Fair Share?

@debrakcarey (19924)
United States
November 30, 2012 1:25pm CST
In 2010 (little has changed), the top 1% of earners paid 37.4% of federal income taxes, while earning 18.9% of adjusted gross income. The top 5% paid 59.1% of income taxes, while earning 25% of income. And the top 10%, those earning $116,000, paid 70.6% while earning 43.1% of all income. The super rich? The top 0.1% paid 17.8% of the pie, while earning 9.24% of adjusted gross income. And the bottom 50%, those tax units earning less than $34,338 per/year? They paid 2.4% of the income taxes, even though they earned 11.7% of all income. These figures DO NOT account for Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) REFUNDS! If they did, the upper groups would be seen to pay even MORE, and the latter group even LESS. Fair share? Your thoughts...
7 responses
@chrystalia (1209)
• Tucson, Arizona
4 Dec 12
I've said it before, I'll say it again--tax SPENDING, not INCOME. Slap a national tax on EVERYTHING. Everyone can earn as much as they like--they pay their tax when they spend it, no matter what they spend it on. No more IRS, no more paperwork, no more loopholes. Then everyone is paying, based on their consumption. So those who live large, pay large. Those who live frugally (and use less resources thereby) are paying less. Of course it will never happen, because then the government would have to drop over 150,000 IRS agents, and they would save over 12 billion dollars, and over a million tons of paper wouldn't get used every year... nope. never happen.
@urbandekay (18312)
6 Dec 12
I would previously have taken the opposite view, regarding income tax as a fairer way of distributing the burden of collective responsibility, those that are more able to contribute sharing greater part of the burden, just as say if a car broke down the strongest would share a greater burden of pushing it. But, now I am inclined to think differently, whilst I cannot agree that all tax should be on purchase, since this would make paying for the basic necessities of life beyond the means of many, but I am thinking that an increased level of purchase tax might discourage the odious consumerism that has become prevalent in society and encourage those qualities I value, being frugality, self-sufficiency and resourcefulness, etc. all the best, urban
@debrakcarey (19924)
• United States
7 Dec 12
IF you believe that it is government's job to socially engineer people's lives, I suppose a reform such as Chrystalia suggests would be somewhat better. Personally, I think a flat tax rate on everyone with minimal deductions for contributions to charities, mortgages, education and medical expenses.
• Tucson, Arizona
7 Dec 12
The reason I favor a consumption tax over a flat tax is simple-- efficiency and freedom. With a flat tax, everything you add to it--basic deductions, etc.-- decreases the efficiency, and makes it "unfair"--in that some people can't afford the charity deduction, or they can't use the education deduction, whatever. The actual tax would be "fair" as in universal and equal, but the addition of deductions would introduce inequality--again--and people would begin to campaign for more deductions, or credits--and you're back where we are now, after a while. A consumption tax, on the other hand, is maximally efficient--it would happen through the systems automatically in place already (cash registers, monthly bills, etc) and it allows the maximum freedom to the individual, and maximum empowerment for individuals. Since everyone keeps EVERYTHING they make, their "success" or "failure" can no longer be pointed at somebody or something else--like the government. Each individual and family would be as empowered as possible, financially--they would have full control not only over their income, but over their taxes. If it were implemented within the current system, then the current social programs would still be paying their portion of basic necessities, as people accumulated savings, became debt free, and began to prosper, and eventually, those people would be prosperous enough to not be using those programs any longer. As more people got off social programs like food stamps, the cost of those programs on the government would fall, and the programs would shrink naturally over time. I don't consider a consumption tax to be "social engineering", as the government wouldn't be telling anyone how to manage their money or their consumption. People would be totally free to spend as they wish, always. Where's the social engineering in that? You might make a slim case, from somewhere that this would "force" people to be frugal...but it doesn't that is still a personal choice.
@coffeebreak (17820)
• United States
1 Dec 12
Just wait till next year when they take away the mortgage interest deduction on the 1040's...they have been saying NO TAX INCREASE....yet if they take away a deduction which is deducted from your GROSS income/earnings...to give you your ADJUSTED GROSS of which you pay taxes on...that means that with no deduction...your adjusted gross stays higher, which means you pay more/higher taxes. Sneaky way around "not raising taxes"!
@debrakcarey (19924)
• United States
1 Dec 12
And we have 'asked' them to do this by demanding they care for us. We've brought this on our own greedy little selves. By not forbidding them access to our livlihoods, we have sold them our lives with each new entitlement promised.
@coffeebreak (17820)
• United States
1 Dec 12
Yes, that and just not bothering to learn the "whole story"...everyone thought "no tax cut" means no higher taxes on a paycheck and with the yelling of "tax the rich" in our faces to distract them and think.."great, I'll vote for him!". But no one bothers to go the next step and find out what is being raised to get more tax revenue...making your more of your income taxable! People are going to be very shocked...not sure if it is April 2013 or 2014..but it is coming! And then along with the Obamacare "penalty" on 1040's, people are going to finally start waking up. They are predicting a huge mortgage crises again...end of next year to 2014..bigger than the last one!
@debrakcarey (19924)
• United States
1 Dec 12
You reap what you sow. Spiritual laws cannot be ignored forever.
@robspeakman (1705)
30 Nov 12
Of course it isn't fair. We are encouraged to work hard and be successful, we then pass this message on to our children... WHY? Why should we do this, as soon as you become successful and start to make a bit of money you are accused of not paying your way - You are slighted and derided by the poor and havenots. We have allowed the havenots and jealous people to lead some form of social revolution against the rich and successful. The western world is in danger of alienating it's achievers and biggest employers. I find this all a little hypocritical considering that most of us buy lottery tickets in the hope of become rich - WHAT IS ALL THAT ABOUT? In the UK, any money won on the LOTTERY is TAX FREE - yip, TAX FREE - even if you win £20 million. Now, surely if some one so against the rich, then wins a fortune - they will pay tax on their TAX FREE winnings? Won't they? Seems only right. As a finishing line - I would love to be rich
@debrakcarey (19924)
• United States
30 Nov 12
Why do you think the 'pay their fair share' slogan/talking point has been so successful? And I'm with you...rich is nice. And so is being able to dream about starting my own business and helping the unfortunate.
@debrakcarey (19924)
• United States
30 Nov 12
Some stats to think upon: Number of billionaires in USA 403 Their avg. annual income $106 Million Tax revenue at 70% $30 Billion Obama's 2011 budget deficit $1.27 Trillion Percentage of deficit paid by Millionaire's tax 2%
30 Nov 12
The 21st century has seen the birth of the online bandwagon - people without a care in the world attaching themselves to the cause of the week. Just because something appears on Twitter, it does not mean that it actually true. At this moment in the UK, there is pressure for the powers that be to implement more control and restraints on the press - Activists are calling for a law to be passed. There is an online petition in support of this... 16000 people have signed, Over 65 million people live in the UK. That means around 65 million people do not care. The idiots that follow have created a Twitter trend supporting this online petition. Just another thing for the fools to follow.
@urbandekay (18312)
1 Dec 12
Fair indeed, those rich you mention can pay their tax purely from their disposable income, the poor, though paying a lesser percentage find it steal eats into the money they need to buy necessities of life all the best urban
@debrakcarey (19924)
• United States
1 Dec 12
The word of God says the poor will always be with you, and that it was the duty of those who HAD, to care for those who did not have. They did this by leaving their fields partially harvested and giving alms. And the poor where NOT handed bread, they had to work for it in the gleaning of the rich man's fields, and they were not given the best of everything, they sat in the streets begging. The Israelites were told to not forget their charitable acts, he did not tell them to pay their taxes so the king could be charitable for them, releasing them from their PERSONAL responsibility to the poor. God warned the Israelites when they demanded a king as other nations had, that they would rue the day they asked for a King to rule over them...because kings are men and will not always rule with wisdom and would take power where they could. And when he commanded them to give the king his due, it was to remind them that the king now OWNED them, and they had given themselves to the king willingly as his subjects. They had NO SAY in what the king spent his riches on. There is no guarantee of 'fairness' in life. And God's remedy for the unfairness was to commend INDIVIDUALS to love others as they love themselves, not to shirk their duty to their fellow man off on the government.
@urbandekay (18312)
3 Dec 12
It is your post and one about fairness. If, "There is no guarantee of 'fairness' in life." was it not foolish to posit the question in the first place You complain that the rich are not being treated fairly then state that it is acceptable that there is no fairness, strange indeed all the best, urban
2 people like this
@debrakcarey (19924)
• United States
7 Dec 12
The term 'fair share' is NOT MINE, it is that of the man asking for the rich to pay an even larger share than they already do.
@flowerchilde (12518)
• United States
30 Nov 12
The biggest inequity will be when the small business man gets squeezed out of business #1, because he/she cannot hire a firm of lawyers to be sure to be regulation current, and #2, when his/her $250,000 'profit' which has to go for upkeep and wages is taxed even more than it is already! - SIDE NOTE: don't tell me the dems are not FOR the biGGest corporations and businesses!!! and squeezing out the smaller ones, as all their policies do just that!
@Adoniah (7515)
• United States
30 Nov 12
The "small businesses" employee many more Americans than do the Large corps.
@debrakcarey (19924)
• United States
1 Dec 12
That is the one thing that has amazed me through all of this; that the poor and middle class think that government is protecting them from the evil rich. What a laugh, the government FEEDS off the very rich. It is the very rich who give government the bulk of their power over us.
@Adoniah (7515)
• United States
30 Nov 12
Collecting more taxes from anyone is NOT going to do any good. If everyone paid 100% of their income into the debt kitty, it would not take care of the problem...The obamderthal gov. has to STOP spending. They have to STOP entitlement programs and I do not mean Social security or medicare...I mean SSI, food stamps, WIC and medicaid paid out to folks who are not eligible for it. They need to stop wasting money so that minorities can keep their entitlement gov. jobs...They need to stop sending money and weapons to countries that hate us and say that they are going to kill us...They need to stop sending money to countries that are richer or almost as rich as we are...Let them take care of their own poor...That is just a sample...
@mensab (4207)
• Philippines
30 Nov 12
i always wonder what will the people do with lots of money in their possession. i think we all are in the same earth. our excess is a saving grace to many. i do not mind paying taxes, as long as the government is doing its job to do services and make the country competitive in the global market, safe, healthy, and fair.
@debrakcarey (19924)
• United States
1 Dec 12
I understand the need for taxes too, but I don't think that governments should pass out goodies like it's Halloween. If a man does not trust himself to provide for himself, if he trusts another to do for him, he has sold himself to that man. And men of government can be just as greedy as anyone else, thinking only of their own desires. Hand more power to them and they will demand even more power. Men who seek to be your master in a few things, will convince you that they are to be trusted as your master in ALL things.