• 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
Funny, last time I checked, with the Republicans talking about SS like it's welfare, every America paid 7.45% of their income to Uncle Sam - at a minimum.

Now, if the Republicans and their lackey's want to stop referring to SS as welfare or something even close to it then we might have something to talk about.

It is like welfare because what the average senior is getting is hundreds time more than they put into it. And most young people think they'll never get back what they are puttting into it now.
 
It is like welfare because what the average senior is getting is hundreds time more than they put into it. And most young people think they'll never get back what they are puttting into it now.

the first part of your statement is a wild exaggeration about the average senior. If you would like to present the supporting verifiable data, I would be glad to examine it.

As to the second, young people can believe whatever they want to believe. Aside from possibly being unwitting dupes in a self fulfilling prophecy of their own making, it matters little.
 
It is like welfare because what the average senior is getting is hundreds time more than they put into it.
That's pure crap. I guess if you're going to shovel **** you may as well pile it high.

And most young people think they'll never get back what they are puttting into it now.
Then they're being mislead and/or stupid. But, hey, it's their future. If they need to relearn what previous generations already learned about and corrected for then so be it!
 
It is like welfare because what the average senior is getting is hundreds time more than they put into it. And most young people think they'll never get back what they are puttting into it now.
Social Security is not welfare, and would be a very viable plan if two things had happened differently.
First, the Government did not start declaring surplus SS receipts as deficit offsets. (I am not talking about the special bonds,but outright theft.)
Second SS be allowed to invest in other stable paths. Municipal bonds, ect..

If a person put 15% of every dollar earned below $100K for 40 years, and that money earned a modest return.
the person would not live long enough to get all of it back at today's SS payments.
 
It is like welfare because what the average senior is getting is hundreds time more than they put into it. And most young people think they'll never get back what they are puttting into it now.
And I can assume from here on out that you will add into all income below ~$106k that 7.45% of Fed taxes, right?

Feel free to include it in those upper income brackets as well. Wouldn't want anyone to think I was being unfair.
 
Social Security is not welfare, and would be a very viable plan if two things had happened differently.
First, the Government did not start declaring surplus SS receipts as deficit offsets. (I am not talking about the special bonds,but outright theft.)
Second SS be allowed to invest in other stable paths. Municipal bonds, ect..

If a person put 15% of every dollar earned below $100K for 40 years, and that money earned a modest return.
the person would not live long enough to get all of it back at today's SS payments.
I mostly agree although that investment in other bonds is a little discerning. Doesn't matter, though. Even with standard Fed rates there's plenty there for the average retiree, with some very minor corrections to account for unforeseen and unpredictable economic disasters.
 
I had to answer "no" because the rich pay far more than their fair share.
 
Funny, last time I checked, with the Republicans talking about SS like it's welfare, every America paid 7.45% of their income to Uncle Sam - at a minimum.

Now, if the Republicans and their lackey's want to stop referring to SS as welfare or something even close to it then we might have something to talk about.

You have a valid point there. Anybody who does work does indeed pay that FICA tax and double that when you consider what the employer matches it with funds that would have gone to the worker. No doubt about that.

But I am saying that in addition to that reality, I would support all Americans who earn dollar one to pay 5% federal income tax on that. And I would raise ALL tax brackets by 5 points each. In addition I would treat all income the same and get rid of the favorable discriminatory rates for things like capital gains and inheritance. Just tax it as income according to the applicable schedule.
 
No more than they will ignore that the current policies aren't working to fix the broken system...

When is the last time we had two consecutive years of growth in manufacturing jobs as we've had under this administration?
 
you keep yammering about old tax rates as if those were fair or necessary.

Wassamatta, couldn't back up your claim that the higher tax rates of the 90's put corporations out of business???:lamo
 
I am still waiting for somebody to explain what is "fair".

If I make $500,000 a year, what is my "fair share" I should pay in federal income taxes.

Right now I believe it is 35%. Why isn't that "fair"?

Man you are getting rooked, Romeny only pays 14%! Do you think is fair the super rich only pay 14% and you have to pay 35%?
 
Wassamatta, couldn't back up your claim that the higher tax rates of the 90's put corporations out of business???:lamo

that is not the issue-the rich should not pay more of the income tax than their share of the income-AND THAT STILL MEANS THEY PAY MORE THAN THEY SHOULD since the sure don't use 22% of the government services
 
Man you are getting rooked, Romeny only pays 14%! Do you think is fair the super rich only pay 14% and you have to pay 35%?

He still pays a higher rate than you do and more importantly, he pays more in a year than you pay in a life time and yet you will use more government services than he will
 
that is not the issue

That was your reason given for not discontinuing their tax cuts. Just another of the ridiculous claims that you make and then run away from.
 
He still pays a higher rate than you do and more importantly, he pays more in a year than you pay in a life time and yet you will use more government services than he will

LOL! Romney pays a lower effective total tax rate than most of the country, including me!
 
Last edited:
That was your reason given for not discontinuing their tax cuts. Just another of the ridiculous claims that you make and then run away from.

one of the reasons why there were tax cuts was that your party jacked them up so people like you would vote for the Dems. when the party people like me often support won, the rates were cut. Dems jack up taxes to buy the votes of the envious and the spiteful, GOP cuts taxes to gain the support of the overtaxed
 
LOL! Romney pays a lower effective total tax rate than most of the country, including me!

stop lying, his overall effective federal tax on his income is about 14%-people like you don't pay near that much.
 
Man you are getting rooked, Romeny only pays 14%! Do you think is fair the super rich only pay 14% and you have to pay 35%?

No one in the country pays 35%. That is the top rate, and even if you did not itemize and took the standard deduction of $3,500, your effective rate is still less than 35%. The top bracket applies to people who make $388,000 and above. I think it is clear that people with incomes of that magnitude have plenty of write offs and are able to lower their effective rate just like Romney does, and like I do- even though I don't make nearly that much.

Tax Brackets (Federal Income Tax Rates) 2000 through 2012[
 

No, No ,No, Everyday 3 or more water mains break, thousands ofbridges need repair or replacing. There are jurisdictions where are certian 911 calls (against woman) the chief of police won't let his men roll, due to lack of officers. Many urban areas fear a major fire, what with skeleton crews in firehouses. There are classrooms with 40 kids & we are way behind in science/math.The Romney-bot says the federal government doesn't pay for cops, firefighters & teachers, but I guess he can be forgiven his ignorance because he's never been a governor. What, what's that you say, he was a governor? He accepted block grants from the fed. Gov. for police & fire fighter & teachers? Then he's willfully lying? But I digress,The top teir "Job Creators" haven't come through on the implyed promise of the Bush Tax cuts, they have been pocketing the savings rather than "Creating Jobs", in America at least. But instead of "creating" new taxpayers, they have added burdens on the remaining taxpayer, by laying off millions of American workers, sending their work offshore.
A modest increase to pre-Bush rates, let's pass President Obama's Jobs Bill & get to work on American Inferstructure, before another bridge collapses, while putting American's back to work. :peace


What do you think?
 

No, No ,No, Everyday 3 or more water mains break, thousands ofbridges need repair or replacing. There are jurisdictions where are certian 911 calls (against woman) the chief of police won't let his men roll, due to lack of officers. Many urban areas fear a major fire, what with skeleton crews in firehouses. There are classrooms with 40 kids & we are way behind in science/math.The Romney-bot says the federal government doesn't pay for cops, firefighters & teachers, but I guess he can be forgiven his ignorance because he's never been a governor. What, what's that you say, he was a governor? He accepted block grants from the fed. Gov. for police & fire fighter & teachers? Then he's willfully lying? But I digress,The top teir "Job Creators" haven't come through on the implyed promise of the Bush Tax cuts, they have been pocketing the savings rather than "Creating Jobs", in America at least. But instead of "creating" new taxpayers, they have added burdens on the remaining taxpayer, by laying off millions of American workers, sending their work offshore.
A modest increase to pre-Bush rates, let's pass President Obama's Jobs Bill & get to work on American Inferstructure, before another bridge collapses, while putting American's back to work. :peace

A great big FONT plan there, skippy. But that was SAID to have been done already. Remember? That was to keep unemployment from reaching 8%, yet only 6% of the stimulus went to NEW infrastructure, and we still have everything that you have described going on PLUS $6T in new national debt. The Bush tax cuts, lowered federal revenue from 18% of GDP to 17% of GDP, but the Obama federal spending was increased from 20% of GDP, under Bush, to 24% of GDP, yep a 20% increase. Increasing the taxes on the top 5% will MAYBE reduce the federal deficit from 40% to 38%, yet that "massive deficit reduction" disappears instantly with yet another round (or two) of stimulus. The reason that "the rich" and businesses will not increase investment and production, hiring more people, is that THEY know who will be "held accountable" to repay the HUGE national debt, THEY alone will. If your profit margin will soon be cut in HALF (by federal tax increases) then why would you wish to risk MORE of your money to do so? The rich did not get that way by being stupid. Yes he did!
 
Last edited:
stop lying, his overall effective federal tax on his income is about 14%-people like you don't pay near that much.

I have had years where I pay that much. And when I don't its not far off that.

You badly underestimate people who are not sipping tea with you at your private club.
 
I have had years where I pay that much. And when I don't its not far off that.

Daggum. Double-dipping with that nice pension must be paying better than I thought.

Average_Tax_Rates.png


Maybe I should stay in :2razz:


The only profession I know off off the bat that pays higher is what my dad does - as a minister he has to pay both sides of FICA out of his pocket, so he get's hit with 15.2 right out the gate.
 
Last edited:

No, No ,No, Everyday 3 or more water mains break, thousands ofbridges need repair or replacing. There are jurisdictions where are certian 911 calls (against woman) the chief of police won't let his men roll, due to lack of officers. Many urban areas fear a major fire, what with skeleton crews in firehouses. There are classrooms with 40 kids & we are way behind in science/math.The Romney-bot says the federal government doesn't pay for cops, firefighters & teachers, but I guess he can be forgiven his ignorance because he's never been a governor. What, what's that you say, he was a governor? He accepted block grants from the fed. Gov. for police & fire fighter & teachers? Then he's willfully lying? But I digress,The top teir "Job Creators" haven't come through on the implyed promise of the Bush Tax cuts, they have been pocketing the savings rather than "Creating Jobs", in America at least. But instead of "creating" new taxpayers, they have added burdens on the remaining taxpayer, by laying off millions of American workers, sending their work offshore.
A modest increase to pre-Bush rates, let's pass President Obama's Jobs Bill & get to work on American Inferstructure, before another bridge collapses, while putting American's back to work. :peace


Nice big font there. Are you compensating for your small.......oh never mind.
 
The only profession I know off off the bat that pays higher is what my dad does - as a minister he has to pay both sides of FICA out of his pocket, so he get's hit with 15.2 right out the gate.

All self employed people pay both sides of FICA taxes
 

Ask your M... oh nevermind.
I've been on four other forums, two that closed, one that was boring (all liberals) & one that I'm presently on a volunetary leave, due to a bet. I've always taken advantage of the otions available for font & size (I like to see what I'm writing) & have only been questioned once before, humorously. Maybe because others took advantage of the options also. I've been called a douch & now had the size of my...oh nevermind questioned.
This does seem a uniform lot. This is the last time I'll bother with those intolerant of those who tend to be different. Hurl those insults if you will, I thrive on 'em. :peace

Nice big font there. Are you compensating for your small.......oh never mind.
 
Back
Top Bottom