[LeRoySmith]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

The "rich"??? Who are they???

I guess they are anyone who worked hard all their lives and were fiscally responsible.

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

This class warfare rhetoric has to end. The top 5% currently pay 65% of all taxes. And that's "fair"????? Forty-seven % pay no tax----and that's "fair". But by all means let's continue the populist rhetoric that started in 1933 and has only become worse since then.

I don't mind paying my share and I know that society has responsibilities that need to be met. I do have major heartburn with the tax dollars that are extracted from me being used for so many ridiculous things (foreign and domestic). The people that truly need help should get it, no questions asked. The people that have the ability to fend for themselves and won't are the worse kind of scum. Not only do they steal from us they steal from those truly in need. The welfare systems that have been put in place the past 50 or 60 years are criminal. The people that put those programs in place are the ones to blame for many of our problems, financially and socially.

The problem is those people can't and won't be punished or removed from their positions of power.

[Ptmcbriz]

I think it irresponsible to be adding trillions more to the debt. Why don’t we cut corporate welfare? The true definition of socialism. Why have we been subsidizing fossil fuels, agriculture, technology over and over for decades , yet a child getting a free lunch at school is the problem. The multi millionaire and billionaires are making record profits as CEO’s yet typically pay a much lower percentage in taxes due to many loopholes. If I pay 20% in taxes, then it’s reasonable for a billionaire to pay at least 20% but most pay a much smaller % due to deductions. The 20% impacting me, is the same impact on a billionaire. That money would would greatly increase the federal government’s income which would make our problems much less. A first world country takes care of its citizens. It’s only 3rd world countries that don’t take care of their citizens. That’s the benefit of living in a wealthy advanced country. The more poor and homeless you have the uglier the country becomes both physically and financially. It becomes much more crime ridden and dirty. First world countries all create safety nets for their citizens. That’s the benefit of an advanced country. Yet somehow we continue to go backwards towards the 1930’s when there were less protections for citizens and more abuse of citizens by corporations. This is crazy.

[Cuervo]

Look my problem with this BBB is not even its supporters truly know all that is in it.
I have no opinion if it is a Big Beautiful Bill or a Big Pile of Crap, I believe I've somewhat isolated myself from any damage.
But our elected official on both side of the isle should go over it 10 times before they vote yea or nay.
Putting an artificial deadline might sound like a good idea at the moment, but the American people are the ones that will suffer if all the i's are not dotted and the t's are not crossed.

[jimbomaybe]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Perhaps we can say “the rich” are those who will put any additional tax breaks into their investment accounts rather than into the economy. Give $1,000 to someone making less than say $100K and it will likely be spent. Give $1,000 to someone making more than $400K and they might not notice if they dropped it on the floor, they certainly aren’t going to spend it in Publix.

It would be interesting to see statistics on the percentage of income the top 5% make. Do the top 5% who pay 65% of taxes also receive 80% of income? Similarly, it would be interesting to see what their effective tax rate is. I looked but wasn’t able to find that in a quick search.

And factor in the difference between income and net worth, managing your investments to have the "income" you want the rest better positioned for growth , that by the way is a very positive thing for the economy that benefits everyone. The old adage is proven again and again " A fool and his money are soon parted". Those who have large wealth did something right to acquire that wealth , buy financing good ideas that grow the economy via productive enterprises , productivity, efficiency are why we have historically the highest standard of living for everyone

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Perhaps we can say “the rich” are those who will put any additional tax breaks into their investment accounts rather than into the economy. Give $1,000 to someone making less than say $100K and it will likely be spent. Give $1,000 to someone making more than $400K and they might not notice if they dropped it on the floor, they certainly aren’t going to spend it in Publix.

It would be interesting to see statistics on the percentage of income the top 5% make. Do the top 5% who pay 65% of taxes also receive 80% of income? Similarly, it would be interesting to see what their effective tax rate is. I looked but wasn’t able to find that in a quick search.

And just what do people think happens to money deposited into an "investment account"???? The CEO puts it under his mattress???? Corporate profits are either put back into expanding the business (more jobs, new construction), increasing salaries of workers, or by declaring a dividend, which then is reinvested and so on. Again, we need to dump the "rich and corporations are bad" rhetoric, and also realize that you cannot make the poor richer by making the rich poorer

And to answer your question, from the IRS:

"According to the latest IRS data, the top 1% of earners paid 40.4% of all federal income taxes in 2022. This underscores the extent to which the burden of the income tax system falls on taxpayers from the highest income groups.

Do the top 1% pay 40% of taxes?
The top 1% of earners typically pay much more in taxes than many other Americans. Nationwide, this group contributes 45% of total personal income taxes collected. However, the top 1% doesn't pay the same amount everywhere. Therefore, some states may be more dependent on this group than others for tax revenue.


What do the top 5% pay in taxes?
Most of the government's federal income tax revenue comes from the nation's top income earners. In 2021, the top 5% of earners — people with incomes $252,840 and above — collectively paid over $1.4 trillion in income taxes, or about 66% of the national total.


Did the top 5% pay 66% of all federal income taxes?
The top 5% pay more than 65% of federal income taxes, the highest 10% pay 75% of them and the top 25% are accountable for 89%. The bottom half of earners, who make below $46,627 a year, paid just 2% of federal personal income tax, according to the report.

Who pays 97% of all federal income taxes?
The top 50 percent of all taxpayers paid 97 percent of all federal individual income taxes, while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 3 percent."

And did they represent 80% of the income? Who cares, THEY EARNED IT, THEY WORKED FOR IT, AND THEY SUCCEEDED. Let's stop punishing success in this country and maybe we'll climb out of debt.

[Chateau]

Income tax paid on Social Security funds the Social Security Trust Fund.

We need to understand how that proposed change affects this funding mechanism and the impact, if any, on the projected Social Security Trust Fund shortfall

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

And just what do people think happens to money deposited into an "investment account"???? The CEO puts it under his mattress???? Corporate profits are either put back into expanding the business (more jobs, new construction), increasing salaries of workers, or by declaring a dividend, which then is reinvested and so on. Again, we need to dump the "rich and corporations are bad" rhetoric, and also realize that you cannot make the poor richer by making the rich poorer

And to answer your question, from the IRS:

"According to the latest IRS data, the top 1% of earners paid 40.4% of all federal income taxes in 2022. This underscores the extent to which the burden of the income tax system falls on taxpayers from the highest income groups.

Do the top 1% pay 40% of taxes?
The top 1% of earners typically pay much more in taxes than many other Americans. Nationwide, this group contributes 45% of total personal income taxes collected. However, the top 1% doesn't pay the same amount everywhere. Therefore, some states may be more dependent on this group than others for tax revenue.


What do the top 5% pay in taxes?
Most of the government's federal income tax revenue comes from the nation's top income earners. In 2021, the top 5% of earners — people with incomes $252,840 and above — collectively paid over $1.4 trillion in income taxes, or about 66% of the national total.


Did the top 5% pay 66% of all federal income taxes?
The top 5% pay more than 65% of federal income taxes, the highest 10% pay 75% of them and the top 25% are accountable for 89%. The bottom half of earners, who make below $46,627 a year, paid just 2% of federal personal income tax, according to the report.

Who pays 97% of all federal income taxes?
The top 50 percent of all taxpayers paid 97 percent of all federal individual income taxes, while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 3 percent."

And did they represent 80% of the income? Who cares, THEY EARNED IT, THEY WORKED FOR IT, AND THEY SUCCEEDED. Let's stop punishing success in this country and maybe we'll climb out of debt.

Spoken as someone trying to justify and protect the 5%.

Disclosure: I am definitely not part of 5%. While I believe I will personally benefit from parts of this bill, my country will be severely damaged by it.

Who cares? If you want to stand on the 65% of overall payments then it’s important to know the other side of the equation, the percent of overall income.

It’s interesting that we can easily find data on how put upon the millionaire class is but it is difficult to learn how much they benefit for shouldering such a burden. It’s almost as if the statistics were generated specifically to prove a point.

[Pat2015]

Originally Posted by tophcfa

The cynical part of me has me worried that this is a small bone that they are throwing out to seniors to soften the blow from future cuts to Medicare and/or Social Security benefits. I guess time will tell?

There are no proposed cuts to Medicare though the premiums will continue to increase as they have every year. There’s also no proposed cuts to SS though there are changes that include increasing the retitement age which has been done before, making more income eligible for SS taxes, and an increased vigilance of detecting fraud and prosecution for those who commit fraud. No party is cutting SS checks as that would be political suicide.

[SoCalGal]

Originally Posted by Lottoguy

The rich must pay more taxes. It’s the only way to make a dent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=661pi6K-8WQ&t=118s

[Aces4]

Originally Posted by Ptmcbriz

I think it irresponsible to be adding trillions more to the debt. Why don’t we cut corporate welfare? The true definition of socialism. Why have we been subsidizing fossil fuels, agriculture, technology over and over for decades , yet a child getting a free lunch at school is the problem. The multi millionaire and billionaires are making record profits as CEO’s yet typically pay a much lower percentage in taxes due to many loopholes. If I pay 20% in taxes, then it’s reasonable for a billionaire to pay at least 20% but most pay a much smaller % due to deductions. The 20% impacting me, is the same impact on a billionaire. That money would would greatly increase the federal government’s income which would make our problems much less. A first world country takes care of its citizens. It’s only 3rd world countries that don’t take care of their citizens. That’s the benefit of living in a wealthy advanced country. The more poor and homeless you have the uglier the country becomes both physically and financially. It becomes much more crime ridden and dirty. First world countries all create safety nets for their citizens. That’s the benefit of an advanced country. Yet somehow we continue to go backwards towards the 1930’s when there were less protections for citizens and more abuse of citizens by corporations. This is crazy.

Backwards? Lol, this country has been too generous to the poor in that we now have many more ablebodied who have found they can survive without working and many have taken the sad route of drugs.

People in the USA have become lazy so we had to bring in people who know how to work. And in 5 years or the next generation the US will have the same problem because that group of workers will have figured out the system of "getting a higher education" and not performing physical labor. Do you then bring in millions more to work to reach the same conclusion?

This touting of the poor is ridiculous when only a certain percentage of Americans are footing the bill for the rest. What did one think would happen when employers hire under the table and not providing healthcare benefits, decent wages, not paying into the SS system, no retirement benefits or 401 contributions to these off-the-record hirees.

Those poor you are mentioning are a good portion of that population along with those who work the system. Then we have the number of unwed mothers and fatherless children that need supporting. How about no children if you can't care for and feed them?

I am truly supportive of those who are poor and need extra help but there are millions of people in that hot air balloon basket that don't belong there and it ain't gonna fly no more.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Pat2015

There are no proposed cuts to Medicare though the premiums will continue to increase as they have every year. There’s also no proposed cuts to SS though there are changes that include increasing the retitement age which has been done before, making more income eligible for SS taxes, and an increased vigilance of detecting fraud and prosecution for those who commit fraud. No party is cutting SS checks as that would be political suicide.

The proposed changes that you mention are ideas to push out the date when benefits will need to be reduced. Neither party wants to do that but the math is pretty clear.

[jimbomaybe]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Spoken as someone trying to justify and protect the 5%.

Disclosure: I am definitely not part of 5%. While I believe I will personally benefit from parts of this bill, my country will be severely damaged by it.

Who cares? If you want to stand on the 65% of overall payments then it’s important to know the other side of the equation, the percent of overall income.

It’s interesting that we can easily find data on how put upon the millionaire class is but it is difficult to learn how much they benefit for shouldering such a burden. It’s almost as if the statistics were generated specifically to prove a point.

The statistics are the point , not generated but lifted from the facts a factual response to who pays how much. Spend money on themselves OK , so what , other wise known as spreading the money around .

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Spoken as someone trying to justify and protect the 5%.

Disclosure: I am definitely not part of 5%. While I believe I will personally benefit from parts of this bill, my country will be severely damaged by it.

Who cares? If you want to stand on the 65% of overall payments then it’s important to know the other side of the equation, the percent of overall income.

It’s interesting that we can easily find data on how put upon the millionaire class is but it is difficult to learn how much they benefit for shouldering such a burden. It’s almost as if the statistics were generated specifically to prove a point.

NO, it's not important or relevant.

20% of $50 million is much more than 20% of $100,000---in fact. 9,980,000 more. As their income goes up, the amount of tax goes up, so the fact that they represent more of the total income is IRRELEVANT. But it's even much more unfair than that---as income goes up, so does the TAX RATE. So, to make the numbers real, 38% of $50 million is $ 19 million, 14% of $100,000 is $14,000.

The problem is that the top 5% could be taxed at 90% and it still wouldn't make any difference in the deficit or debt---but it would bring investment and venture capitalism to a grinding halt. People shouldn't be concerned over what their neighbor pays and pay THEIR FAIR SHARE themselves

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by jimbomaybe

The statistics are the point , not generated but lifted from the facts a factual response to who pays how much. Spend money on themselves OK , so what , other wise known as spreading the money around .

My earlier point was that the money wasn’t spent, it was hoarded.

I’m good with who pays how much but if you want that to mean something you also need to tell me how much they made (income, not unrealized gains). If 65% of net income before taxes paid 75% of the taxes then great. If 50% of net income before taxes paid 65% of taxes then I have no complaint at all. But if 95% of net income before taxes paid 65% of taxes then quit the dang whining!

The statistics are based on facts but both the facts and the statistics are incomplete.

Then there are always the “three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics.”

[Pballer]

The Big Beautiful Pile of Crap bill is just that, a pile of crap. The middle class will be paying thousands more in big beautiful tariffs and getting back a fraction of that from grandiose promises that sounded good at the time but have restrictive conditions that leave you feeling that you have been suckered. Take the no tax on overtime promise. It turns out that a maximum of only $12,500 in overtime will be exempt from tax. I guess that was somehow left out of the promise. I'm sure the billionaire class got most of what they wanted in this bill though.