With THAT we can agree Djplong. I seem to remember when there was some kind of "luxury tax" and people stopped buying "yachts."
It put many people out of work.

Locally (meaning here in New England), it killed boatbuilders in Maine and Connecticut.

Rich and Poor
 

"The poor complain about the money they can't get, and the rich complain about the money they can't keep"

The fact of the matter is that the so-called "rich" are will probably stay rich through good times and bad. If the government creates an environment that is hostile to business, they will not invest.

Being envious of people who have money is just foolishness.
Ambitious people who have the means to get richer, are the ones that create good jobs.

Anyways, that is my thought for the day. Must go and rest now.

Conservatism
 

You just decribed "fiscal conservatism101"

You might want to check your sources.....


http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...5865964.column

These guys made $108 million dollars between 2004 - 2009 and paid $0 dollars in taxes.

I knew somebody might post this story. As a sports fan, I heard a lot on this the last few days, and I would be glad, if time permitted to find stories of folks ripping off the system and everytime we hear it we get upset and rightfully so.

HOWEVER.....

In taking your advice to find sources...

"The highest earners pay the lion's share of the dollars Uncle Sam collects.

The top fifth of households made 56% of pre-tax income in 2006 but paid 86% of all individual income tax revenue collected, according to the most recent data available from the Congressional Budget Office.

Narrowing in further: The top 1% of households, which made 19% of pre-tax income, paid 39% of all individual income taxes.

The trend is similar if you count income taxes, social insurance taxes, excise taxes and corporate income taxes (such as capital gains) combined. The top fifth of households paid 69% of all federal taxes. The top 1% paid 28%."

http://money.cnn.com/2009/04/15/pf/t...east/index.htm

"Percentiles Ranked by AGI
AGI Threshold on Percentiles
Percentage of Federal Personal Income Tax Paid

Top 1%
$410,096
40.42

Top 5%
$160,041
60.63

Top 10%
$113,018
71.22

Top 25%
$66,532
86.59

Top 50%
$32,879
97.11

Bottom 50%
<$32,879
2.89

Note: AGI is Adjusted Gross Income

Source: Internal Revenue Service"http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pa...ome-taxes.html


In 2007, the top 1 percent of tax returns paid 40.4 percent of all federal individual income taxes and earned 22.8 percent of adjusted gross income. Both of those figures—share of income and share of taxes paid—are significantly higher than they were in 2004 when the top 1 percent earned 19 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI) and paid 36.9 percent of federal individual income taxes.

The 2007 numbers show that the top 1 percent’s income and tax shares reached all-time highs for the third year in a row. That is likely to reverse direction when data from recessionary 2008 is published a year from now.

For the first time this year, we are also presenting data on the top 0.1% of tax returns (the top 10 percent of the top 1 percent). This 10 percent of the returns in the top 1 percent amounts to only 141,000 tax returns but accounts for nearly 12 percent of the adjusted gross income earned and approximately 20 percent of the nation's federal individual income taxes. The average income for a tax return in this top 0.1 percent is $7.4 million, while the average amount of income tax paid is $1.6 million, indicating an average effective individual income tax rate of 21.5 percent. This very top income group actually has a lower average effective tax rate than the rest of the top 1 percent of returns because these extremely high-income returns are more likely to have income from capital gains and dividends, which are typically taxed at lower rates. (Note that in the case of capital gains and dividends, in most cases the income has already been taxed once by the corporate income tax, which is not included here.)

http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html


There are more sources, and lest you want to say how the Bush tax cuts or any tax cuts "favor" those who make more money....DUH.....of course it does when you cut taxes across the board. They are still paying the same percentage of what is paid.

Then you add the following...

"In 2009, roughly 47% of households, or 71 million, will not owe any federal income tax, according to estimates by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.

Some in that group will even get additional money from the government because they qualify for refundable tax breaks.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/30/pf/t...axes/index.htm

There is nothing wrong with my sources. There are tax cheats on both sides of the aisles. Obama has surrounded himself with tax cheats. Rich families like the Kennedy's hide their money, too.

I would ask what tax cheats but you are mostly likely referring to some appointees who didn't pay some taxes owed but then did. But obviously you didn't read the link....I never said they were cheats and the link clearly indicates all of this was legal.

And this would be the second time you used the Kennedy example....sounds like a fixation to me.

Something my father told me very early in life is still true. He said in order to pay taxes you have to make money.... So I am ok that I pay more taxes than my sisters because I make 3 times the amount of money they make that is just rational. They got the stimulus check I did not...no big deal.

Some posts quote tax rates but that is just the tip of the iceburg...to rip off a phrase "Its the deductions stupid". (No personal reference intended"

Another reason there is no jobs is because Obama said that he would increase taxes for people making over $250,000. Nothing like a little encouragement for people to strive to better themselves, huh?
There is an expression that has been making the rounds for a couple of years and it is called "Going Gault". That means business people and professionals like doctors and lawyers, have decided to stop making money once they reach the $250,000 plateau. They are cutting back and spending more time on personal pursuits like hobbys and family relations. Their incentives are on hold until the business climate changes. When the president of the United States sets a tone to penalize the people who make this country work, we are all in trouble.

cologal: The Kennedys are just a prime example of political hypocrisy - that's why people mention them.

The most egregious offense was when matriarch Rose Kennedy died. She'd spent her last couple of years in Massachusetts yet, upon her death, the family claimed FLORIDA residence to avoid paying MA estate taxes.

Evidently Ted Kennedy did the same thing, selling the compound in Hyannisport for $1.00 (estimated value between $5M and $8M depending on who you listen to) so that he qualified for Florida residency. I believe Florida tightened their laws since the Rose Kennedy 'stunt', hence the reason Ted might have had to sell.

The rich do not in any sense of the word make this country work.They do everything in their power to make sure they hold onto as much of their wealth and power as possible.Thats what they are supposed to do. Tax laws,investment laws,estate taxes all fovor the rich and punish the middle class. The rich by spreading the false notion that they are the jobs creators and by using their money to influence politicians have somehow talked some of you into feeling sorry for them. Well they don't feel sorry for you.
Djplong unwittingly made this arguement for me. The Kennedy reference is not important. What is important is the rich finding another loophole so they do not pay taxes.
Tax tables can be quoted until we are dead. Here is the only stat that matters......1984 the wealthy paid 50% tax rate and were doing quite well. 2010 the wealthy paid 16.6%tax rate and are laughing all the way to the bank with the money. I'm sorry not the bank ,no tax loopholes there.

WAYNE.....with all due respect, you just say stuff !! You quote things totallly out of context.

You make very little sense !

:agree: Apparently he did not read the real figures.

As a retired teacher I am very familar with the leftest rant. Wayne, the next time you go to a concert or other public event, in your home town, look at the program. The sponsors are corporations and wealthy individuals. I got so tired of listening to the teachers, in the teacher's lounge, moaning and groaning about how teacher were so mistreated and so under paid.

Let me understand here.... No tax increases have occurred but just because Obama said he would increase taxes on people over $250,000 that is why this is a job less recovery? So what caused all the job losses in the last year of the Bush presidency?

I believe that the middle class is the engine of the economy...these are the people who have cut back and in many cases are down. Doctors and lawyers are still ok....

All we have to look at is the Wall Street bonuses which quote "Had to be paid due to contractual agreements" while the Union contract were thrown out to "save" the auto industry. Double standard....

Leftest....LOL another one going back to the 50's.

Just why is it ok to respond that the Kennedy's did it to? That is the stock standard answer for both sides....Obama bashing is ok because Bush was bashed. Democrats using the filibuster brought out howls of "Up or Down vote" now a single senator held up all the outstanding nominations for a earmark. The Republicans used reconciliation what 21 times but it is wrong to use it for the Healthcare Bill? Is this kind of partisanship what the founding fathers envisioned? Does anyone win? Nope we all lose.

I don't think the founding fathers envisioned a socialist in the white house either.

He is NOT a socialist.....he is a US citizen. Deal with it.

That doesn't make any sense. One has nothing to do with the other. Even if he is a citizen, he can still be a Socialist.

Cologal: You asked why people always mention the Kennedys, I was responding to that. I thought that providing an example of Kennedy tax hypocrisy would demonstrate the point. In other words, it's ok for Ted Kennedy to hike your taxes, but he does his damndest to avoid them (including selling the estate for $1 in 2008!).

When he is one of 'the liberal leaders', he should be held up to a standard that doesn't fail the "do as I say, not as I do" test.

It's the same thing that brings down other politicians, evangelists - anyone who preaches what other people should do.

A real test of do as I say not as I do is looming with
 

the ethics committee and our dear old liar/cheater Rangel. Let's see if the Dems demand the same for him that they raised cane about with Tom Delay....

anybody wanna take bets?

btk

No actually I didn't ask why people always mention the Kennedys. In another string I called Sen. McCarthy a mean drunk and the retort was Ted Kennedy was a drunk. I posted a link about the owners of the LA Dodgers legally paying absolutely zero taxes although they took in millions. The retort, from the same person was, there are tax cheats on both sides the Kennedy's do it. So I said this person seemed to be fixated on the Kennedy's.

My point in this thread is more tax options are available to the rich than to the middle class...I would be in favor of a flat tax for both people and business. Quite often business comes in gets tax breaks from local and state government based on promises but somehow things just don't work out. I have sure seen it in Colorado Springs a city completely under conservative control, the TABOR law and so totally out of money.

What do you want to bet? A beer at the square? I'm in.

Just you saying, or maybe it was Glen Beck, he is a socialist or racist or not a American citizen doesn't make it so. This is a free country and you can be a member of the Socialist party...nothing wrong with that. My nephew is fighting in Afghanistan right now right in the middle of that battle we have all been hearing about. Many brave men and women have died just so we can have free speech and be members of the socialist party.

If you abhor all things socialist have you turned in your Social Security and Medicare cards yet? I know you have to be against all those socialist entitlement programs.

First you say B. Hussien Obama is not a socialist, then you say it doesn't matter. These socialist entitlement programs are bankrupting the USA and now he he trying to get yet another one. (health care)
He has tripled out national debt in one year. This man is dangerous and a threat to our future.

I bet they do nothing
 

Yes after Pelosi and the Dems wanted Delaney out of there I do wonder how they will react. Rangel chairing the Ethics committee. Is this a joke ot what?:highfive::highfive:

Cologal, I can't answer for Donna2, but I will answer for me. No I will not turn in my social security or medicare cards. I wasn't given a choice. I was forced to particiapate. I would much rather have been able to invest MY money as I saw fit. When Bush tried to allow young people to put part of their money aside, as they wanted to, he was demonized.

Sally Jo, your answer is exactly my answer. And now they want to add another boondoggle entitlement to further our descent into a Banana Republic.

Please explain what point you are making, in relation to how many folks DO NOT PAY AT ALL and include your opinion of the percentage of the TOTAL tax revenues paid by income !

Thank you

The name of the thread is Where Did the Wealth Go? I am just trying to show that the wealth some of us middle class people had went to the wealthy,where else would it go?

Well, keep track of your taxes as we roll out Govt insurance, cap and trade etc.....cause somebody has to pay for it !!! And if you believe your are exempt because you make less than 250,000 you are not paying very close attention to what is actually happening and more attention to the words.

And will check backlater on that CT retirement fund !

I do not want to pay more taxes,no one does,maybe we could just level the field a little more.
Sorry to not respond to CT.teachers. The post you sent me is for the Ct. state employers Retirement system a system teachers are not part of. I don't know when teachers decided to not join and have their own retirement system but they did.(First sentence under Tier 1) our system is entirely independant of that retirement system.
I do understand that pensions are having a bad effect on state govt's but they also spend money like drunken sailors. I do know that our state employees have either given back or delayed some of their benefits and the state is asking for more. To blame all the problems on state pensions no matter who they are for and how they are funded is just much too simplistic. Again I can only speak for CT. but the size of state gov't and all the bureaucracy that goes with it is a major factor in CT's debt. Layer upon layer of supervisors,spokesmen and nobody really knows what they do or where the money goes.Example Just last month it came to light that the drinking water bill for state legislators was $300,000.Poland Springs laughed all the way to the bank. I don't know where you are from but I'll put up our state buildings against any others. We are the Taj Mahal of state buildings.
This will be my last post for awhile and I know you and I have differences and I don't agree with some of your views but I did enjoy the sparring.

Our economy is NOT a zero sum gain as many liberals like to believe. What one side gains the other loses is simply not the truth.

You better hope they don't level the playing field. The top earners pay most of the taxes. If they level the field, you will have to pay more then half your income to taxes.
I just had my taxes done yesterday. Years ago I would be unhappy today. We celebrated last night when we got back from the taxman. Half the people in the USA are on a free ride. Now they want "free" health care?

He is not a Socialist and this is a free country which means that any one is free to be a socialist if they choose to be.

Where was the Tea Party when Bush was running up the debt? I didn't see anyone screaming about the out of control spending then....where was the outrage?

So totally bogus....the companies are taking away standard pensions and forcing us into 401K's. Wall Street takes the money and invests it, I would use that term loosely these days, pays themselves big bonuses and when the whole thing blows up then they demand a taxpayer bailout. And you want Social Security to be subject to that?

The intent of Social Security privatization was for the Wall Street fat cats to make even more money. Count me out I sold all of my stocks and my families stocks....

So you agree that you and your bunch elected a socialist?