1% Tax Rate?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

th1b.taylor

Active Member
Dec 4, 2010
277
22
28
79
SE Texas
I post the following for information only. If you wish to debate this, please, contact the left wing CNN. I´m still in shock that they told the truth. Most Americans have yet to wake up and realize that the flat tax will help and harm everybody. Being a patriot I push for it because it will be good for the nation and balance the load all around.Now, the article.

In case you haven't heard, President Obama wants the wealthiest to pay more in taxes.
Noting the rise in income inequality in recent years and the need to reform the U.S. tax system, the president on Tuesday said that some of the wealthiest in America pay far less in federal taxes as a percentage of their income than many lower down the income scale.
"A quarter of all millionaires now pay lower tax rates than millions of middle-class households. Some billionaires have a tax rate as low as 1%," Obama said in a speech in Kansas.
Here are some of the facts behind the claim: In 2006 roughly 25% of those with adjusted gross incomes over $1 million paid a smaller portion of their income in federal taxes -- income, payroll and corporate -- than 10% of those with AGIs below $100,000, according to a recent study from the Congressional Research Service.
As for the president's assertion that some billionaires have a tax rate as low as 1%, Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center, said that it's definitely possible but hard to verify.
Buffett rule could hit 25% of the very rich
"Billionaires are still rare enough that we cannot get data for them without running afoul of privacy rules," he said.
But for a lot of reasons, Chris Bergin, president and publisher of Tax Analysts, said, "It is certainly not implausible."
Last year, 4,000 households with incomes over a million dollars owed no federal income tax whatsoever, according to Tax Policy Center estimates.
What's more, of the top 400 federal tax returns with the highest adjusted gross incomes in 2008, 30 had an effective tax rate of less than 10%, noted Mark Luscombe, the principal federal tax analyst at CCH.
A big reason is that a large percentage of wealthy Americans' income comes from investments, which are often taxed at lower rates than ordinary wages and salaries.
What's more, some perfectly legal tax code provisions allow taxpayers to reduce their investment tax bills even further.
Of course, the wealthy aren't the only ones who enjoy what Obama refers to as "loopholes and shelters." Anyone who deducts their mortgage interest, saves money for retirement, realizes a capital gain or loss, or gets health insurance from their employer is enjoying a tax break.
Bush tax cuts: The real end game
The difference is that the rich use a broader array of tax-preferred investments, such as partnerships. Or they may invest in dividend-paying foreign stocks and can claim a foreign tax credit for the tax withheld from them by the foreign government.
Typically, too, the wealthiest are more likely to be retired or self-employed and are in a position to make big charitable contributions -- all of which come with distinct tax advantages.
And the wealthy can afford to be more risk-averse and park a lot of money in bonds, often tax-free.
To Obama, the fact that the wealthy can so whittle down their tax burden is "the height of unfairness."
Fairness in the tax code is a real issue, but there is no absolute answer to the question "what's fair?" And that's one reason why reforming the tax code will be a tough fight.
Earlier this fall, Obama proposed what he dubbed the Buffett Rule, named after billionaire investor Warren Buffett, who has urged Congress to tax the rich more.
The Buffett Rule is intended as a guiding principle for tax reform to ensure that millionaires pay a higher percentage of their income in federal taxes than those who make less.
That may not be as easy to implement as it sounds.
But one thing is a sure bet: The president will be sounding the theme many times over in his re-election bid.
View this article on CNNMoney
 

Foreigner

New Member
Apr 14, 2010
2,583
123
0
The top 1% already pay 38% of all taxes.

The bottom 48% pay zero taxes.

That means the bottom 48% are paying nothing for the roads they drive on, the National Defense that protects them, or - in many cases - the government funded checks or medical coverage they are using.

Are you really saying that every single person at and below the 48% is not capable of paying any taxes?

Just what percentage of tax rate do you wish the 1% to be taxes at? (The top 1% are those making $350,000/year or more.)

And what specific income to you feel is the absolute lowest we should be able to charge taxes on?

Please be specific.




.
 

aspen

“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
Apr 25, 2012
14,111
4,778
113
53
West Coast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The top 1% already pay 38% of all taxes.

The bottom 48% pay zero taxes.

That means the bottom 48% are paying nothing for the roads they drive on, the National Defense that protects them, or - in many cases - the government funded checks or medical coverage they are using.

Are you really saying that every single person at and below the 48% is not capable of paying any taxes?

Just what percentage of tax rate do you wish the 1% to be taxes at? (The top 1% are those making $350,000/year or more.)

And what specific income to you feel is the absolute lowest we should be able to charge taxes on?

Please be specific.




.

Can't wring water from a stone.
 

Foreigner

New Member
Apr 14, 2010
2,583
123
0
Can't wring water from a stone.


So you're saying that no one in the 50% of Americans have the ability to pay any taxes at all?

Facts do not support that assertation in any way, shape, form or style, but thanks for the reply none the less.
 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
And where do the Tax Exempt Foundations come under all this??? Lot of the wealthiest individuals in America create or use those tax-exempt Foundations to get around paying taxes, while still keeping a measure of control of how that money is used.

I have no doubt the wealthiest are paying less taxes than the middle class. I don't trust that many in Congress to tell the truth about it simply because many... of them are in the independently wealthy upper classes. They'd be cutting their own throats by admitting they don't pay what the middle classes do.


But NONE of that is the real point. There's two major issues to be considered:


One of the real POINTs is, just HOW MUCH paid tax is FAIR for an individual? If a multi-millionaire paid $12 million in taxes on income he/she earned, then how much more is FAIR? I seriously doubt anyone here has ever paid $12 million in taxes. If you did, you ought to be paid up for your lifetime!


The tithe (a tenth) system was God's Way in Old Covenant times with Israel, so why isn't that good enough today???

If the truly wealthy are paying more than 10% in taxes as they and their penmen claim, then why would they ever be against paying just 10%? Their disagreement with it suggests they ARE NOT EVEN PAYING 10%!!! They tell on theirselves by being against a 10% flat tax for everyone!

Also, what do WE THE PEOPLE really want? Is it our aim to be jealous of wealthy people with this? That's one of the darts the Obama administration is using to keep the people stirred up; it's to help lead the people to accept his brands of Socialism against our U.S. Constitutional Republic of "We the people".

It's the tax, business, and financial laws that need to be addressed in America, not jealousy over how much the rich have.


Since the 1970's, I have warned people about the dangers of Fiat paper money and the monetary controls by foreign banks in connection with systems like the 1913 Federal Reserve. It's the same exact.. problem that Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson dealt with in their era with foreign bankers trying to get a hold of the U.S. economy through the idea of a National Bank. U.S. Presidents in the past vetoed legislation to form up such a system, or to continue an existing National Bank with connection to foreign banking and investors because of it being unconstitutional. And if you don't yet understand how the Federal Reserve Bank is a PRIVATE BANK in control of our U.S. monetary policy, with no Congressional oversight, then you are way behind in understanding how that is the REAL financial problem in the U.S. today.

The inflation of the U.S. dollar is controlled by the Federal Reserve. Inflation means reducing the VALUE of the dollar. And the system has an inflation amount to occur every year, which is why 'cost of living' raises were given by companies in the past to keep up with the lowering value of the dollar. That really took off when the Federal Reserve removed our U.S. monetary system off the Gold Standard. NOTHING... has been backing our U.S. dollar since the early 1970's when they did that. A Double-Eagle gold piece minted in the late 1800's was originally worth only $20 dollars U.S. Now, that same gold piece is valued at around $3200 dollars. That's because of paper Fiat dollars not backed by gold have replaced that value.

A 10% flat tax would be a good... start in paying off our National Debt, along with proper budget cuts of frivolous spending of pet projects by our nation's leaders. And those cuts should in no way affect our nations priorities like national defense, roads, schools, etc., and protection of the U.S. and its people. A lot of those cuts SHOULD be with money sent to foreign banker's projects and their foreign think-tanks, the U.N. and Communist-Socialist governments that work against our national sovereignty, etc. Enough is given in just those foreign realms to probably end our National Debt problem overnight! (Why don't we hear the media speaking of that?!? Ask them!)

Then... the END of today's Fiat paper money monetary system controlled by the Federal Reserve, and back... to the Gold Standard of each dollar backed by equal amount of silver or gold held in reserve. THAT prevents the bankers from PRINTING PAPER MONEY OUT OF THIN AIR, which drives the value of the dollar down.

After President Andrew Jackson in the early 1800's refused to renew the National Bank charter, he required usage of gold and silver in payment for certain transactions (huge ones). In about a year he paid off the then national debt that the National Bank had caused through Fiat paper dollars bankers created outside of gold backing.

Know what else this would end that goes on today? It would end the slight-of-hand stock speculations done by firms on Wall Street. It would also end congress' ability to tell the Treasury to print up billions of worthless paper dollars that drives the value down of the few dollars in our pockets. It moves CONTROL of the wealth into the people's hands, and out of the politician's and banker's hands.

Think about it. A one ounce U.S. Silver Dollar costs approx. $32 dollars in Fiat paper dollars today. That means YOU should have at least 32 times more the dollars you now have, IF, the U.S. had not left the Gold Standard in the early 1970's. For just $1,000 in your savings account, it would mean you'd have instead $32,000 dollars.
 

aspen

“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
Apr 25, 2012
14,111
4,778
113
53
West Coast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So you're saying that no one in the 50% of Americans have the ability to pay any taxes at all?

Facts do not support that assertation in any way, shape, form or style, but thanks for the reply none the less.

No.
 

Foreigner

New Member
Apr 14, 2010
2,583
123
0
I agree Aspen.
The claims in the majority of your posts should be met with the word, "no."

Let's get back to reality, should we.

If Obama was truly concerned about people paying their fair share, the first thing he would do would be to have one of his key financial advisors, Jeffrey Emmelt, the head of GE, pay up.

GE made BILLIONS last year, like the year before and the year before that.

Yet GE paid absolutely ZERO dollars in federal taxes. Why? tax loopholes.

Close the deduction loopholes both for businesses and individuals and see money role in.

If the Federal government doesn't cut back spending and address widespread fraud, it won't matter how much revenue it brings it.

The Bush Tax Cuts are a PERFECT example.
They ended up bringing in record (repeat: RECORD) revenue to U.S. coffers.

But it did little to help the Deficit.
Why? Bush and the Republican Congress, (and for the last two years, the Democrat Congress) spent like drunken sailors.

More revenue it meant more to spend. That is how they saw it.

The top 1% pay 38% of all taxes.
The top 10% pay 70% of all taxes.

Adding to their tax burden isn't going to solve a thing.
When Carter was in office and our economy was in the tank, the high end tax rate for the uber-wealthy was 70%.

Strangely enough, I am willing to bet the very wealthy WOULD consent to giving more of their money to the government.....IF the government got its house in order.

It is a like a father who helped his son get a checking account. The son keeps overdrawing and asking Daddy to give him more and more money.

The Dad keeps giving money hoping his son will learn. Eventually, the Dad has to cut the son off saying "As soon as you learn to control your wild and unnecessary spending, THEN we can talk about me giving you more money."

And once more I will point out that 48% of all Americans don't pay any federal taxes whatsoever.

Yet these are not all shelter-living, soup kitchen visiting, homeless.

If you look at who the U.S. government defines as "poor" today you will find that many own their own home or have a nice apartment. Food enough to eat. A large percentage own a car, many owning two. The vast majority have cable or satellite TV.

You start asking them to pay 1% of their income to Uncle Sam instead of just giving and asking nothing in return, they TOO will start demanding that Congress be more fiscally sound.

They are already living under the military defense that the taxes of the rich have paid for, enjoying the infrastructure that the taxes or the rich paid for, accepting the food stamps and Medicaid that the taxes of the rich paid for, etc. etc. etc.


Even increasing the tax burden of the rich by 20% is not going to stop the Deficit from growing.
Only Congress cutting back on thing such as Defense, social programs, etc. will make a difference.


As far as hitting millionairs and above with an additional 1% tax, what exactly would that do?
Would they now be "paying their fair share?"
Even if you increased it by 10%, 20%, or 30%, it won't make any difference.
 

th1b.taylor

Active Member
Dec 4, 2010
277
22
28
79
SE Texas
The top 1% already pay 38% of all taxes.

The bottom 48% pay zero taxes.

That means the bottom 48% are paying nothing for the roads they drive on, the National Defense that protects them, or - in many cases - the government funded checks or medical coverage they are using.

Are you really saying that every single person at and below the 48% is not capable of paying any taxes?

Just what percentage of tax rate do you wish the 1% to be taxes at? (The top 1% are those making $350,000/year or more.)

And what specific income to you feel is the absolute lowest we should be able to charge taxes on?

Please be specific.




.
If you make a dollar, you need to pay tax! but at the present, assuming you pay no Federal Income Tax you still pay about 45 cents hidden tax when you spend that dollar and that is wrong.

And where do the Tax Exempt Foundations come under all this???
Under a Flat Tax there is no such thing! The Church, not the Pastor and not the staff, will pay no tax because the money to the Church is donated from the personal income and the tax has already been paid.
 

Foreigner

New Member
Apr 14, 2010
2,583
123
0
If you make a dollar, you need to pay tax! but at the present, assuming you pay no Federal Income Tax you still pay about 45 cents hidden tax when you spend that dollar and that is wrong.

-- Wow, I hope you are just acting ignorant to facts and aren't really this clueless.
First, you have nothing, no-thing, to support the claim about 45 cents in 'hidden tax' if you haven't paid income tax.
If that silliness was true that would mean people who pay 20% federal tax would end up with purchasing power of only 35 cents on the dollar.

LOL, no...

That may be true in countries that have the VAT (value added tax).....oh, go look it up yourself, but not in the U.S.

True, if you do not pay federal taxes you are still paying taxes on gasoline, food, clothing, etc.
...except, some states have no tax on clothing and some states have to tax on food products.

That means that those who pay the federal taxes and have to then pay the taxes on gasoline, arepaying an even LARGER percentage of their income in taxes.

But those that do not pay federal tax are retaining a larger percentage of the money they earn so when everyone is taxed, say on gasoline, they are still paying considerably less to Uncle Sam than others.

The same Uncle Sam that provides for their defense, their infrastructure, their welfare programs, etc. etc. etc.

In other words, they are letting others pay for their well-being and not putting forth their fair share.

What is stunning is that these are the same people demanding that those who already pay more in taxes (both by volume and percentage) should be willing to pay EVEN MORE.

Pathetic.
 

aspen

“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
Apr 25, 2012
14,111
4,778
113
53
West Coast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Foreigner, you and I both know that you would never talk to someone in person the way you post on these boards. Isn't it hypocritical to call people 'clueless' and there ideas 'pathetic' online, but not in person? Sounds like a character issue to me.....
 

th1b.taylor

Active Member
Dec 4, 2010
277
22
28
79
SE Texas
Aspen is correct, of course. And your comments hold absolutely no real weight because all you have spewed is rhetoric! By the words of your own rhetoric, my assertions should easily be researched and dismissed. The truth is quite to the contrary though. Letś just look, for a moment at a tire. The basic ingredients are first sold ad a sales tax is collected and the price is added to the cost of manufacturing the tire. Now the ingredients must be shipped and before the truck/aircraft/ship can move it must purchase fuel and the fuel is taxed and the cost is added to the final cost, at sale. If, and most of it does, cross our National Borders to enter the US, it is taxed, as per the cost that yhas already been taxed three times, not just adding tax but taxing the tax also. Now, the plant must have fuel and electricity, all taxed, to make the tire. Add to that the Taxed Wages of the employees that is all added to the cost of the tire at sale.

And then the tire must be distributed and the transportation all requires fuel that is taxed and an operators wage that is taxed and all is added to the cost. And there you are in the Tire Shop watching men install your tire and their wages are taxed and paid by the owner and that is also in the finale cost of the tire. All of these taxes have been added to the cost of the tire and then you pay Federal Excise Tax on all those taxes and a Sales Tax, finally, at least here in Texas, on not just the cost of the tire but also on the Federal Tax as well.

Now, without meaning to I´m going to be just as rude as you but in this case it is the truth. Had the, present day, emphasis on Rote Memory not been taught to you and you generation and had the better thought of education, teach them how to solve an unknown problem, been taught, as it was to our generation, you would not have jumped on me without first examining what I actually said.

Here´s hoping this lesson will help and may God bless! Every item you purchase has this rediculas string of taxed taxes and I did not wish to shock anybody and went low with the 45% mark.
 

Foreigner

New Member
Apr 14, 2010
2,583
123
0
Foreigner, you and I both know that you would never talk to someone in person the way you post on these boards. Isn't it hypocritical to call people 'clueless' and there ideas 'pathetic' online, but not in person? Sounds like a character issue to me.....

-- Aspen, what is funny - and I do mean humorous - is that you would have the nerve to criticize how I speak when you yourself have said the same and worse.

First plank THEN splinter, big guy :D
 

aspen

“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
Apr 25, 2012
14,111
4,778
113
53
West Coast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
-- Aspen, what is funny - and I do mean humorous - is that you would have the nerve to criticize how I speak when you yourself have said the same and worse.

First plank THEN splinter, big guy :D

Ha! Talk about funny...

I think the record speaks for itself.