, and not especially desirable differences. Without public schools, these child would be left out. And yes, parental involvement is desirable a great thing. However, we will never have all parents involved, so do we leave those students (or maybe blame the teachers)?

It is the case in my district. But again, what is the ultimate outcome you'd like to see? You don't like it when private schools are able to expel misbehaving children and you've noted in the past that you don't like it when public schools are forced to keep such students, so what is the ultimate outcome you wish to see? You seem to be applying a double standard.
Click to expand...

Like it? No, I'm OK with it, but it is a major difference, and contributes to the numbers you think proves private schools teach better.

I'd like see more effort put into fixing public schools, and not just abandoning them. I'd like parents to rally and put their effort in to helping those schools aready there to improve education for all. The private school silver bullet is simply not going to fix very much.



You said "I believe" and belief is the basis of faith, not knowledge.
Click to expand...

Not how I see it. If I look at data, use experience, and reach a conclusion, coming to believe something, I'm not exercising faith.


That's horrible, but ultimately it is the right of parents to decide where their kid will be taught. I'm all for integration but forced integration and forced busing hasn't led to any major improvements in the education system.
Click to expand...

Maybe not, but then again, it was never the only issue.


Then perhaps you should take a look at the study, yourself. The book is called The Beautiful Tree by James Tooley. And PS, the public school system in the countries where the study was conducted had horrible rates of attrition and achievement. The problem isn't bad schools giving phony grades, but rather bad schools tolerating bad habits (i.e. allowing teachers to read a newspaper and/or sleep while the children do busy work). And again, it is the right of parents to send their children to whatever school they deem is appropriate. If stupid parents wish to send their kids to a diploma mill, then we must let them. School choice must triumph over imposed slavery.
Click to expand...

I will look that up this weekend. But as a parent who visited the classrooms his kids were in, I don't think teachers are the major problem in US. They are just the ones who have been scapegoated. Maybe you shoudl look up this book:

Diane Ravitch, The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education (New York: Basic Books, 2010).
Diane Ravitch Website

And I wonder who was behind such a study. That's pretty condescending and elitist, if you ask me. You're implying teachers and administrators know what's best for a child more so than their own parents.
Click to expand...

It was a poll. They asked parents questions (not sure that makes anyone elitist or condesending). But, I'll said I would look for it later, and I did. Here it is:

Public Opinion and Education Policy - C-SPAN Video Library
Click to expand...
 
Boo Radley said:
Yes, difference that can't be in the public school, and not especially desirable differences.
Click to expand...

Without public schools, these child would be left out.
Click to expand...

And yes, parental involvement is desirable a great thing.
Click to expand...

(not sure that makes anyone elitist or condesending).
Click to expand...

But, I'll said I would look for it later, and I did.
Click to expand...

Like us, other factors here effected our budget.
Click to expand...

So you're claim falls under the causal relationship error.
Click to expand...

Iraqis were largely killed by Iraqis, us merely the referee.
Click to expand...

dept chair, huh?

LOL!
 
ElijahGalt said:
The statistics that reveal most private and charter schools are very open to accepting students regardless of their ability to pay or their overall GPA. Just take a look at the thousands of different Internet schools and independent study groups that have flourished over the years. Their entire existence is based on reaching out to kids to need a little extra help or need an alternative based education and then tailoring the learning process to fit their individual needs and wants. By golly, it's been going on for decades. When my father kept dropping out of school and doing poorly on his exams, the school board gave him a choice. He could straighten out his school career at the public school immediately or he can enroll himself into an alternative, vocation-based technical school. He chose to learn to fly airplanes and almost received his pilot license. Of course, he ended up taking a completely different path as a nurse anesthetist in the Air-Force but his example just goes to prove my point. There are other options. I've been to two different high schools in extremely different parts of the country. Both had a system where troubled and under-performing youths could find an alternative at a technical school and immediately begin to learn a trade while simultaneously finishing their high school degree. I almost felt jealous of my friends who were learning carpentry and masonry while I was stuck learning theoretical concepts.
Click to expand...

I went to a great public technical school as well. Not sure what your point is.



What does that have anything to do with it? Some of the absolute best high schools in our history were all-black private schools that served the African-American community who were excluded from the mainstream public schools. Some of the absolute best colleges and universities to date are HBCUs. Are you suggesting a person's ethnicity has an immediate effect on their learning capabilities?
Click to expand...

I am just citing the facts:

"An achievement gap separating black from white students has long been documented — a social divide extremely vexing to policy makers and the target of one blast of school reform after another."

"Black mothers have a higher infant mortality rate and black children are twice as likely as whites to live in a home where no parent has a job."

“There’s accumulating evidence that there are racial differences in what kids experience before the first day of kindergarten,” said Ronald Ferguson, director of the Achievement Gap Initiative at Harvard. “They have to do with a lot of sociological and historical forces. In order to address those, we have to be able to have conversations that people are unwilling to have.”

Those include “conversations about early childhood parenting practices,” Dr. Ferguson said. “The activities that parents conduct with their 2-, 3- and 4-year-olds. How much we talk to them, the ways we talk to them, the ways we enforce discipline, the ways we encourage them to think and develop a sense of autonomy.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/09/education/09gap.html



I really don't know the answer to that question, but I can't imagine they would turn students down simply for a learning disability. Learning disabilities are a fairly newly discovered phenomenon and people in my grandfather's generation never really understood or acknowledged such conditions. The answer today is just to drug the kids and turn them into zombies. Or, the learning staff and parents can take the more difficult method of patiently spending more time and energy tutoring them. With such a small teacher-to-student ratio, such extended tutoring is quite possible.
Click to expand...

Unlike public schools, private schools do not have to take in everyone like public schools do today. In public schools they have to deal with not only the exceptional student, but the special needs kids, and a large population of kids from poor socio-economic backgrounds. In other words they have to meet few of the constraints that public schools have to contend with.

Generally small as they should be.
Click to expand...

Just as they could be in public school with more teachers.

The difference between private and public schools is that the private schools have all the freedom in the world to build as many educational centers as humanely possible. The public schools are extremely restricted in the manner of constructing new schools. They'll overspend their budget to produce lavish buildings filled with administrators and empty departments with a shortage of teaching staff, but they're bureaucrats! What do you expect? The major difference is the amount of money wasted in the public school as opposed to the amount of money wisely utilized in a private school
Click to expand...
.

There is no proof that a private system serving all children would be any better and Education is too important to the country to leave it to the private sector control.

Of course they were! My grandfather, as much of a stern liberal democrat he is, can thank private charity 100% for his wonderful and empowering primary and secondary education.
Click to expand...

Which charity has agreed to take on the education of all children? You just want others to take the responsibility from you.


Underfunded?! We've doubled the amount spent per pupil (AFTER adjusting for inflation) over the past twenty years and we've seen nothing but flat line results. When we're spending, on average, close to 12 thousand dollars per public school student with no real results, I'd say you're going to have to qualify your use of the term "underfunded." Little private schools in the deepest part of an inner-city will spend a third of what the general public school spends per pupil and will get twice or triple the level of performance results.
Click to expand...

Because they don't have to take in everyone and they have more teachers per number of pupils.



Bull****. It is completely based on the wealth of the parents. If you're wealthy, you can send your child anywhere you want, either by spending twice for their eduction (once in taxes for an education they don't receive and second in tuition for the education they do receive), or by moving your entire family to an area with a higher-performing public school. If you're middle class or working class, you're screwed. Your zip code will dictate your child's education. I don't believe that is fair.
Click to expand...

In Virginia, if you can prove the public school does not meet your child's needs, you can apply for government funds to send him to a special school.


You're missing the tremendous benefits of being a teacher. It is a privilege to be a teacher or a professor. This profession, more so than other in this nation, has the ability to shape the entire personality of the next generation. It's not easy, but the rewards are very fulfilling. This is why some of the best teachers are found in private schools that happen to pay them less than public schools and who don't offer them tenure. Despite the lower pay and the fear of competition, these remarkable teachers live to teach. Since a large portion of WI kids in the public schools are currently on leave because their teachers care more about their pay and their tenure than they do about teaching, we can see who possesses the genuine passion for teaching.
Click to expand...

So your feeling one of the most important jobs in the country should be filled by charity, from those just wanting to help people without being paid more than a ditch digger?
To most of us, education is s much higher priority than digging ditches.

And your expectation that educated teachers ought not to be paid any less than a college educated professional in any other field is absolutely ludicrous. Take a citizen with a degree in soft science philosophical pondering like sociology and compare him to a citizen with a degree in hard science engineering or mathematics. You honestly believe a person with a bachelor's degree in sociology should automatically receive the same or near-equal pay of a person with a bachelor's degree in civil engineering? Heck, I don't even think a person with a PhD in sociology has the same entitlement to the salary of a person with a bachelor's in civil engineering. They both have very radically different backgrounds and skills. These skills produce very radically different results of invention and innovation. Just because a student sat in class for four extra years and wrote a dissertation does not automatically entitle him or her to the wages of an equally educated student. Degrees produce different real results and your idea stems from the equalization of education and wages.
Click to expand...

If you want a ditch digger to teach your children, no one is stopping you. I take the realistic approach that teaching is one of the most important and difficult jobs in the country, and education is too damn important to this country to leave to just anyone.

That is NOT a straw man. Let me quote what you said: " I don't expect a teacher...to be paid less than a college educated professional would be paid in any other field."
Click to expand...

That is exactly right because I do not expect something for nothing.

You're proposing the equalization of education and wages. It's no different than claiming ALL citizens with a certain kind of degree (be it a high school diploma, bachelor's degree or PhD) must be paid the same wages regardless of their job, their skills, or the specific degree they pursued. That's a very socialistic tendency, don't you think?
Click to expand...

No, you are the one arguing they should all be paid the same. I am saying the teaching profession deserves the pay it earns. I'm not looking for charity to take on my responsibilities.
 
Conservative said:
You seem reasonable and not the typical liberal so how about answering the question as to what you feel is the "fair share" that the rich should pay? From the IRS data here is what we have right now

This relates to Federal Income taxes as that is the role of the IRS

The top 1% of wage earners make 20% of all income and pay 38% of all taxes.
The top 5% of wage earners make 34.7% of all income and pay 58.7% of all taxes.
The top 10% of wage earners make 45.8% of all income and pay 69.9% of all taxes.

The bottom 50% make 12.8% of all income and pay 2.7% of all taxes.

Currently approximately 47% of all Americans pay nothing and actually get money back making their tax rate negative.

Do you believe it is fair for 47% of the people NOT to pay any Federal Income tax? 38% of all Federal Income taxes come from the rich so apparently that isn't a fair share? Zero percent paid by income earners below 50,000 is fair?
Click to expand...

No, its not fair, but not for the reasons you think.

Yes, I am reasonable. I am not a party shill. I do have my own philosophies about things. When it comes to taxes, I am afraid you have picked an area where I am more liberal than the average democrat. So, with that to level set you......

I believe strongly in a progressive tax system. I also believe income taxes should be focused on discretionary income, not total income. Since not everyone with income will have discretionary income, there will be large segments of the population that pay no income tax. Moreover, with a progressive tax system, there will not be even distribution of amongst the population.

I don't buy the distinction that 47% pay no federal income tax. While I am not arguing the fact, I am arguing the de facto reality. Everyone pays payroll taxes, which we have just co-mingled with all of the other taxes. There is really no distinction as the dollars paid for payroll taxes are given to the federal government to for general operating expenses. Therefore, I argue, on a de facto basis, that all wage earners (except those that are beneficiaries of the earned income tax credit) are income tax-payers. Unfortunately, the government has increasingly relied on payroll taxes to fund its day to day life. This is the injustice.

Numbers_Figure-2_What-are-federal-govt-sources-of-revenue_1.jpg


People do not draw the distinction on how taxes are used. To most people, taxes are taxes. I doubt many could tell you what service was really derived from what tax. The gripe with taxes is generally about the tax burden, not about the particular form of taxation. I think worrying too much about who pays income taxes vs. payroll taxes is moot. In fact, on an marginal tax basis, the highest tax rate actually extends well down into the middle class levels. A single tax payer with $82K in taxable income enters the 28% bracket, yet is still paying 7.65% FICA, for a marginal rate of 35.65%. The single guy in the highest tax bracket, at $374,000 of taxable income is at 36.45% (35% plus 1.45%) and the guy making only $34,000 is at 32.65% (25% plus 7.65%)... this is another injustice.

2010 tax bracket rates

I actually think the progressive system isn't progressive enough. Payroll taxes and most other forms of taxation are not progressive at all. These are the taxes that workers pay. Now, if payroll taxes were really collected on the current needs of social security and medicare and not co-mingled and if corporations paid their fair share of taxes, I might have more understanding of your position. But, the reality is the tax burden, on an individual pain basis, is falling disproportionately on those least able to pay.

When it comes to income taxes, Conservative, I am very liberal. I frankly think we should be taxing all wages > $1.0M at 50% or better. We should be putting in place mechanisms which incent companies to take money out of the business to pay executives in favor of incentives to re-invest in the business. A stiff upper tax rate does that. Business owners should make their money on capital gains, not high salaries. This current tax structure is leading to the economic bifurcation of America, which IMHO, is the single largest security threat to this nation that we have. When an economy does not work for the average citizen, the economy and thus nation will not stand.

My core philosophy on government and taxation is that government is the administrative arm of a society, and its policies should be reflective of the mores and values of its people. As we are a nation largely comprised of Christians and we Christians have an inherent sense of charity, and since that charity has cost, government has cost. Who pays? Well, I would follow Christ's words of Luke 12:48 "...For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required..."

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+12&version=NIV
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom