English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Seriously, why do people talk about them needing to pay "their fair share" when they already pay a much higher percentage of their income than the rest of us?

2006-12-31 07:29:55 · 27 answers · asked by n_arent 3 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

27 answers

They definitely are not. In France the rich pay 80% of their income in taxes and they enjoy double the unemploment of the US, a stagnant economy that is not growing. The Islamic poor rioting in the slums and a high suicide rate. By all means the rich need to be taxed more in the US so we can all enjoy the the quality of life in France! Who needs small business that provides jobs for the poor? Tax the rich and take away all rewards for serving others and innovation. This sounds like a great plan!

2006-12-31 07:38:59 · answer #1 · answered by Lighthearted 3 · 3 2

It's because 99.99 percent of the people who say this crap about the "rich not pay their fare sahre don't understand how the tax system really works." Have you actually done the math on the tax table the IRS puts ou each year? If you did you would be seeing red all over again. Only the people in the bottom tax bracket pay a straight percentage of 10 percent. Everyone else pays a marginal percentage, but reguardless of your tax bracket your gross income is not the basis for the tax that you owe. After you take all the exemptions and deductions you are left with what the IRS call taxible income and it is that total which determines your tax bracket.

example: Joe Scmoe has a gross income of say 20,000 and is single but has a child. This entitles him to 2 exemptions of 2900 subtracted from 20,000 now makes his income 14,200. He is the head of house hold so he also get a standard deduction of 10,500 give or take. This makes for a taxible income of 3,700 which puts him in the 10 percent tax bracket and the tax on 3700 is 370, but he will probalby not have to pay that because of earn income credit and child tax credits. But now let say Joe Scmoe is single and no children making 20,000 gross 2900 form 20,000 is 17,100 and only gets a standard deduction of 4800 making a total taxible income of 12,300 leaving him in the 15 percent bracket. Now logically he should have to pay 15% of 12,300 but he doesn't. He pays 10 percent of 7,000 = 700 plus 15 percent of the remainder 12,300 - 7,000 = 5,300 * .15 = 795 + 700 = 1,495.

However, Uncle sugar isn't through screwing him yet, since Joe's income isn't over 100,000 he has to use the tax table and the table says he owes 1499. This is because the tax table uses averaging and rounding. his average would be 5,325 * .15 = 798.75 rounded 799.

This marginal system patern continues for each bracket paying only a margian percentage of the remainder after the cutoff for their filing status. It goe like so 39.6% of X + 35% of X + 28% of X + plus 20% of X + 15% of X + 10% of X. I realize the I may have the percentages wrong but you get the idea right?

2006-12-31 09:22:13 · answer #2 · answered by ikeman32 6 · 2 0

The fact of the matter is, it is not just the rich- it is the poor as well. There are too many breaks for both. The middle-class are the ones that have to pay. Frankly, I am for a flat national sale tax...higher than now but no income tax or even IRS. It would make things much easier and we could collect money off of things even illegal immigrants try to purchase.

2006-12-31 07:47:16 · answer #3 · answered by Matthew H 1 · 1 1

Even with tax deductions, individuals over 200K are paying the highest % of their income. Larger corporations are paying the most in raw dollars as well as the highest rates.

Our economy could improve significantly if the highest tax brackets were cut by several percentage points, leaving 25% as the highest and 5% as the lowest (rather than 35% and 8%).

The matching action that would mean the most in spending less would be a line-item veto awarded to the president to put a stop to overnight earmarking. There is a lot of fat that can be trimmed in our budget that few are willing to do in Congress, and the line-item veto would also curtail a little of the corruption by allowing special interests one fewer major bargaining option.

2006-12-31 07:37:32 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

because most people are misinterpretting rich with only 6 figures a year.
when people say "the rich" need to pay more taxes, they are talking about 1% of the people who pay less per dollar of income than anyone else. they are referring to the people who do most of the hiring of huge numbers of undocumented workers, and illegals.

this isn't referring to individuals who make $150,000 or 200,000 a year, they are part of the middle class that is getting screwed. they actually fall into the term of middle class when making such a statment, it is referring to people who has a company that makes 50 million a year, has 10 years of tax free business operation from the community they live in, had tax payers of that community pay a portion of the land development expenses to get jobs into their commuity, get millions in subsidies to keep prices deflated so Americans can afford their products, and have huge tax breaks that the middle class and poor do not get to take advantage of, thus lowering the taxes they pay to a smaller amount of every dollar they make then the middle class.


if you take individuals that make 6 digit incomes and compare them to people who own larger corporations that have 7 digit incomes or higher, you most likely will find that the people with the 6 figure incomes pay a larger portion of taxes between the two. Why are they considered to be the same group in terms of taxes by corporate whore politicians?? just guess!
this is yet again, another example of elitist double-talk that sways people form the real issue!

2006-12-31 08:27:56 · answer #5 · answered by qncyguy21 6 · 0 1

Those looking to blame someone else. The people in this country who want the government to do more for them but don't want to pay for it. People in higher income tax brackets are the people with big houses, IE bigger property taxes, Fancy cars, IE gasoline tax and luxury tax, buy more, IE pay more sales tax. When they die their families get to pay inheritance tax. People in higher income brackets are also the ones who give more to charity.
Many of these people have companies and pay matching SS, insurance benefits, property tax, franchise tax, business income tax, sales tax, capitol gains tax, school tax, and on and on and on. So what is exactly a fair share. That would be a flat tax that every paid equally. When you continue to heap more hidden taxes on business it only has a trickle down effect to higher prices on everything.

2006-12-31 07:50:38 · answer #6 · answered by j.m.glass 4 · 2 1

there's more than income tax to consider. The very well off pay a lower perecentage of their income in taxes than the very badly off...and even the moderately badly off. If everyone paid a similar percentage of their income on taxes, then the rich would finally be paying their 'fair share'.

2006-12-31 07:35:28 · answer #7 · answered by slobbachops 1 · 0 2

The American ideal has always been to care for those less fortunate than yourself, and the law of the land is a progressive tax, if you reap a larger percentage of this societies material wealth, why do you begrudge those less fortunate, greed my friends, pure, unadulterated greed and selfishness. It's me, me, me, no concern for society, unless you need a tax break for your company or a government contract, the corporate welfare in America makes any social program look like small change, so put down your crying towels and give poor people a helping hand. You'll feel good for giving and you'll be making America a better place.

2006-12-31 07:58:02 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

the wealthiest 1% earn 21% of the income in the US and pay 17% of the tax. Some would say thats not their fair share.

2006-12-31 07:32:46 · answer #9 · answered by snarkysmug 4 · 4 2

the poor pay much more than just 50% in taxes when you take into account all they need to pay out. Why is it the rich get all the breaks and the poor have to pay for it all? Why should they not pay more since they get a lot more?

2006-12-31 07:34:16 · answer #10 · answered by ramall1to 5 · 2 3

fedest.com, questions and answers