So do you Socialists want to raise taxes on the rich?

[Dargil]

The Tax Foundation's Summary of Federal Income Tax Data outlines the following distribution of income taxes paid:

Top 1% of taxpayers (The Richest) earn 20.6% of all adjusted gross income, but pay 38.4% of all federal income taxes.

Top 10%: Earn 50.3% of total income and pay 70.5% of all income taxes

Top 25%: Earn 72.8% of total income and pay 86.3% of all income taxes.

Middle 20%: Pay 10.1% of all taxes

Bottom 50%: Earn 12.3% of total income and pay 3.3% of all income taxes, facing an average tax rate of just 3.7%.

Lowest 20%: Pay 1.5% of all taxes

The upper 50% pay nearly 97% of all federal individual income taxes.

The lower 50% responsible for the remaining 3%

I think we already do.

[Chazmatazz269]

Sort of. It would be nice if the wealthiest people and organizations didn’t also have the most tax advantages, abatements, exemptions, credits and loopholes. But what you’re really getting at is the fact that everyone with an IQ over seventy knows that the wealthiest people and organizations will always get out of paying their fair share. So politicians who promise to “tax the rich” are really just using propaganda to recruit morons to vote against their own interests. They will and when the rich and powerful greased pigs slide out, those same politicians will proceed to tax the middle class who don’t have the same exit strategies. Those politicians will still manage to get rich while taxing the working class into poverty.
This literally has nothing to do with “socialism”. This has been the de facto tax policy in the USA for generations. The entire “trickle down economics” argument from the Reagan era was built on this model. It’s called supply side economics in the books. It’s where two “competing” businesses simultaneously artificially raise their prices because they command the majority of market share. In the US in particular, those two companies often overwhelm smaller competitors that lower prices in order to compete (demand side economics). The US hasn’t functioned on economic demand in decades. Beyond that those same companies own so much of the market that they can bribe politicians for favorable legislation. And if they can’t bribe sitting politicians, they can fund campaigns to install new candidates who will support their demand for ever more money and power.
To everyone who throws “socialism” around like a dirty word, this is just good business! Capitalism, as good as it gets! 😂😂😂😂
Look at every sitting politician who has been there for decades. They’re not all democrats and they’re not all republicans, but they ALL legislate in favor of the rich and powerful, including themselves. That’s literally the only way someone can hold a seat for that long. The plebeians are way too fickle.
I’m all in favor of people getting as rich as they want to be through capitalism. But when they interfere with our government in that vain, it should be a crime. When my livelihood is altered because the rich and powerful paid for legislation that only benefits them, and everyone else suffers, it’s absolutely no better than the “socialist” regimes you’ve imagined but never actually observed, let alone experienced.

[Effably]

I am technically not a socialist but lwan more right. However this is basically just an illiterate person's take on taxes.

They use AGI, adjusted gross income, as the benchmark in this and compare it to various taxes paid that are not limited to being paid on the AGI amount. Thus overstating the share while understating the income.

Excluding MOST sources of income for how much a person with wealth actually earns. And including taxes paid on different sources of income is at best incompetent and at worst utterly dishonest.

They then proceed to use this false representation of income to overstate the now no longer true representation of tax burdens.

To anyone without a degree in economics this is basically as if you and I had a business. Our business made 1 million $. I then paid myself 998 000$ in compensation. With 2000$ left I give you 1000$ of our profit and keep 100$ for myself. I now claim you earn what I do and just ignore my 998 000$. Because we used an adjusted income and I did not include my other sources there. Yet I paid a small amount of tax on those other sources so I get a high tax percentage on the 1000$ I included - but a laughably small one on the 999 000$.

This is the same sort of true but statistical misrepresentation that caused the whole pay-gap feminism stuff a decade ago. Grow up and use real math. Stop using professional jargon to lie to people.

Also the general claim is to start taxing non-taxed income. Which isn't even included. It is about taxing hidden income not raising the tax that already does not access it.

[jamesgoldman]

That's why the left are aiming for 110% taxation on everything, everyone has ever owned

[Effably]

A sort of wealth tax is indeed a common idea. Not 110% mind you. The core idea is that if I can own stocks, use those instead of money to buy stuff, then my stocks should be taxed too.

The exact implementation of this is far more complicated and there is no agreement on it. The fact that our current tax structure is not made to account for other sources of capital is not debated.

Naturally whether you think taxes are good or bad is.

And for anyone who read this much. While the source here, Taxfoundation, is a reputable source they are sponsored by a lot of corporations and are pretty well known for having published material advocating tax cuts for the wealthy since their inception. They are also well known to lean right despite claiming to be non-partisan.

There is nothing wrong with using a right-wing think tank as a source but it is important to know that is what it is. This particular paper they should be ashamed of though. It is basically real numbers and a whole bunch of implied lies about what those numbers actually mean. Fine for me to read, I scoff at it and know what is nonsense. But I do not blame the poster for not having the same background.

Misinformation is a bad basis for discussion.

[jamesgoldman]

Unfortunately that is what the far left want, remember you will own nothing and be happy about it

[Dargil]

Obfuscating a clear situation with blather, Kind of ineffable.

[Effably]

Clarifying lies, Dargil. And to your merit mind you. Surely you did not want to mistakenly misinform GAG with false reports? If anything I would expect gratitude.

[Dargil]

@jamesgoldman They are unhappy unless they are unhappy.

[Paige2006]

Yes they do so they can pay for their free stuff

[Ariesman81Nshiiit]

Not to mention... the top 30% earners are responsible for creating the jobs that then in turn generate even more of the income tax. New York and California are figuring out what happens when you increase taxes on your income generators.

[strateguy632]

omg! i did not realize it was so unjust! they pay more than a fair share.

[DonaldDarko]

They're a bunch of commies. They don't even think people should own things at all.

[slatyb]

We should repeal the Trump tax cuts, then the Bush tax cuts, then the Reagan tax cuts.

[Just_Ken]

They say they do to get elected.

[exitseven]

It is never enough with these people.

[noohair]

Half the population pays zero taxes. is that fair?