• 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!

Taxes reach historic low

J-mac, I understand where you're coming from and the points you've laid out here are probably suited for a separate discussion.

It's clear to me, however, at least at the federal level, that tax rates on personal income have remained relatively low (compared to the past) for all income brackets. That's the point the OP was trying to make.

remind me what the income tax rates were for the first 130 or so years
 
5%, 10%, I don't know, you tell me? Something though don't you think?

j-mac

Ok, so lets figure this out.

10% of 12,000 dollars is 1200 dollars. That person making 12K is now making 10,800 because you feel they should "pitch in" and "help out."

10% of 100,000 dollars is 10,000 dollars. That leaves them with 90,000 dollars. Would you say that 10% made more difference to the 12K guy or the 100K guy? And when we are 14 trillion in debt, how much will 1200 dollars help out the gov't, compared to the man who actually earned it? Sure doesn't sound very conservative to me and I really lay large amounts of doubt on your "how much of MY money should the gov't be allowed to take?" bullshyt when you sit here and want to take 1200 dollars out of the hands of someone earning 12k a year.

That's not conservative my friend.
 
Ahhhh, I see.....so it isn't REALLY fairness that concerns you...it's punishment....we get it.

You/they want more they can earn it like everyone else.

Ok, so lets figure this out.

10% of 12,000 dollars is 1200 dollars. That person making 12K is now making 10,800 because you feel they should "pitch in" and "help out."

10% of 100,000 dollars is 10,000 dollars. That leaves them with 90,000 dollars. Would you say that 10% made more difference to the 12K guy or the 100K guy? And when we are 14 trillion in debt, how much will 1200 dollars help out the gov't, compared to the man who actually earned it? Sure doesn't sound very conservative to me and I really lay large amounts of doubt on your "how much of MY money should the gov't be allowed to take?" bullshyt when you sit here and want to take 1200 dollars out of the hands of someone earning 12k a year.

That's not conservative my friend.
 
Ok, so lets figure this out.

10% of 12,000 dollars is 1200 dollars. That person making 12K is now making 10,800 because you feel they should "pitch in" and "help out."

10% of 100,000 dollars is 10,000 dollars. That leaves them with 90,000 dollars. Would you say that 10% made more difference to the 12K guy or the 100K guy? And when we are 14 trillion in debt, how much will 1200 dollars help out the gov't, compared to the man who actually earned it? Sure doesn't sound very conservative to me and I really lay large amounts of doubt on your "how much of MY money should the gov't be allowed to take?" bullshyt when you sit here and want to take 1200 dollars out of the hands of someone earning 12k a year.

That's not conservative my friend.

You fail to consider whether the person bringing in 12k bothered to finish high school.

Choices have consequences. The guy making 12k still has choices but the longer he waits to get off his ass and act on them, the longer he is going to be poor.
 
Ahhhh, I see.....so it isn't REALLY fairness that concerns you...it's punishment....we get it.

You/they want more they can earn it like everyone else.

What? Punishment? We're forced to pay taxes with threat of force, you don't think the people who can actually afford it should be the ones who should pay? Fairness? What's fair about taking someone's income when every penny is literally going to survival? A 1 bedroom apartment around here is going for about 600 dollars a month. 12g's a year and you have 2/3 of that going to rent alone.

GPS, this has nothing to do with wanting or not wanting to be poor. This has to do with the gov't forcing you to give up some of your income when you are barely scratching out a living. Obviously you've never lived poor before where 1200 dollars actually mattered. Consider yourself blessed.

Don't get me wrong, I am part of the Tea party, taxed enough already. I sure in the HELL dont support taxes on anybody, but damn, live life as a truly poor person for a while and you'll see why taxing someone making 12g's a year is doing way more harm than good. Remember, its THEIR money first.

J-man, you're sounding awfully liberal. Remember, liberals are liberal with OTHER PEOPLES MONEY. Sounds like you, doesn't it? I'm not saying TO tax anyone, I'm only saying to NOT tax the poor. How they became poor, or are poor, is irrelevant.
 
Last edited:
Don't even go there.....ANYBODY cab BETTER themselves if they want to...I don't I owe anybody ANYTHING.

In the last 8 years I've had 2 failed businesses and not only SURVIVED but will go from 35,000 in 2009 to 70,000 this year.

I am sick and tired of people saying it can't be done, get off your asses and make it happen.



What? Punishment? We're forced to pay taxes with thread of force, you don't think the people who can actually afford it should be the ones who should pay? Fairness? What's fair about taking someone's income when every penny is literally going to survival?

GPS, this has nothing to do with wanting or not wanting to be poor. This has to do with the gov't forcing you to give up some of your income when you are barely scratching out a living. Obviously you've never lived poor before where 1200 dollars actually mattered. Consider yourself blessed.
 
This chart comes from an article I started a thread on a few days ago and it seems to be relative to the topic.

%7B42DCC4E7-1BEB-44DF-9C02-34CAB15243C8%7D04132011_Cooper_graph_inline.jpg

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Colum...ficit-Government-Handouts-Top-Tax-Income.aspx

The graph is based around the average household income in the US. They get that average by taking the incomes of every household in America and adding them together, then taking that number and dividing it by the total number of households.

The red line on the graph is the one relative to this discussion. It shows the percentage of the average household income that's used to pay taxes. Right now that looks to be between 17% and 18%, which according to that chart, hasn't been this low since around 1970.

Since factors like the employment rate and the state of the economy effect that percentage, I decided to add some of my own additions to that graph... Take a look:

entitlements_received_taxes_paid.jpg
 
Last edited:
GPS, this has nothing to do with wanting or not wanting to be poor. This has to do with the gov't forcing you to give up some of your income when you are barely scratching out a living. Obviously you've never lived poor before where 1200 dollars actually mattered. Consider yourself blessed.

Don't get me wrong, I am part of the Tea party, taxed enough already. I sure in the HELL dont support taxes on anybody, but damn, live life as a truly poor person for a while and you'll see why taxing someone making 12g's a year is doing way more harm than good. Remember, its THEIR money first.

I don’t know what it is like to live poor? Who the **** do you think you are to tell me that? I grew up poor, dropped out of school at 14, lived on the streets and in halfway houses until I could get a real job by lying about my age and have paid the price ever since. Don’t talk to me like I’m some silver spoon fed chump who doesn’t know what being poor feels like. I have been through hypothermia and near starvation so I do know a thing or two about being poor.

If you ever need tips on how to stay warm and find food when you have absolutely nothing but the clothes on your back, I can give you a wealth of personal advice from my own experience. If you ever need someone (who is still very poor) to encourage dropouts to go back to school or go get a GED, I’m your guy.

You see, I speak with some personal authority on the subject because I am currently clawing my way into what I hope will end with a wealthy retirement. I may never get there but I’m a hell of a lot better off now than I was when I decided to stop being a victim.
 
Well look what I found. In that bastion of socialism no less, SoCal. :2wave:


<While Republican lawmakers appear unified against tax increases and many Tea Party activists want existing rates rolled back, statistics consistently show that federal taxes are at a historic low.>


<For the past two years, a family of four earning the median income has paid less in federal income taxes than at any time since at least 1955, according to the Tax Policy Center. All federal, state and local taxes combined are a lower percentage of per-capita income than at any time since the 1960s, according to the Tax Foundation. The highest income-tax bracket is its lowest since 1992. At 35 percent, it's well below the 50 percent mark of much of the 1980s and the 70 percent bracket of the 1970s.>

Taxes reach historic low - News - The Orange County Register

Yes, federal taxes are at historic lows currently.

No, Orange county is not a bastion of "socialism", but an island of conservatism in an otherwise liberal part of the country.
But that's just an observation and an aside. It isn't relevant to the main point.

Here's a history:

Federal+Tax+Revenue.jpg


As we all can see, the percentage of GDP collected by the federal government was nearly 21% back in 2000, when coincidentally, the federal budget sort of balanced after the amount sto.. I mean borrowed from SS. Now, it is more like 15%.

Now, were they to collect that extra 6% of that 14 teradollar GDP, they'd have an extra 840B or so, or roughly half of the current deficit.

So, the budget could be balanced by an equal measure of spending cuts and tax increases, couldn't it? Once the economy begins to recover, we could actually start paying down that enormous debt.

But, politics being what they are, they won't.
 
Because the wealthiest Americans pay way more in taxes than the ops family example would. And that is who Obama is targeting, the job creators. I can't speak for anyone else, but I've never signed employment papers for anyone worth less than 2 million dollars. That would be those top income earners Obama wants to tax the **** out of.

Its very misleading to talk about tax rates being low for a bracket that pays very little tax as a whole. So rather than duck the question, why not answer it?

High income individuals are not job creators.... That is the biggest myth since "the check is in the mail". If you want to give tax breaks to job creators, do so with a job creation tax credit rewarding the behavior after the fact rather than this voodoo economic idea that it happens.
 
High income individuals are not job creators.... That is the biggest myth since "the check is in the mail". If you want to give tax breaks to job creators, do so with a job creation tax credit rewarding the behavior after the fact rather than this voodoo economic idea that it happens.

Proof? Link?

You can’t just say that it is a myth like “check is in the mail” without backing it up. That is a little more than you giving an opinion, that is you stating something as fact and I am going to call you on it.

I think we already have several job creation tax credits.

Your “voodoo economics” statement does clear a lot up though. I’ve been to that website too and it didn’t back up the math or explain where it got the numbers it used.
 
High income individuals are not job creators.... That is the biggest myth since "the check is in the mail". If you want to give tax breaks to job creators, do so with a job creation tax credit rewarding the behavior after the fact rather than this voodoo economic idea that it happens.

Well then by all means, show us proof that the poor in America are the job creators, because if it's not high income, it must be low income. I know I've never had a job given to me by a poor person. Have you?
 
Well then by all means, show us proof that the poor in America are the job creators, because if it's not high income, it must be low income. I know I've never had a job given to me by a poor person. Have you?
The rich do not 'create' jobs. Demand for goods and services creates jobs. Unless there is demand, rich people are not hiring. That's a fact.
 
It doesn't help that 1/2 of all Americans pay no federal income taxes at all.

The rich are already toting the note here, folks. Yet, you want more blood.
 
The OP is misleading liberal rhetoric. Historic lows implies to many that in history, the money government collects from people has never been at a lower rate. That's false. Then the graphs that cherry pick the time right as we entered WWI, showing huge tax rates to fund the relatively costly war effort. Liberals think their **** doesn't stink. PPssstt. We can smell it.

Unless there is demand, rich people are not hiring. That's a fact.
Not true, and misleading. A company seeing low demand can higher marketing staff or a marketing firm to boost demand, for example. They can hire R&D to create a new product and introduce it to the market. Etc.

Trying to trivialize the role of business in a prosperous capitalistic economy, is absurd.
Heck, even your state likely woos big business because of the tax revenue and jobs it brings, they probably subsidize them.
 
Last edited:
The "poor" don't pay taxes, our owners pay taxes, we pay rent to our owners. :roll:

Your owners? WTF are you talking about?
 
The rich do not 'create' jobs. Demand for goods and services creates jobs. Unless there is demand, rich people are not hiring. That's a fact.

The less I pay in taxes, the more demand I create.
 
Yes, federal taxes are at historic lows currently.

No, Orange county is not a bastion of "socialism", but an island of conservatism in an otherwise liberal part of the country.
But that's just an observation and an aside. It isn't relevant to the main point.

Here's a history:

Federal+Tax+Revenue.jpg


As we all can see, the percentage of GDP collected by the federal government was nearly 21% back in 2000, when coincidentally, the federal budget sort of balanced after the amount sto.. I mean borrowed from SS. Now, it is more like 15%.

Now, were they to collect that extra 6% of that 14 teradollar GDP, they'd have an extra 840B or so, or roughly half of the current deficit.

So, the budget could be balanced by an equal measure of spending cuts and tax increases, couldn't it? Once the economy begins to recover, we could actually start paying down that enormous debt.

But, politics being what they are, they won't.

Hey, I made my case for cuts right here:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...nt-cuts-deal-debt-problem.html#post1059422194
 
Back
Top Bottom