View Poll Results: Should voting be limited to Americans who pay Income tax

Voters
64. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    15 23.44%
  • No

    49 76.56%
Page 3 of 24 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 238

Thread: Should voting be limited to Americans who pay Income tax

  1. #21
    Matthew 16:3
    Tucker Case's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    09-25-16 @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,365

    Re: Should voting be limited to Americans who pay Income tax

    Quote Originally Posted by bilbus View Post
    Sure, if you cheat on your taxes you should be barred from office.



    Typical wealth envy, When the top 5% of achievers pay 60% of the taxes .. sounds to me like they are paying plenty.

    What percent taxes should the richiest 1% pay? 30%? 50%? More?

    Percentiles Ranked by AGI
    AGI Threshold on Percentiles
    Percentage of Federal Personal Income Tax Paid

    Top 1%
    $388,806
    39.89

    Top 5%
    $153,542
    60.14

    Top 10%
    $108,904
    70.79

    Top 25%
    $64,702
    86.27

    Top 50%
    $31,987
    97.01

    Bottom 50%
    <$31,987
    2.99

    Note: AGI is Adjusted Gross Income
    Source: Internal Revenue Service
    The lowest in the top 1% could pay the yearly income of one of the bottom 50% and only pay less than 9% of their wages on taxes.

    Of COURSE they will pay more of the pot. They make more than 91% more money than the bottom 50 percent.

    Think of it this way.

    100 people.

    50 of them have $5, 25 have $8.23, 15 have $16.64, 5 have $28.01, 4 have $39.49, and 1 has $100.

    Now lets say they all got taxed 30%

    They are left with

    50 have $3.50 (total revenue $75), 25 have $5.76 (total revenue $61.75), 15 have $11.65 (total revenue $74.88), 5 have $19.61 (total revenue $42.02), 4 have $27.64 (Total revenue $47.39), and the one now has $70 (total revenue $30). Total revenue generated $331.04.


    Now what happens when we make the one with a $100 start off with $1000? (translates into $3,888,060 per year) This works because the top 1% make greater than $388,806 so it is more akin to real world numbers to make that 1% have more than the minimum for the sake of the math experiment.

    Now the numbers look the same for every one except the rich guy has $700 left over and paid $300 in taxes.

    Total revenue is now $601.04! That guy just paid almost 50% of the total taxes!!!!


    And think of it this way.

    Let's say take 50 people who are in the bottom 50% that make just a single penny below the cut off from being in the top 50% ($31,986.99 per year) and then you take just one guy from the top 1% who makes $1,599,350 per year (a lot of money, sure, but not outrageous considering that there are about 2,000,000 millionaire household in the US excluding primary residence which is a little over half of 1% of the total population of the US so taking on of the top 1% is actually more likely to get you a millionaire than not).

    The guy from the top 1% makes more money per year than all 50 of the bottom 50% COMBINED.

    Now let's take 30% of taxes form them all.

    The guy in the top 1% just paid out $479,805 and is left with a paltry $1,119,545 to get by on. This equals the pre-tax wages of 35 of those bottom 50%!

    The bottom 50% would pay out a total of $479,804.85 and be left with the hefty sum of $22,380.84 each to live on.

    So, what if the person in the top 1% made 14 million a year? Like Albert Haynesworth for example.

    Haynesworth will make an average of about 14 million per year with his contract

    So let's say he pays 30% of taxes on that or 4.2 million dollars. Add it the 480 thousand by 50 people in the bottom 50% and the total is 4.68 million, of which Haynesworth would have paid a whopping 89.74%! This is so unfair!!!! Poor Albert! He's being persecuted! How's he gonna live on 9.8 million a year?!?!?!?




    I posted all of this to illustrate that quoting statistics doesn't mean anything if you don't take into account all the factors involved in creating the disparity you are pointing out.

    I also used a flat tax rate to point out that the disparity would still occur if there wasn't a graduated tax-rate.

    But let's face it, living off of 70% of 32K is not exactly the same thing as living off of 70% of $388,806

    Or even more to the point, living on 98% of 32K ain't exactly the same as living on 50% of $388,806. Although both might have struggles, one's struggles are far more compelling than the other's.

  2. #22
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 10:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Should voting be limited to Americans who pay Income tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    Or even more to the point, living on 98% of 32K ain't exactly the same as living on 50% of $388,806. Although both might have struggles, one's struggles are far more compelling than the other's.
    I don't disagree at all, but the question revolves around whether tax policy should be based on how compelling people's struggles are.

    The fact that Warren Buffet could live comfortably without making a single penny for the rest of his life doesn't mean we should tax 95 or 100% of his income.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  3. #23
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Should voting be limited to Americans who pay Income tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    Or even more to the point, living on 98% of 32K ain't exactly the same as living on 50% of $388,806. Although both might have struggles, one's struggles are far more compelling than the other's.
    This treads dangerously close to the idea that the government should decide who has 'enough' and who has 'too much' -- and then taxing those people accordingly.

    'Greed' is wanting more than you 'need';
    You 'need' what a liberal thinks you should be allowed to have.

  4. #24
    Matthew 16:3
    Tucker Case's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    09-25-16 @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,365

    Re: Should voting be limited to Americans who pay Income tax

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    I don't disagree at all, but the question revolves around whether tax policy should be based on how compelling people's struggles are.

    The fact that Warren Buffet could live comfortably without making a single penny for the rest of his life doesn't mean we should tax 95 or 100% of his income.
    Absolutely. We shouldn't tax people on the basis of living comfortably or not, but we should not tax those who's tax-burden would prevent them from living in reasonable comfort (I'm defining that as Maslow's lowest tier on the heirarchy of needs: Food, Shelter, etc)

    Personally, I'm in favor of a flat-tax of some sort, myself.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    This treads dangerously close to the idea that the government should decide who has 'enough' and who has 'too much' -- and then taxing those people accordingly.
    Not really. I'm pointing out something that is obvious. The statement is true.

    It doesn't mean that people who make more than enough to pay for their basic needs shouldn't be taxed. I'm just saying that when discussing tax policy, harping on how much more of a total revenue percentage the top 1% of incomes pay is pointless. There's a valid reason for this that would exist in any tax system. If someone makes 10K a year, and you take away 3K, they are going to become even more of a burden on society than they already are.

    If someone makes 28K and you take 7K of that, you are making them pay their taxes, and they are going to feel the bite of those taxes quite strongly, but that alone should not exempt them from paying taxes. But they just might warrant paying less than the total flat-tax rate in order to prevent their taxes from sending them to the poor house.

    Whereas the guy making 100K pays out 25K in taxes, he's still fine for the most part, but he's definitely going to feel the bite of those taxes, too.

    Whereas the guy making 10 million can pay out 2.5 million and he's going to be peachy.

    Personally, I think that a dude making 400K shouldn't have to pay the same total rate as the dude making 400 million, but I'm OK with him having the same tax rate as the guy making 80K.

  5. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Should voting be limited to Americans who pay Income tax

    People that don't put money into the kitty shouldn't have a vote on what to have for dinner.

  6. #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Should voting be limited to Americans who pay Income tax

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    The one that got voted class President was the most popular kid. High schoolers know that class Presidents have no power to follow through with any promises.
    Wow.

    Just like Obama.

  7. #27
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Should voting be limited to Americans who pay Income tax

    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernDemocrat View Post
    The 15th Amendment states the following:

    "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude."

    The 26th Amendment states the following:

    "The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age."

    From the language of both of those amendments its plainly construed that voting is a fundamental right of citizenship.
    No.

    You've pointed out that race and color aren't preconditions to preclude voting.

    You've point out that anyone past the age of 18 can't be denied their vote on the basis of their age.

    Taken together, THOSE AMENDMENTS DO NOT SAY THAT A 19 YEAR OLD BLACK CRACK WHORE THAT DOESN'T PAY TAXES CAN'T BE ALLOWED TO VOTE.

    Work on your logic skills. They're lacking.

  8. #28
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    48,242

    Re: Should voting be limited to Americans who pay Income tax

    Quote Originally Posted by bilbus View Post
    there is no right to vote.

    The Constitution says nothing about voting being a right. It says you can not deny voting because of race or gender.

    Unproductive citizens are only going to vote for someone who will give them free stuff.
    The Constitution does not grant rights, nor does it list the whole of our rights. Government derives its power from the governed, so long as citizens are of the governed they should be allowed to vote. Otherwise, I say only people with a PhD in science, engineering, or math should be allowed to vote. No sense in letting retards set rules and policy when they can't understand the full ramifications for them doing so.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  9. #29
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 07:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should voting be limited to Americans who pay Income tax

    Quote Originally Posted by bilbus View Post
    Currently 40% of Americans pay no income tax, should these financial failures be permited to influence the country?

    Also should people on government assistence be permited to vote?

    I understand the "right" to vote can not be removed ... but what if?
    More like WTF? So I guess clergy, retirees, college students, civic volunteers, etc shouldn't be allowed to vote because they aren't living your particular dream? That's just stupid.

  10. #30
    Hi
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    26,288

    Re: Should voting be limited to Americans who pay Income tax

    Quote Originally Posted by bilbus View Post
    Currently 40% of Americans pay no income tax, should these financial failures be permited to influence the country?

    Also should people on government assistence be permited to vote?

    I understand the "right" to vote can not be removed ... but what if?
    People who are not net tax payers and who can not review information and candidates objectively and rationally should not be able to vote.

    The majority of people don't know a damn thing about justice or what the government was created for in the first place.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari
    The Constitution does not grant rights, nor does it list the whole of our rights. Government derives its power from the governed, so long as citizens are of the governed they should be allowed to vote. Otherwise, I say only people with a PhD in science, engineering, or math should be allowed to vote. No sense in letting retards set rules and policy when they can't understand the full ramifications for them doing so.
    Ikari for President!
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

Page 3 of 24 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •