The political knifes are drawn

[SamIam]

Originally Posted by skysidhe

As far as individuals go. This is the tax burden people have to look forward to in a shaky economic climate.


Quote:
According to calculations at mytaxburden.org, created by the Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan tax research group based in Washington, D.C.:
n A single person making $50,000 will pay $605 more in taxes.
n A couple making $50,000 with two minor children will pay $2,143 more in taxes.
n A single person making $100,000 will pay $2,105 more in taxes.
n A couple making $100,000 with two minor children will pay $4,010 more in taxes.
n A single person making $250,000 will pay $7,484 more in taxes.
n A couple making $250,000 with two minor children will pay $6,254 more in taxes.

In January, If the person making 50,000 is paying $605 more in taxes, it isn't hard to assume they will be spending less.

What's striking is the couple who make $50,000 will pay $2,105 more in taxes

What? You have completely lost me, Sky. If mytaxburden.org is putting out propaganda like what you quoted, they're about as nonpartisan as an Ayn Rand novel. Where's John Galt when we need him?

As far as your comment to Spex, I'll agree he was off base, but everyone here is bright enough to Google anything they damn well please. I bet if I searched enough I could find RavingMaoLovingHippyLiberals.org, a non-partisan group dedicated to disseminating honest to God pictures of homeless Moms and kids eating out of garbage cans.

In an attempt to verify your quote I did some Googling for myself (I got lost on mytaxburden.org). I came across my very own non partisan outfit, the taxpolicycenter.org. Here's a few of their jillion statistics, hot off the Internet as of 12/07/10:

Reported tax agreement between Administration and Congressional Republicans - percent change in after tax income:

Lowest quintile 3.7%
Second quintile 4.6 %
Middle quintile 4.4%

Fourth quintile 4.6%
Top quintile 5.2 %

Top 1% 6.3%
Top .1% 7.3%

http://tpcprod.urban.org/numbers/dis...63&DocTypeID=2

All the above percentages are INCREASES in income. As a Liberal, I'll make note of the fact that, as usual, the upper income brackets fare better than the lower ones.

But that's not my point. I'm wondering where the hell everyone gets their data and should we believe any of it? I would like to think that we could trust an outfit that labels itself "non-partisan," but obviously we can't.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by SamIam

... an Ayn Rand novel. Where's John Galt when we need him?

I have a number of bumper stickers on the back of my truck that refer to that very thing.

[TheMercenary]

As long as a minority of the electorate pays for everything those that pay little to nothing will have no problem asking them to give more as they spend more of that they don't have to pay for. Zero Liability Voters will always vote for someone or something that does not affect them financially. Always. Only when everyone has a stake in the costs and everyone one pays an equal share of the federal taxes as a percentage of our various incomes will we begin to tackle the problems that pain us as a nation....

[Lamplighter]

Merc, in this land of equality where everyone will have the same stake,
do some citizens get tax deductions / credits / exemptions
based on the form of their income (e.g., investment vs hourly wages ),
or has all of that sort of tax-avoidance been eliminated ?

Or, is taxation not based on income at all, but instead equal taxation
applied at the time of expenditures (VAT) ?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Lamplighter

Merc, in this land of equality where everyone will have the same stake,
do some citizens get tax deductions / credits / exemptions
based on the form of their income (e.g., investment vs hourly wages ),
or has all of that sort of tax-avoidance been eliminated ?

Or, is taxation not based on income at all, but instead equal taxation
applied at the time of expenditures (VAT) ?

We don't live in a land of economic equality and never have. Not everyone has the same stake in our economy, hence the phrase "Zero Liability Voter". Our progressive system is currently based only on income. I would welcome a VAT, if it replaced a huge decrease in the current tax basis for all income earners. That or a flat tax ala the Boortz plan, which contrary to it's critics would give us a lot more money than the current scheme.

[Lamplighter]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

We don't live in a land of economic equality and never have. Not everyone has the same stake in our economy, hence the phrase "Zero Liability Voter". Our progressive system is currently based only on taxable income. I would welcome a VAT, if it replaced a huge decrease in the current tax basis for all income earners. That or a flat tax ala the Boortz plan, which contrary to it's critics would give us a lot more money than the current scheme.

I added a word above...

But in your earlier post you spoke of

Only when everyone has a stake in the costs and everyone one pays an equal share of the federal taxes as a percentage of our various incomes...

So I'm curious how "equal share" is to be defined or determined.


ETA: I found this via Google search on Boortz and flat tax.
Is this what you mean ?

A 17 percent rate would apply to all taxable income, whether the taxpayer is Bill Gates, Steve Forbes or the mechanic who fixes their cars. Investment income would not be taxed at all under the individual tax, which by itself benefits predominantly higher-income taxpayers.

[SamIam]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

We don't live in a land of economic equality and never have. Not everyone has the same stake in our economy, hence the phrase "Zero Liability Voter". Our progressive system is currently based only on income. I would welcome a VAT, if it replaced a huge decrease in the current tax basis for all income earners. That or a flat tax ala the Boortz plan, which contrary to it's critics would give us a lot more money than the current scheme.

I'm coming in late here and don't feel like reading 6 screens of posts, so forgive me if you have already explained - what is a zero liability voter? It seems to me that even a guy who sleeps in the park and gets by on what he can panhandle would be effected by the economy and increases or decreases in average income. Heck, the amount of your spare change makes all the difference between a pint of vodka and 8 oz of Boone Farm!

PS Why did I know you would have bumper stickers?

[HungLikeJesus]

Originally Posted by SamIam

I'm coming in late here and don't feel like reading 6 screens of posts,...

The easy way to get around that is to change your set-up to show 60 posts per page. That way you would have less than one-and-a-half screens of posts to read.

It saves a lot of time.

[SamIam]

Originally Posted by HungLikeJesus

The easy way to get around that is to change your set-up to show 60 posts per page. That way you would have less than one-and-a-half screens of posts to read.

It saves a lot of time.

Heh! Nice try.

[skysidhe]

About these Numbers
These calculations are based on the Tax Foundation's projected 2011 tax bracket levels, which are calculated by the IRS according to inflation statistics from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). While the IRS has not officially released tax brackets for 2011 due to uncertainty about tax law changes, we use their formula to calculate bracket levels for many possible policy scenarios.
Note: To plug in your own example to see how a hypothetical family of your choosing, would fair under these alternative policy scenarios (as opposed to our three chosen examples above), visit the Tax Foundaton's MyTaxBurden.org calculator.

The Tax Policy Blog is the official weblog of the Tax Foundation, a non-partisan, non-profit research organization that has monitored tax policy at the federal, state and local levels since 1937. Our economists welcome your feedback. If you would like to send an e-mail to the author of a blog post, please click on that person's name to locate his or her e-mail address or visit our staff page

[Lamplighter]

Sky, The big difference between a Single $50K and a Couple $50K+2 minors
seems to be a (2 minors x $1K each) tax credit, not a tax deduction, in the Compromise plan.
I had not heard reports of such a major new tax break for parents of minor children.

But there is something else weird(?) in this web site.
For all the scenarios (except 1) I entered in the calculator,
there were NO differences between the Democratic plan and the Republican plan.
Somehow, I can't buy it yet that all is well in this calculator.

[skysidhe]

humm that's interesting lamp.

Well maybe someone else can try entering their information. Being an unemployed student, I am not paying much in taxes and I don't itemize anything, nor do I qualify for any credits.

There is a contact page. Maybe someone there can answer that question about the calculator. The page says they welcome feedback.

[Pico and ME]

I was leery of those numbers too Sky. How did you get those figures...did you come up with them by using the calculator or did you quote them directly?

[skysidhe]

As I posted. These came from my tax burden.org which uses IRS tax tables.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/publica...how/26320.html

[skysidhe]

ok. I put in my info and this is what it looks like.

My taxes will increase by $61 dollars if the tax cuts expire. For myself, 60 dollars is not that much of an increase, but if I were making some serious money, then I can plainly imagine having hundreds of dollars less to spend.

I am editing to say, I could use that extra 60 dollars though. To government coffers it isn't that much and doesn't hurt me TOO bad if I had to pay it.