@okie,
okie wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
The "evidence" is right in front of you; GW Bush gave tax breaks to the wealthy from 2001 to 2006. The following is from Wiki:
Quote:President Bush and a Republican-controlled Congress passed a series of massive tax cuts from 2001 to 2006. Their cuts lowered everyone’s taxes, but they were skewed heavily to the wealthy. More than half of the total benefit from the Bush tax cuts this year alone will accrue solely to the richest 5 percent of Americans while the middle 20 percent of Americans will reap only 7 percent of the benefit.
ci, a question for you, how much of the income tax does the top 5% income people pay in this country? And how much does the middle 20% pay in income tax? I am serious. I want an answer, because it would help you understand the truth about what you just posted.
Since ci failed to answer my question, I will have to answer it for him. The top 5% income people pay about 59% of the income tax in this country. The bottom 75% pay only about 14% of the tax collected. Determining the middle 20% is a bit difficult because I could not find a link that gave that number, but the link I provide below, showing that the bottom 75% pays about 14%, by interpolating a bit, it is obvious that the middle 20%, such as the 40 to 60% range, they would pay almost nothing probably, probably less than 10%, perhaps about 7% or less.
So, I invite you, ci, to use just a little common sense here, if the government decides to lower tax rates to stimulate the economy, it is entirely logical to a logical mind to assume that the more taxes you paid in, the more likely you would be to pay less taxes. If you pay no taxes to begin with, how can you pay less taxes? I could come up with tons of examples, but if you don't stay at the Choice Hotels chain and spend much money doing it, you will not receive any discounts or bonus points for future spending at a Choice Hotel.
If the top 5% income people are paying almost 60% of the income taxes, it is entirely logical that any tax cut would return more than 50% of the taxcut dollars to them. Similarly, if the middle 20% income earners are only paying less than 10% of the taxes at best, it is also very logical that they would only receive about 7% of the tax cut dollars. In fact, they may be getting a higher break than the highest earners, the figures that I dug up certainly would not prove that not to be the case.
Face it, folks, what we are dealing with here is the issue of income redistribution. Our income tax brackets have for decades been involved in income redistribution, by taxing those that make more money, and hardly taxing the low incomes at all. In fact, it has gotten to the point that families with two children making less than $25,000 per year, they pay nothing, in fact they usually receive several thousand from the government that was not even paid in. Their tax is essentially a negative tax of almost 25%. I know this because I have run the numbers in Turbo Tax a few times, and I have more than one relative that benefits from this tax structure. The people I know, they work for a living and they have health insurance through their employers, and they are responsible people, but you are never going to convince me, ci, that they are being abused by the tax system, because they are net beneficiaries of it. Now, that applies if you earn the income, you earn your money from a job, but if somebody is sitting around collecting disability or a few bucks from interest on money that they inherited, no, I don't think the government will give them money back, but they don't deserve it if they don't work.
As a conservative, I am growing very tired of the demagoguery being used by liberal Democrats in regard to tax breaks. Their demagoguery is intellectually dishonest, and downright pathetic. That includes your nonsensical opinions about taxes, ci.
http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html
