How the Rich pay NO Taxes!

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 8:01 PM GMT
    Interesting.......

    http://money.msn.com/taxes/latest.aspx?post=26d490bd-7317-4f93-8b43-e1da1151ea5f&GT1=33005
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 8:04 PM GMT
    *waits to see who avoids this topic*

    icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 8:26 PM GMT
    *whistles a little tune, checks watch*

    Oh SB, oh Mock, wherefore art thou?

    *waves hanky from palace window*
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 8:30 PM GMT
    Just a reminder - "Guess Who Really Pays the Taxes":

    http://www.american.com/archive/2007/november-december-magazine-contents/guess-who-really-pays-the-taxes

    2. What income group pays the most federal income taxes today?

    The latest data show that a big portion of the federal income tax burden is shoul­dered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per­cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. These are proportions of the income tax alone and don’t include payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare.

    3. But didn’t the Bush tax cuts favor the rich?

    The New York Times reported recently that the average family in America with an income of $10 million or more received a half-million-dollar tax cut, while the middle class got crumbs (less than $100 shaved off their tax bill). If we examine the taxes paid in a static world—that is, if we assume that there was no change in behavior and economic performance as a result of the tax code—then these numbers are meaningful. Most of the tax cuts went to the super wealthy.

    But Americans did respond to the tax cuts. There was more investment, more hiring by businesses, and a stronger stock market. When we compare the taxes paid under the old system with those paid after the Bush tax cuts, the rich are now actually paying a higher proportion of income taxes. The latest IRS data show an increase of more than $100 billion in tax payments from the wealthy by 2005 alone. The number of tax filers who claimed taxable income of more than $1 million increased from approximately 180,000 in 2003 to over 300,000 in 2005. The total taxes paid by these millionaire households rose by about 80 percent in two years, from $132 billion to $236 billion.


    What I don't understand is why some people believe that the rich should necessarily pay more as a percent when they pay a lot more in actual dollars. It's as if it's more important that the rich are penalized for the monies they earn than actually, well, ensuring some government programs get funded.

    That said, the tax code in both the US and Canada are far far too complex because of silly tax loopholes as lobbied for by various special interest groups and in pursuit of elusive social goals. They could probably close up the loopholes including deductible home mortgage interest while reducing the tax rates to get both higher effective marginal tax rates AND a more efficient economy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 8:31 PM GMT
    meninlove said *whistles a little tune, checks watch*

    Oh SB, oh Mock, wherefore art thou?

    *waves hanky from palace window*


    Sorry, did you bother reading the article that pointed out that the rich DO actually pay taxes? Grow up. The title was link bait and the article is about how the rich (and everyone else) are able to reduce their effective tax rates because of various programs created by government.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 8:33 PM GMT
    We can deduct our mortgage interest?

    In Canada you say? *sips tea*

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 8:34 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    meninlove said *whistles a little tune, checks watch*

    Oh SB, oh Mock, wherefore art thou?

    *waves hanky from palace window*


    Sorry, did you bother reading the article that pointed out that the rich DO actually pay taxes? Grow up.


    LIGHTEN up. I read the article. Did you? icon_lol.gif

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 8:34 PM GMT
    meninlove said We can deduct our mortgage interest?

    In Canada you say? *sips tea*



    Nope, only in the US - and it's a huge tax benefit - and causal in creating real estate bubbles.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 8:37 PM GMT

    ...and your hot-headedness should be directed at
    Jesse Drucker, Bloomberg Businessweek, who penned the title.



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 8:39 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    ...and your hot-headedness should be directed at
    Jesse Drucker, Bloomberg Businessweek, who penned the title.


    Puh-lease - as if I would waste any emotional energy on you despite your juvenile math challenged rants. I do however find your cognitive biases telling icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 8:44 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    meninlove said
    ...and your hot-headedness should be directed at
    Jesse Drucker, Bloomberg Businessweek, who penned the title.


    Puh-lease - as if I would waste any emotional energy on you. I do however find your cognitive biases telling icon_wink.gif



    lol, I'm not Jesse Drucker. Had your coffee yet?

    I just suggested you waste your emotional energy on him. icon_wink.gif



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 8:49 PM GMT

    Of course, it's easier to use your clearly uneducated psych skills on me, rather than directly address the article and what it says. Pulling up an article that says rich people pay taxes doesn't do that.

    Nice red herrings. icon_lol.gif
  • TrentGrad

    Posts: 1541

    Apr 12, 2011 9:02 PM GMT
    For the wealthiest Americans, it's been a golden age ever since Reagan...and the fault lies not with the top 10% of income earners...it lies with the bottom 90% who let it happen.

    Any fool should be able to see that free trade, the dismantling of the unions and tax cuts for all are a path to ruin...yet that top 10% has managed to convince the bottom 90% that trickle down works.

    If the bottom 90% doesn't wise up soon, and especially the bottom 50% who cumulatively SHOULD be dictating the direction of the USA, they will wake up to find that the role of the state will be nothing more than safe guarding in many cases the ill gotten gains of the wealthy, whilst oppressing the poor!
  • TrentGrad

    Posts: 1541

    Apr 12, 2011 9:06 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    Of course, it's easier to use your clearly uneducated psych skills on me, rather than directly address the article and what it says. Pulling up an article that says rich people pay taxes doesn't do that.

    Nice red herrings. icon_lol.gif


    Thank you for not replying to riddler's postings. I thought I'd read before that, although his profile says he's from Canada, he's actually living in China...and if that's the case, is there any wonder why he so voraciously defends the current system?

    China has become a prime exporter of everything...including poverty, by utilizing underpaid workers, and undercutting the domestic labour force of the nations they saturate with their crap!

    Good times for the wealthiest...bad times for everyone else!

    Notice how the middle class is disappearing!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 9:10 PM GMT
    TrentGrad saidFor the wealthiest Americans, it's been a golden age ever since Reagan...and the fault lies not with the top 10% of income earners...it lies with the bottom 90% who let it happen.

    Any fool should be able to see that free trade, the dismantling of the unions and tax cuts for all are a path to ruin...yet that top 10% has managed to convince the bottom 90% that trickle down works.

    If the bottom 90% doesn't wise up soon, and especially the bottom 50% who cumulatively SHOULD be dictating the direction of the USA, they will wake up to find that the role of the state will be nothing more than safe guarding in many cases the ill gotten gains of the wealthy, whilst oppressing the poor!


    Great post.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 9:11 PM GMT
    TrentGrad said
    meninlove said
    Of course, it's easier to use your clearly uneducated psych skills on me, rather than directly address the article and what it says. Pulling up an article that says rich people pay taxes doesn't do that.

    Nice red herrings. icon_lol.gif


    Thank you for not replying to riddler's postings. I thought I'd read before that, although his profile says he's from Canada, he's actually living in China...and if that's the case, is there any wonder why he so voraciously defends the current system?

    China has become a prime exporter of everything...including poverty, by utilizing underpaid workers, and undercutting the domestic labour force of the nations they saturate with their crap!

    Good times for the wealthiest...bad times for everyone else!

    Notice how the middle class is disappearing!


    Is this true Riddler? You are a communist? Makes sense.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 9:25 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    Of course, it's easier to use your clearly uneducated psych skills on me, rather than directly address the article and what it says. Pulling up an article that says rich people pay taxes doesn't do that.

    Nice red herrings. icon_lol.gif


    I'm still trying to figure out why you would want people to think you are unable to read.

    From the article originally posted:
    For the 400 U.S. taxpayers with the highest adjusted gross income, the effective federal income tax rate -- what they actually pay -- fell from almost 30 percent in 1995 to just under 17 percent in 2007, according to the IRS. And for the approximately 1.4 million people who make up the top 1 percent of taxpayers, the effective federal income tax rate dropped from 29 percent to 23 percent in 2008. It may seem too fantastic to be true, but the top 400 end up paying a lower rate than the next 1,399,600 or so.


    If the rich cited paid "no" taxes as you seem to think based on the title, the effective federal tax rate for these people would not be 17%. It would be 0. Further, the other article posted is relevant as it shows that despite only paying an effective 17%, they pay 37% of total income taxes - significantly more than their overall earnings of 19%.

    For the record however, I will respond to one comment from TrentGrad who seems to grasp ideas with even greater difficulty than yourself, that I live in Canada, was born in Canada, and am currently in Canada but travel a lot elsewhere. I'm not exactly sure why he would think otherwise but there is no accounting for stupid. icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 9:51 PM GMT
    riddler78 said

    For the record however, I will respond to one comment from TrentGrad who seems to grasp ideas with even greater difficulty than yourself, that I live in Canada, was born in Canada, and am currently in Canada but travel a lot elsewhere. I'm not exactly sure why he would think otherwise but there is no accounting for stupid.
    Lets talk about 'stupid'..

    When you are in Waterloo.. your are 'LIVING' in Waterloo, When you are in Toronto.. you are 'LIVING' in Toronto, when you are in Hong Kong.. you are LIVING' in Hong Kong, when you are in New York, you are 'LIVING' in New York. Unless you are physically dead in any of those locations while existing there.
    Most people 'live' where they physically are.


    Here is what sums you up:
    "(I used to be an investment banker in NYC and also worked to turnaround a small microfinance institution in Uganda)" <--- from your profile. I'd bet a thousand bucks you didnt dare let anyone in Uganda know your were a.. lets say.. battyboy, did ya?
    Let alone the 'investment banker"....

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 9:56 PM GMT
    TropicalMark said
    riddler78 said

    For the record however, I will respond to one comment from TrentGrad who seems to grasp ideas with even greater difficulty than yourself, that I live in Canada, was born in Canada, and am currently in Canada but travel a lot elsewhere. I'm not exactly sure why he would think otherwise but there is no accounting for stupid.
    Lets talk about 'stupid'..

    When you are in Waterloo.. your are 'LIVING' in Waterloo, When you are in Toronto.. you are 'LIVING' in Toronto, when you are in Hong Kong.. you are LIVING' in Hong Kong, when you are in New York, you are 'LIVING' in New York. Unless you are physically dead in any of those locations while existing there.
    Most people 'live' where they physically are.


    Here is what sums you up:
    "(I used to be an investment banker in NYC and also worked to turnaround a small microfinance institution in Uganda)" <--- from your profile. I'd bet a thousand bucks you didnt dare let anyone in Uganda know your were a.. lets say.. battyboy, did ya?
    Let alone the 'investment banker"....



    Really. Let us talk about stupid then. Is that the best you can do to discuss the issues? Are my arguments so threatening to your world view that you feel that you need to make up personal attacks on me? For clarification, are you telling me that you told people while in the Marines that you were "a... lets say battyboy"? What relevance does this possibly have to anything here or even what TrentGrad has said?

    I'm not "actually living in China". By your own broad definition I am LIVING in Waterloo right now. Engrish comprehension apparently is not restricted to those who do not speak English as their primary language icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 11:08 PM GMT
    riddler78 said

    Really. Let us talk about stupid then. Are my arguments so threatening to your world view that you feel that you need to make up personal attacks on me? Nope they don't. Just highlighting your own 'personal attack' on another poster here. You posted it. Your own medicine tastes nasty doesn't it?

    I'm not "actually living in China". By your own broad definition I am LIVING in Waterloo right now. Engrish comprehension apparently is not restricted to those who do not speak English as their primary language
    Neither is spelling.... icon_wink.gificon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 11:14 PM GMT
    TropicalMark said
    riddler78 said

    Really. Let us talk about stupid then. Are my arguments so threatening to your world view that you feel that you need to make up personal attacks on me? Nope they don't. Just highlighting your own 'personal attack' on another poster here. You posted it. Your own medicine tastes nasty doesn't it?

    I'm not "actually living in China". By your own broad definition I am LIVING in Waterloo right now. Engrish comprehension apparently is not restricted to those who do not speak English as their primary language
    Neither is spelling.... icon_wink.gificon_rolleyes.gif


    Lol - seriously? Given your utter lack of contribution to the discussion and what's worse, a complete misread and unintentionally ironic comments, I have to wonder why it is that so many like you and meninlove seemingly have a absurdly poor level of english comprehension. Maybe it's correlated to ideology? icon_wink.gif

    As for personal attacks - apparently that only applies in your world when someone might possibly be offended by someone you disagree with. Obviously you have no idea what we've been talking about. You probably missed the part where we're talking about the actual content of the posted article and facts that I have no dispute over. There are two possibilities - these people either didn't read the article or they did and did not have the 5th grade level of comprehension (based on Flesch-Kincaid) required to understand it.

    (PS the "Engrish" misspelling was deliberate)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 11:45 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    TropicalMark said
    riddler78 said

    Really. Let us talk about stupid then. Are my arguments so threatening to your world view that you feel that you need to make up personal attacks on me? Nope they don't. Just highlighting your own 'personal attack' on another poster here. You posted it. Your own medicine tastes nasty doesn't it?

    I'm not "actually living in China". By your own broad definition I am LIVING in Waterloo right now. Engrish comprehension apparently is not restricted to those who do not speak English as their primary language
    Neither is spelling.... icon_wink.gificon_rolleyes.gif


    Lol - seriously? Given your utter lack of contribution to the discussion and what's worse, a complete misread and unintentionally ironic comments, I have to wonder why it is that so many like you and meninlove seemingly have a absurdly poor level of english comprehension. Maybe it's correlated to ideology? Really? "Grow up" (your second post).
    " Puh-lease - as if I would waste any emotional energy on you despite your juvenile math challenged rants." (your fourth post).

    And the post I nailed you on---> “For the record however, I will respond to one comment from TrentGrad who seems to grasp ideas with even greater difficulty than yourself, that I live in Canada, was born in Canada, and am currently in Canada but travel a lot elsewhere. I'm not exactly sure why he would think otherwise but there is no accounting for stupid.”

    Hardly "poor reading comprehension"...

    As for personal attacks - apparently that only applies in your world when someone might possibly be offended by someone you disagree with. And for you, its just the normal postings to anyone as shown by the majority of your posts in this thread alone! Obviously you have no idea what we've been talking about. Obviously you have a denial issue. You probably missed the part where we're talking about the actual content of the posted article and facts that I have no dispute over. And you probably missed the fact that I said nothing about the 'article' but an awful lot of your aggressive, dismissive condescending posts toward another poster in here.and There are two possibilities - these people either didn't read the article or they did and did not have the 5th grade level of comprehension (based on Flesch-Kincaid) required to understand it. Or, we have those who get caught with their pants down blaming everything and everyone else for their behavior.

    (PS the "Engrish" misspelling was deliberate)<----- Nice try, doesn't fly! You really think people are that dumb? LMAO
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 11:46 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    meninlove said We can deduct our mortgage interest?

    In Canada you say? *sips tea*



    Nope, only in the US - and it's a huge tax benefit - and causal in creating real estate bubbles.


    ____________________________________________________________


    I just love it when the inexperienced Like Riddler comes up with these kind of rediculous statements as above. This is definately a great tax benefit to young struggleing families in their quest to make ends meet and support their families.

    Riddler coupled his assinine idea of doing away with the primary deduction that helps middle America, along with closing loop holes for the wealthy. The very wealthy may not need tax deductions on what few have mortgages on their homes, but middle Americans certainly do.

    And please do provide some proof that deducting mortgage interest "is causal in creating real estate bubbles". what a crock !!!
    Tell us Riddler, since your so full of Ideas and answers to middle Aberican problems, do you own a home? Have you even attempted working on a home for someone you know to help them create "sweat equity", or help them accomplish some home addition or alteration on their own to save money on labor, so they can afford to improve their home? Do you even know what "sweat equity" is ? Do you own a car that you saved for and bought yourself ? Did you work your way through college or did someone pay it all for you ? What have you done with your own hands that took a lot of effort to make your way in the world ? Had you a high level of life experience in making your own way or providing for a family in Middle America, you wouldn't be making that suggestion at all. You may have some book sense but I dare say your greatly lacking in common sense that it takes to make it in Middle America. Be carefull what you suggest because you tell on yourself, and your inexperience.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2011 11:56 PM GMT
    TropicalMark said
    riddler78 said
    TropicalMark said
    riddler78 said

    Really. Let us talk about stupid then. Are my arguments so threatening to your world view that you feel that you need to make up personal attacks on me? Nope they don't. Just highlighting your own 'personal attack' on another poster here. You posted it. Your own medicine tastes nasty doesn't it?

    I'm not "actually living in China". By your own broad definition I am LIVING in Waterloo right now. Engrish comprehension apparently is not restricted to those who do not speak English as their primary language
    Neither is spelling.... icon_wink.gificon_rolleyes.gif


    Lol - seriously? Given your utter lack of contribution to the discussion and what's worse, a complete misread and unintentionally ironic comments, I have to wonder why it is that so many like you and meninlove seemingly have a absurdly poor level of english comprehension. Maybe it's correlated to ideology? Really? "Grow up" (your second post).
    " Puh-lease - as if I would waste any emotional energy on you despite your juvenile math challenged rants." (your fourth post).

    And the post I nailed you on---> “For the record however, I will respond to one comment from TrentGrad who seems to grasp ideas with even greater difficulty than yourself, that I live in Canada, was born in Canada, and am currently in Canada but travel a lot elsewhere. I'm not exactly sure why he would think otherwise but there is no accounting for stupid.”

    Hardly "poor reading comprehension"...

    As for personal attacks - apparently that only applies in your world when someone might possibly be offended by someone you disagree with. And for you, its just the normal postings to anyone as shown by the majority of your posts in this thread alone! Obviously you have no idea what we've been talking about. Obviously you have a denial issue. You probably missed the part where we're talking about the actual content of the posted article and facts that I have no dispute over. And you probably missed the fact that I said nothing about the 'article' but an awful lot of your aggressive, dismissive condescending posts toward another poster in here.and There are two possibilities - these people either didn't read the article or they did and did not have the 5th grade level of comprehension (based on Flesch-Kincaid) required to understand it. Or, we have those who get caught with their pants down blaming everything and everyone else for their behavior.

    (PS the "Engrish" misspelling was deliberate)<----- Nice try, doesn't fly! You really think people are that dumb? LMAO


    Your comments are beyond parody. If you don't mind, I'll just quote to ensure that this post remains as a record since a response is unnecessary icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2011 12:02 AM GMT
    realifedad said
    riddler78 said
    meninlove said We can deduct our mortgage interest?

    In Canada you say? *sips tea*



    Nope, only in the US - and it's a huge tax benefit - and causal in creating real estate bubbles.


    ____________________________________________________________


    I just love it when the inexperienced Like Riddler comes up with these kind of rediculous statements as above. This is definately a great tax benefit to young struggleing families in their quest to make ends meet and support their families.

    Riddler coupled his assinine idea of doing away with the primary deduction that helps middle America, along with closing loop holes for the wealthy. The very wealthy may not need tax deductions on what few have mortgages on their homes, but middle Americans certainly do.

    And please do provide some proof that deducting mortgage interest "is causal in creating real estate bubbles". what a crock !!!
    Tell us Riddler, since your so full of Ideas and answers to middle Aberican problems, do you own a home? Have you even attempted working on a home for someone you know to help them create "sweat equity", or help them accomplish some home addition or alteration on their own to save money on labor, so they can afford to improve their home? Do you even know what "sweat equity" is ? Do you own a car that you saved for and bought yourself ? Did you work your way through college or did someone pay it all for you ? What have you done with your own hands that took a lot of effort to make your way in the world ? Had you a high level of life experience in making your own way or providing for a family in Middle America, you wouldn't be making that suggestion at all. You may have some book sense but I dare say your greatly lacking in common sense that it takes to make it in Middle America. Be carefull what you suggest because you tell on yourself, and your inexperience.


    It defies imagination how anyone who claims to have "experience" does not recognize that when you subsidize something people use more of it. Mortgage interest deductions are a subsidy for debt ... and NOT surprisingly people borrow more in the US. As for sweat equity yes to most of the above questions (and also worked in the US). That there is any question of this in the aftermath of the financial crisis is remarkable.

    More here, presuming you have any interest in attempting to understand the world around you: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704415104576250593440896056.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion

    If the financial crisis revealed anything about homeownership in this country, it's that "ownership" is too often a misnomer.

    Since the crisis began, more than five million homeowners—people who thought they'd achieved the American Dream—have seen their houses reclaimed by lenders. Thirteen million more will be forced out by 2015. That's hardly the kind of security one associates with owning.

    Government-backed financial institutions like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac prop up a system in which homeowners can spend decades paying their mortgages, often with little money down. They go years without building significant equity in their homes, rendering them little more than glorified renters.

    Not surprisingly, the idea that the government should get out of the mortgage business has lately taken hold in Washington. Sen. John McCain (R., Ariz.) and House Republican Conference Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R., Texas) recently introduced bills that would wind down government sponsorship of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac within the next five years. In February, the Obama administration submitted to Congress its plan for backing out of Freddie and Fannie.

    The idea of a country with no government-backed mortgages is frightening to some Americans. But shifting more mortgages to private banks, particularly smaller ones that are more likely to maintain relationships with their borrowers, does come with certain benefits. It could stabilize the home market and prevent another collapse like the one we're still recovering from.