Obama '08?

ou never talk about a books, film, music, theatre. You only post on political threads where most people tell you that factually you are wrong.

So you finally admit your claims were dead wrong.

Duly noted, B-Net. Pretty naive, eh?
The thing that irks me is how people will make statements without having much data to support what they are arguing for or against.
Here are some numbers for yall from the IRS in 2007:

The top 1% (1,410,710) of tax return filers earned 23% of the income* and paid 40% of the federal government's revenue from personal income taxes. Their effective tax rate was 22%.

The next 4% (5.6M) earned 15% of the income , paid 20% of the taxes for a tax rate of 18%.
6% to 10% (7M) earned 11%, paid 11% for a tax rate of 13%.

Then we get into the larger number of people.
21M taxpayers (21% of the total) earned* around $100K in 2007. They contributed 15% in income taxes to the federal government. Their tax rate was about 9%.
35M (19%) of us earned around $50K, and our share was 11% of the federal government's revenue. Our tax rate was 7%.

Add that up and you will find that some 70 million of us- 50% of those filing, accounted for 88% of the reported income and paid 97% of the taxes. The tax burden was 14% overall.

50% of filers, with incomes below about $33K, earned 12% of the total income* and paid 3% of the income taxes. The effective tax rate was also 3%.

*The IRS, in its review, starts not with income, but with adjusted gross income. That excludes income from capital gains, dividends and municipal bond

I find that funny okie.

Last year income taxes made up only 43% of the Federal revenues.

So.. the top 1% makes 19% of the income but only paid
15.9% of the total taxes in income tax.

Okie is consumed with the Blue-Red game, which I am becoming increasingly convinced is a spectacle put on by the corporate class as a diversion so that they can pick everyone's pockets.

Quote:

So you finally admit your claims were dead wrong.

Okie, link to where I wrote what you claimed I did. Quote me. Or stop making **** up, because you are sounding like a goddamn idiot.
Cycloptichorn

I said that the wealthy now own a larger percentage of the overall wealth in America then in the past, and this leads them to pay more taxes - even though their rates of taxation are lower than they used to be.

it is obvious to me that the income tax rates are not the principle driving force behind the reasons for poverty

Quote:

it is obvious to me that the income tax rates are not the principle driving force behind the reasons for poverty

Good because no one said so.

Tax breaks for the rich are exactly the issue. Reagan chopped the highest brackets down to half what they used to be, and we got nothing - nothing - in return. There has been no giant leap in American wealth due to these tax breaks, no huge rises in investment in industry or manufacturing.

You're wrong about no proof, though - there exists a gigantic amount of evidence that the right-wing economic policies that have been in place since Reagan have lead to a massive gap between the rich and the poor.

And, anyone who denies the presence of the right in the big time drug trade is naive

Or in small time drug dealing. Think of all those folks cooking crystal meth. They are not educated, not elite and not leftists.

Or in small time drug dealing. Think of all those folks cooking crystal meth. They are not educated, not elite and not leftists.

This is interesting.
The new CentCom commander, one approved by Obama, says its "fun to shoot people" and that some Afghans deserve to die.

This sure sounds like trying to end the war to me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkXtWwNDSdA&feature=player_embedded