• 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!

Do the Rich Pay Their Fair Share of Taxes in the United States?

Do the Rich Pay Their Fair Share?

  • Yes

    Votes: 58 48.3%
  • No

    Votes: 62 51.7%

  • Total voters
    120
I also think its childish for people who claim to be informed and want to argue taxes yet they demand proof of stuff that has been posted thousands of times here in an apparent attempt to delay or divert away from the idiocy of their own weak argument.

for Molten Dragon to not know what percentage of the income tax the top one percent pays ought to disqualify him from ever being taken seriously on this issue
 
I also think its childish for people who claim to be informed and want to argue taxes yet they demand proof of stuff that has been posted thousands of times here in an apparent attempt to delay or divert away from the idiocy of their own weak argument.

for Molten Dragon to not know what percentage of the income tax the top one percent pays ought to disqualify him from ever being taken seriously on this issue

But MSNBC will never tell you that. ;-)
 
But MSNBC will never tell you that. ;-)

true-Its just amazing that someone can think its no different for someone who pays 300K a year in taxes demanding that those who pay almost nothing but constantly demand more government should pay more than it is for someone who is already living off the tax dollars of others wanting people like me to not only pay for everything use but to pay for even more stuff for them
 
Here are some facts-probably the fiftieth time it has been posted in one form or another

National Taxpayers Union - Who Pays Income Taxes?

Top 1 Percent Pay 37 Percent of Income Taxes - Hit & Run : Reason.com

these show that the richest 1 percent only earned about 17% of the income-down a few points from a few years ago

Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data | Tax Foundation

Many view taxation as a "contribution" much like charity. They feel that their personal expenses rank first, so all of their income that they wish to spend on themselves should be their "deduction" and then they will allow "fair" taxation on the balance (if any). They see the rich as having a "fair" deduction only equal to their own, and then the rich should pay an even higher rate of tax on their balance. To them that is "fair" they may pay 12% of gross income as tax and the rich may pay 72% of gross income as tax, but since the rules are the same, it is "fair". I've seen posts on here saying that 4x the poverty rate should be the "standard" deduction, and taxation applied only after that.
 
Last edited:
Many view taxation as a "contribution" much like charity. They feel that their personal expenses rank first, so all of their income that they wish to spend on themselves should be their "deduction" and then they will allow "fair" taxation on the balance (if any). They see the rich as having a "fair" deduction only equal to their own, and then the rich should pay an even higher rate of tax on their balance. To them that is "fair" they may pay 12% of gross income as tax and the rich may pay 72% of gross income as tax, but since the rules are the same, it is "fair". I've seen posts on here saying that 4x the poverty rate should be the "standard" deduction, and taxation applied only after that.

the parasite advocates also extrapolate their situation to the rich. They figure if they have a 1000 dollar a month mortgage, the rich should also have the same expenses and thus the rich have tons of "free money" they can use to pay taxes. When I explain many people live at the same percentage of their income-ie if a guy making 50K a year has a 800 dollar a month mortgage often someone making 250K a year might well have a 4000 dolla a month mortgage and pays a higher percentage of his income in federal taxes than does the guy making 50K

to that the parasites often claim that the rich guy ought to be forced to give up his expensive house so he can pay more taxes.
 
you continue to persist in the stubborn assumption that what the rich pay now is fair and any attempt by the rich to actually pay what is truly fair is wrong

And you continue to prove that you pay little to no attention to my posts. I have not said that what the rich pay now is fair. I have repeatedly said that I think there are many things about the current tax system that are unfair and they should be changed.

I want the government to massively cut spending so all taxes go down but if people like you continue to demand mucho government, then people like me shouldn't pay more

I'm in favor of cutting government spending too. I've said that before too. Do you read anyone else's posts when you debate them?

I find it idiotic that you think those who are overtaxed demanding others at least pay more for what they use is no different than those who don't pay their share demanding others pay even more

I find it idiotic that you can't see the similarities between your own behavior and theirs despite having it pointed out to you repeatedly.

Edit: Hadn't read down far enough yet to see that you actually did post a link to numbers.
 
Last edited:
And you continue to prove that you pay little to no attention to my posts. I have not said that what the rich pay now is fair. I have repeatedly said that I think there are many things about the current tax system that are unfair and they should be changed.



I'm in favor of cutting government spending too. I've said that before too. Do you read anyone else's posts when you debate them?



I find it idiotic that you can't see the similarities between your own behavior and theirs despite having it pointed out to you repeatedly.

Oh, and I'm still waiting for a link to the numbers you keep spouting.

its your last sentence that is stupefying. There is no similarity between someone who clearly is paying far more than what he uses demanding merely that others pay for what they use versus someone who is a parasite demanding that they get even more from someone else
 
I also think its childish for people who claim to be informed and want to argue taxes yet they demand proof of stuff that has been posted thousands of times here in an apparent attempt to delay or divert away from the idiocy of their own weak argument.

for Molten Dragon to not know what percentage of the income tax the top one percent pays ought to disqualify him from ever being taken seriously on this issue

Sorry, it's not my job to support your claims. You want to use the numbers, you provide a link to the source when asked. That's how debates work. The fact that you've posted them before is irrelevant.
 
And you continue to prove that you pay little to no attention to my posts. I have not said that what the rich pay now is fair. I have repeatedly said that I think there are many things about the current tax system that are unfair and they should be changed.



I'm in favor of cutting government spending too. I've said that before too. Do you read anyone else's posts when you debate them?



I find it idiotic that you can't see the similarities between your own behavior and theirs despite having it pointed out to you repeatedly.

Edit: Hadn't read down far enough yet to see that you actually did post a link to numbers.

See post #453 for some numbers.
 
its your last sentence that is stupefying. There is no similarity between someone who clearly is paying far more than what he uses demanding merely that others pay for what they use versus someone who is a parasite demanding that they get even more from someone else

Like I said, idiotic.
 
Like I said, idiotic.

you pretend that saying other people should pay more is no different if it comes from someone who pays too much versus someone who pays nothing

You look only to what they say and not the merit of their position
 
you pretend that saying other people should pay more is no different if it comes from someone who pays too much versus someone who pays nothing

You look only to what they say and not the merit of their position

I'm done trying to point your hypocrisy out to you. I've done it several times, and you insist on remaining willfully blind to it. You can lead a horse to water, and so on, and so forth.
 
I'm done trying to point your hypocrisy out to you. I've done it several times, and you insist on remaining willfully blind to it. You can lead a horse to water, and so on, and so forth.


Your idiocy is not understanding hypocrisy. Its not hypocrisy for an overtaxed person to demand others pay at least what they use. I have never demanded others pay my share
 
The government should have NOTHING to do with the economy at ALL.
I stopped reading right there.

If this is what you truly believe than you just haven't thought things through to their logical conclusion and any further conversation between us is a waste of time.
 
I stopped reading right there.

If this is what you truly believe than you just haven't thought things through to their logical conclusion and any further conversation between us is a waste of time.

Your right and your wrong.

Your right that further coversation with you on the topic is a waste of time.

Your wrong about government should controll or manipulate the economy. You have obviously been an employee for all the years you have worked and it shows.

The truth can be cruel. Most employees have never started or ran a business. Almost all business owners have been employees. You might want to consider starting a business and walk on the darkside a bit. Then you will understand.:)
 
Today's taxes lowest in 60 years

"Yes, while we demand tax cuts, we're actually paying less, as a percentage of income, than ever before. And we're doing it while soldiers are fighting."

"As Republicans and Democrats continue to bicker over who should be taxed and how much, one fact rarely gets mentioned: Most Americans today pay less in federal income taxes than they have in 60 years, and far less than they have during other wars.

This is particularly true for the wealthy: By 2007, the richest 400 Americans paid an average of 16.6% in income taxes, thanks to exemptions and low capital-gains taxes, far less than the same group had paid decades ago and well below the 26.4% that group had been taxed only 15 years earlier."

"Overall, taxes are very low right now," said Chuck Marr, the director of federal tax policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a nonpartisan Washington, D.C., research group. In addition, "you have this tremendous shift (of wealth) in the United States to high-income people."

Today's taxes lowest in 60 years - 1 - money & politics - MSN Money
 
Your right and your wrong.
Your right that further coversation with you on the topic is a waste of time.

Your wrong about government should controll or manipulate the economy. You have obviously been an employee for all the years you have worked and it shows.
The truth can be cruel. Most employees have never started or ran a business. Almost all business owners have been employees. You might want to consider starting a business and walk on the darkside a bit. Then you will understand.:)
You make many assumptions in your reply - most of which are wrong.

Sorry, go back to the end of the line.
 
Last edited:
I stopped reading right there.

If this is what you truly believe than you just haven't thought things through to their logical conclusion and any further conversation between us is a waste of time.

So we know you are lazy and afraid to look at conflicting viewpoints.

And save the 'I did not want to waste my time' nonsense...you have posted over 2700 times on this site in less then 6 months...clearly you have lots of time to waste.

You were afraid to read what I typed because you were concerned it might be right OR your mind is so closed, that you refuse to take in any other viewpoints.


You're big on judgements...not so big on providing unbiased, factual proof of those judgements.

Get some or your opinions mean little - just the rants of another frustrated Keynesian.


Where is your factual, unbiased proof that the economy is better off with government intervention?

I guarantee you that you have NONE.

Well...?
 
Last edited:
So we know you are lazy and afraid to look at conflicting viewpoints.
And save the 'I did not want to waste my time' nonsense...you have posted over 2700 times on this site in less then 6 months...clearly you have lots of time to waste.
You were afraid to read what I typed because you were concerned it might be right OR your mind is so closed, that you refuse to take in any other viewpoints.
You're big on judgements...not so big on providing unbiased, factual proof of those judgements.
Get some or your opinions mean little - just the rants of another frustrated Keynesian.
Where is your factual, unbiased proof that the economy is better off with government intervention?
I guarantee you that you have NONE.
Well...?
Insulting me is petty and uncalled for.

Our positions are so far apart there is no reason to debate anything. Had I known your beliefs I wouldn't have bothered to response to any of your posts.

You guys crack me up with your assumptions, though! :lamo
 
Last edited:
Insulting me or de-valuing my position when I didn't even state it is pretty lame.

You guys crack me up! :lamo

And yet again, you refuse to provide ANY unbiased proof to back up your claims.


I will put it more simply then.

I not interested in your economic opinions.

Why would I be - you are just another nobody who posts on chat forums (like I am).

The only thing I am truly interested in is facts.


Now do you have links to unbiased facts to support your claims or don't you?

Yes or no?
 
Last edited:
And yet again, you refuse to provide ANY unbiased proof to back up your claims. I will put it more simply then. I not interested in your economic opinions.Why would I be - you are just another nobody who posts on chat forums (like I am).The only thing I am truly interested in is facts.Now do you have links to unbiased facts to support your claims or don't you?Yes or no?
I'll repeat it for you since you omitted it in your quote of my last post:
Our positions are so far apart there is no reason to debate anything. Had I known your beliefs I wouldn't have bothered to response to any of your posts.
Good day. :2wave:
 
Last edited:
I'll repeat it for you since you omitted it in your quote of my last post: Good day. :2wave:

So in other words...you have ZERO links to unbiased factual proof to ANYTHING you say.

Just another chat forum know-it-all who when pushed is all style and NO substance.

Noted.


Have a nice day.
 
Last edited:
So in other words...you have ZERO links to unbiased factual proof to ANYTHING you say.
Just another chat forum know-it-all who when pushed is all style and NO substance.
Noted.
Have a nice day.
I will not bother proving that monopolies are bad.

I will not bother proving that dumping the dollar and any other national currency is bad.

Most people can figure out those simple truths for themselves.

You are obviously not one of those people, therefore, we have no frame of reference to discuss anything.



See ya'! :cool:
 
I will not bother proving that monopolies are bad.

I will not bother proving that dumping the dollar and any other national currency is bad.

Most people can figure out those simple truths for themselves.

You are obviously not one of those people, therefore, we have no frame of reference to discuss anything.



See ya'! :cool:


You won't prove it because obviously you cannot prove it.

You have posted 2700 times - so you obviously have the time and enjoy posting.

Plus, you have typed some fairly long posts in just the short time I have been here - so you obviously like spending time discussing economics.

So you have spent ALL this time posting and now you say you cannot be bothered?

Sorry pal - that does not even begin to ring true.

Why, just in the time you have spend deflecting my request for links - you could have posted several of them easily...so please save the rhetoric of you cannot be bothered - it does not wash.


As anyone with a clear head could see - you clearly have no links to unbiased, factual proof or you obviously would post them.

Like I typed - all style, little substance.

I will try and remember that about you in the future so I don't waste my time chatting with someone who never backs up what he claims.

No offense, but any idiot can do that...the person to respect is one who backs up their positions - even if they turn out to be wrong.



Have a nice day.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom