advertisement

The world-famous Internet site of the Nationally Syndicated Neal Boortz Show!

Search Boortz.com
Enter search terms:
Browse Boortz.com
Today's Nuze

"Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others."

Ayn Rand

Nobody's listening.

THE RICH AREN'T PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE

By
Neal Boortz
@ August 4, 2009 8:43 AM Permalink | Comments (90) | TrackBacks (0)

Well, folks. The figures are out. The latest numbers from the IRS have hit the mean streets --- and guess what? The rich still aren't paying their fair share! Well .. that will be the liberal line, but since you're reading the Nuze YOU are going to know the truth. So here it is .. the latest figures from the year 2007, according to the Tax Foundation.

The top 1% of taxpayers officially paid 40.4% of total federal income taxes. This is the highest percentage in modern history. Compare that number to twenty years prior (1987) when the top 1% of taxpayers paid 24.8% of income taxes. Now if you're not initiated into the Church of the Painful Truth you're probably thinking that the evil top 1% probably earn way over 40% of the income. Well .. you would be wrong. These nasty, disgusting and oh-so-easy to hate high-achievers actually earned about 22.8% of total adjusted gross income. And just how much does some crook have to earn to be in this top 1%? Try $410,000. Remember now .. many, if not most, of these wretched people are small business owners and their adjusted gross income is really their business income. Still .. they're nasty. Right?

Ok .. more painful truth. The share of taxes paid by the top 1% of taxpayers now exceeds the share paid by the bottom 95% of taxpayers. Again, the top 1% paid 40.4% of incomes taxes while the bottom 95% paid 39.4% of the income tax burden. For those of you who are government educated, that means that the top 1% of taxpayers (which is just 1.4 million people) paid a larger share of the income tax burden than the bottom 95% of taxpayers (which is comprised of 134 million people). This means that the evil rich are carrying the road.

The key to these numbers is that over 9 out of 10 Americans will never see them nor will anyone ever share these numbers with them. So the Democrats will, in spite of these numbers, be able to continue to demonize the evil rich and spread the lie that somehow they aren't "paying their fair share." To make things worse ... Democrat demagogues will continue to promote the idea that all of their vote-buying social welfare programs can easily be funded with additional taxes on the rich. Where do they start? When the top 1% is paying about 80% of all income taxes?

Well .. it gets worse. Now for the first time, the IRS decided to break things down even further. It presented data on the super rich, the top 0.1% of tax earners. We are talking about the top 10% of the top 1% of earners. About 141,000 taxpayers fit into this group. Those 141,000 people account for 12% of the adjusted gross income earned but they pay 20% of all federal income taxes.

Categories:

Tags:

Main Index | Archives | RSS feed

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: THE RICH AREN'T PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://boortz.com/blogging/mt-tb.cgi/38749

Jamie Dupree's Blog

If you enjoy Neal's daily chat with Jamie Dupree, you'll love Jamie's Blog! Check it out for analysis of the campaigns and goings on in Washington D.C.

Cristina Gonzalez and Laura Nunemaker assist in the daily preparation of Nealz Nuze!

Avg. rating: N/A

What others are saying

  • rebendover
    that has to be the single dumbest thing I've ever seen posted here (at least Ivan has the crazy excuse)

    let me get this straight. GDP shrank at record levels for 4 straight quarters. One actually did set a record. But, in your mind, tax receipts are down because taxes have gone up, even though they havent.

    genius!
    By snarkybird @ 08/05/09 09:07:06 AMreport abuse
  • bird squeeze
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_plummeting_taxes

    Here's a look at what happens when the Feds get too greedy.

    "The recession is starving the government of tax revenue, just as the president and Congress are piling a major expansion of health care and other programs on the nation's plate and struggling to find money to pay the tab.

    The numbers could hardly be more stark: Tax receipts are on pace to drop 18 percent this year, the biggest single-year decline since the Great Depression, while the federal deficit balloons to a record $1.8 trillion."

    One of these days maybe you'll learn. Raise taxes, income goes down. People are smarter than you give credit for. They WILL find a way to make things right.
    By Ben Dover @ 08/05/09 07:03:40 AMreport abuse
  • "fair share"
    your "fair share" would be a flat tax, but that leaves people who don't earn as much out in the cold, since a flat tax on gross income is stupid- the people who make little money suddenly make even less money, and so they stay there.
    But we don't have a "flat tax", we have a flat tax, after basic living expenses", and that rate is at about 100%
    By someguy @ 08/05/09 06:04:12 AMreport abuse
  • We're all slaves now
    The next step will be to confiscate everyone's money, except artists or course, and then give everyone the same salary
    By Dave @ 08/04/09 08:00:54 PMreport abuse
  • Obama - American Born???
    I'm with all those Republican Virginians who believe he isn't eligible to be president. When I see proof, I'll believe it - maybe.
    By Kitty @ 08/04/09 06:10:56 PMreport abuse
  • Copyleft, you idiot.
    You've never filled out a tax form - what a surprise! Capital gains are included in the AGI.
    By Morrigan @ 08/04/09 05:28:20 PMreport abuse
  • That actually was funny Snark
    The REALLY funny part is that the snide comments you make shall be proven true soon enough.
    By JoeShmoe @ 08/04/09 04:52:33 PMreport abuse
  • The liberal trolls are out in full force today
    ignore them. The wheels are coming off their little wagon.

    BTW, I really like that Obozo/Joker poster appearing in L.A. Got a big copy printed out here in my office. People love it.
    By $mooth Operator @ 08/04/09 04:30:15 PMreport abuse
  • rejoyce
    right, and what I meant was, people everywhere are not only "taking it" they understand that it works.

    the GOP is quickly becoming a party rooted in a few states in the south. Of course, this is where you all chime in and tell me you're libertarian!...oh yes, the mighty libertarians party. Heck, the Green party is bigger. And they're crazier than you folks!

    but keep up the fight! Cuz it's fun to watch!
    By snarkybord @ 08/04/09 03:58:43 PMreport abuse
  • Positive AGI?
    Am I reading correctly that this overview only includes people that actually had a positive AGI and does not even take into account anyone with no or very low (reported) income? Since we have 141 million people reporting positive AGI, how many does that leave with 0 or negative?
    By NL @ 08/04/09 03:58:02 PMreport abuse
  • You totally misunderstand
    rejoyce
    hmm, judging by how excited you people are about it, I'd say you aren't very successful in your "smacking down".

    Stupid voters.
    By snarkybird

    What it means is that we are not going to just roll over and take it. Keep up your snarkiness, hope you are getting paid well for it. Oh, not getting paid? Boy you really are stupid.
    By Joyce M/Blythe @ 08/04/09 03:43:14 PMreport abuse
  • rerexmachine
    uh yeah, you're right. Silly mean. I was commenting on the topic - percentage of total income tax paid by the wealthy and what that really goes for....

    but yes, it all comes out of your income. So does your 401k and insurance...

    but yes, lets not divert yet again to HOW the govt diverts and tracks funds. not what the actual topic is.

    good job!
    By snarkybird @ 08/04/09 03:40:59 PMreport abuse
  • rejoyce
    hmm, judging by how excited you people are about it, I'd say you aren't very successful in your "smacking down".

    Stupid voters.
    By snarkybird @ 08/04/09 03:33:46 PMreport abuse
  • Uh, Snarkeybird
    ...all those "other taxes" you mention come out of my income. Regardless of how you want to package it, any money that I have withheld or otherwise removed from my gross is a tax on my income. Federal revenues are computed on the gross of what is taken in from taxation, withholdings (which are just another form of taxation) etc...which are levied against incomes. Once the revenues are collated, they are disbursed into the different treasury coffers. Whether the money is removed when I get my paycheck or when I send a check on 15 APR is irrelevant since the Fed Gov treats the revenue the same. Bacon, sausage, chops or ribs...it is still pig, some is just sliced differently
    By Rex Machina @ 08/04/09 03:27:57 PMreport abuse
  • Crap, had to see this
    Usually just move on past snarky dismissive's stupidity but had to see this one:

    We can of course discuss those welfare programs but, in terms of social welfare paid out by your income tax dollars, compared with the other things it goes for - defense, debt, etc., it is very small by comparison.
    By snarkybird

    ONLY because we keep smacking you people down! Think where it would be if you had your way.

    It should be a part of the Federal budget AT ALL. These are these that should be taken care of by charities and local administrations. How much have you given?
    By Joyce M/Blythe @ 08/04/09 03:21:32 PMreport abuse
  • rejobschmoe
    LOL Acorn on Glen Beck?

    Let me respond with http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Grp0EByrLoE

    joke begets joke. at least one's meant to be funny...

    oh yes! See, I sidestepped the FACTS!! I cant handle the truth! Acorn is a socialst organization now in league with the president to take over the country!!! I would be shocked if you were not waiting at your door with a gun right now. That next knock could be "them"
    By snarkybird @ 08/04/09 02:55:09 PMreport abuse
  • re...again, many
    As I recall, the topic here is income tax. Medicare, Medicaid, and SS are all funded by sep taxes and are primarily paid and used by the working class.

    Are they welfare? yes, they are social welfare. Are they part of your income tax burden. No.

    We can of course discuss those welfare programs but, in terms of social welfare paid out by your income tax dollars, compared with the other things it goes for - defense, debt, etc., it is very small by comparison.
    By snarkybird @ 08/04/09 02:45:59 PMreport abuse
  • Okay Copy that was unusually dumb
    If you add in capital gains to the income and add the tax on that gain to the taxes paid, you will STILL end up with the top 1% paying a grossly unfair percentage of the amount paid by ANYONE AT ANY LEVEL. Got it? Course you just wait for your refundable tax credit. You're welcome.
    By Joyce M/Blythe @ 08/04/09 02:24:57 PMreport abuse
  • Re; the count
    The scary one is the interest on debt in 2019 is 690,000,000 from 252,000,000 in 2008
    By Bob @ 08/04/09 02:13:09 PMreport abuse
  • wow, so many people to talk to
    Ivan - "what has gone on" ...um, gosh, that's a rather large subject. Could you be more specific? BTW, my stupid sh** is at least on topic.

    ACE - I'm not saying there should be NO defense spending. I'm saying Ike was right to fear where the MIC would end up and should be one of the first places we look for abuse and waste. Your suggestion is absurd. It's driven by this same hyperbolic fear of the govt and taxes being too high and america being turned into a socialist state that is ridiculous. What you fear is more govt but you have no clue how govt is already helping ...just that more is bad.

    Jeff - you're just mad cuz I gave lebowski your cape full time. :-P "the welfare state"...me thinks you and I differ on what that is exactly. care to explain? - I have an idea what you mean but, dont want to assume and get you all worked up like Ivan.
    By snarkybird @ 08/04/09 02:10:15 PMreport abuse
  • Snarkybird
    You are not exactly accurate regarding the Federal budget. According to CBO, 21% of the 2008 budget is spent on defence; social spending amounts to 44% respectively; interest is only 8% and mandatory and "discretionary" spending is 27%. The bottom line is that the income tax is designed by its very nature to be a manipulative system that rewards laziness. If you earn more or if you make wise financial decisions, or if you have any measure of responsible financial initiative, you run the risk of having your gains taken away from you in order to make someone less inclined to better themselves feel good. Even a flat tax system would be better. And yes, you are right about cutting spending...starting with Federal welfare programs, giveaways, corporate welfares, TARPS, nationalization efforts etc etc etc. A viable financial market system thrives when left on its own devices, with minimal interference...to include prohibitive taxation schemes. I would like to see a society that managed to do better than our economic system by taxing the high achievers, and rewarding the leeches.
    By Rex Machina @ 08/04/09 02:07:00 PMreport abuse
  • Wall Street OpEd Today
    Please read the WSJ op ed "Teeing up the Middle Class" and stop attacking or defending the "rich". Also, read the NY Times Op Ed "The Rich Can't Pay for Everything". If 100% of the income of the top 5% were taxed (everyone earning over $500,000) they would still have only raised $1.3 trillion in 2006 during one of our biggest boon years. Obama's current budget is $4 trillion and there are a lot less people making $500,000. This means a middle class tax like a VAT and we join the rest of Europe with low growth and high unemployment.
    By Kujekial @ 08/04/09 01:31:45 PMreport abuse
  • Jeff
    i don't know where you get your information from ....

    military = 44.4%
    health care = 19.7%
    responses to poverty = 11.8%

    http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-military-spending

    i think you made it up.
    By tshirt-doctor.com @ 08/04/09 01:29:07 PMreport abuse
  • Half-truths... the lifeblood of talk radio
    Naturally, Neal carefully points to ONLY "adjusted gross income" when calculating how much money the rich supposedly have.

    He leaves out any mention of capital gains, which would completely destroy his argument as they represent a much greater proportion of the income of the wealthiest 1%, and are taxed at a lower rate to boot.

    After all, that "richest 1%" also controls 38% of the nation's entire wealth. To this demographic, "adjusted gross income" is code for "pocket change." The REAL money lies in capital gains, as Neal well knows.

    But then, the truth is always an inconvenience to the talk-radio drones, isn't it? Ahh, the entertainment these dunces provide.... (chuckle)
    By Copyleft @ 08/04/09 12:51:10 PMreport abuse
  • Simplistic Mentality
    Anyone who thinks we have ONE problem is really not using their brains.

    1. Welfare fraud and abuse, including too much "given fish" and not enough teaching them how to "catch fish". When Clinton did the ONE thing right, it was welfare reform, finally the number of welfare broods started to drop. Now they are on the rise again.

    2. Entitlement attitude - you may think it's a repeat of #1 but it deserves repeating.

    3. Constitutional abuse

    4. Policing the world

    5. professional lifelong politicians who build up a dependence on big campaign contributors to tell them how to vote

    6. tax system that is demonizing success, growth

    We will have to address all the above before America and the world market that depends on us, can fully recover.
    By Joyce M/Blythe @ 08/04/09 12:50:16 PMreport abuse
  • Gov't spending
    is authorized for Defense per the Constitution (so everyone should pay). What *I* object to is the 50+ weeks unemployment, never ending benefits, etc. that are taking $$ from MY wallet that *I* could be using to give to charity *I* deem worthy, or even better yet, to a family that I held off having explicity BECAUSE $$ was stolen from my paycheck each time (and if you don't think it's stolen, please enlighten me on how to get it back w/out ending up in Club Fed).
    By David D. @ 08/04/09 12:38:10 PMreport abuse
  • re: snarkybird
    I don't know where you get your information on the budget, but the #1 biggest expense in the budget is neither defense nor interest on the debt.
    http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy10/browse.html

    2008 outlays (in hundreds of millions) are, in order:

    Social Security: 617,027
    National Defense: 616,097
    Income Security: 431,313
    Medicare: 390,758
    Health: 280,646
    And THEN Net Interest: 252,757

    The amounts get substantially smaller after that(the next biggest item is education at 91,306)

    Other than national defense and net interest, all the other biggest spending programs are ALL forms of welfare. Welfare is BY FAR the largest piece of the federal budget, by a huge margin.

    In the 2009 budget national defense does finally exceed social security, but adding together all the welfare programs, welfare collectively still vastly outstrips national defense by an enormous amount.

    And hmmm, why do you suppose it is that the government is seeking to add well over 100 billion dollars to the national defense budget for 2009? That's a very large jump for one year... Curious.
    By the count @ 08/04/09 12:28:58 PMreport abuse
  • hahahahahaha.............................
    now that I'm broke and jobless the joke's on the stinkin'muslimfacsistmarxistnoncitizen osamabama...........

    don't pay no stinkin' taxes....hahahahahahahahahahahahaha
    By butt neckid @ 08/04/09 12:08:45 PMreport abuse
  • @Jeff
    I agree with Stan. You asked me a question but your tone is arrogant and immature. I do not give intolerant backwater white men my time. I suggest you read the Constitution for yuorself.
    By Stan's #1 Fan @ 08/04/09 12:04:04 PMreport abuse
  • Taxes
    "Why should they be allowed to suck up all that wealth when I get squat?
    so Stan, thanks for admitting you're a LOSER!
    By JamesJ @ 08/04/09 11:56:33 AMreport abuse
  • what you don't realize
    What you don't realize, Snarky, is that we are doing something about it... and you're helping us. Everyday with your ignorant 'snarky' comments you're helping to show just how illogical and weak the ideals of the left are. Have you ever wondered why the higher ups on the left flat out to refuse to debate the likes of Boortz and Limbaugh? It's simple, they know their ideals cannot stand up to logical scrutiny. Your statist heros instead rely on your ignorance and target your emotions in order to convince you.

    By all means, keep up the good work Snarky!
    By Rullivan @ 08/04/09 11:51:46 AMreport abuse
  • I meant to say TRY and deny it.
    By JoeShmoe @ 08/04/09 11:51:41 AMreport abuse
  • Taxes...
    I read this the other day and thought how appropriate to the current state of affairs in the USA: "You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it." (Adrian Rogers, 1931-2005)
    By Zenman @ 08/04/09 11:51:30 AMreport abuse
  • A gift for Snark et al
    This is just one thing were pissed about. Watch this to the end...if you have the balls. Then deny it.


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6896nsdYOIM&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Emoonbattery%2Ecom%2F&feature=player_embedded
    By JoeShmoe @ 08/04/09 11:50:29 AMreport abuse
  • To snarkybird
    You need to go back to your superiors and ask them why you were assigned to this message board. They must not like you. You will get destroyed here. Ignorant libs like you don't survive long here. You actually disgust me cause you believe your stupid $hit. It is BLINDINGLY obvious what is going on in this country. There are just too many people that don't understand tyranny. What has gone on in this country for the past 9 years is straight up tyranny. Explain to me how it is not.
    By Ivan @ 08/04/09 11:43:33 AMreport abuse
  • Fair Share
    I would like to see a referendum passed to
    tax Congressmen and Senators at 100% TAX RATE.

    ....shouldn't they lead by example???
    By Gerry @ 08/04/09 11:41:41 AMreport abuse
  • Taxes
    Well,
    In online arguments, the liberals have stopped using "income" as their argument to why the rich aren't paying their fair share, they are using net value of property owned as why the top 1% aren't paying their fair share.

    Regardless, we all know (well the liberals know) that rich people don't really need their money.....
    By perdidochas @ 08/04/09 11:39:12 AMreport abuse
  • To all the 'Stan's #1 Fan' Haters
    Haven't you bozos realized by now that his comments are stated in a joking manner. He is stating the opposite of his true beliefs so people can see how idiotic the liberal's arguments are. I enjoy reading his comments and you will to if you simply process them the way he wants you to.
    By Storm Chaser @ 08/04/09 11:35:39 AMreport abuse
  • PROMOTE not PROVIDE
    Promote : to help or encourage to exist or flourish; further: to promote world peace. Provide:to make available; furnish: to provide employees with various benefits.

    big difference
    By Jeff @ 08/04/09 11:33:39 AMreport abuse
  • Snarkybird has it wrong, as usual
    The largest chunk of the federal budget is the welfare state, which is not Constitutional. The Military is Constitutional, but that won't bother you one bit
    By Jeff @ 08/04/09 11:30:14 AMreport abuse
  • hope & change...
    He that lives upon Hope, dies farting......

    Poor Richard...
    By call me mister @ 08/04/09 11:29:22 AMreport abuse
  • Neil Should Pay More
    Neil has been evading taxes far too long. Pay the piper and stop whining. You are in that TOP 1% of the 10% so of course you squeal like a pig. Shut up and Pay up.
    By PainfulTruth @ 08/04/09 11:28:25 AMreport abuse
  • Re: snarkybird “I think Neal would like a similar tax applied to all with some compensation for the poor. “
    What wrong with that???????

    “The majority of which is interest on debt and defense.”
    It's supposed to be spent on defense – That is actually spelled out in the Constitution.
    “I think Neal loves America but would rather go back to an age when only wealthy, white, male land owners were allowed to vote. “
    When has he said that? Let's stick to what he's actually said.
    One could say that you advocate the complete abolition of private property and a Statist economic system and accompanying police state.
    Would it be fair to make such an unfounded accusation against you?
    By ACE @ 08/04/09 11:27:46 AMreport abuse
  • Ace & Jeff
    The Preamble does indeed say that, it's just that the meaning of welfare has changed over the centuries.
    By Joyce M/Blythe @ 08/04/09 11:26:35 AMreport abuse
  • To snarkybird
    Are you SERIOUS? What planet do you live on? Are you an American? Do you not see how bad things are? Pills? WOW. Snarky you are a troll. A bad one. You act like that Copyleft fool. You have literally one bad argument after another. You simply do not understand what soft tyranny is. You are lost. You have bought the entire lie hook line and sinker. I hope you are proud of yourself. Under achieving trash.
    By Ivan @ 08/04/09 11:21:09 AMreport abuse
  • here's your.........................................
    ok. chillin', the next time you use the phrase "the constitution......." I am goin' to seng the "leg breaker" to your house.....when he is finished he will leave you a sign.......

    I iz stoopid

    the constitution is no longer valid in this country......don't believe me????? look to d.c........
    By butt neckid @ 08/04/09 11:14:56 AMreport abuse
  • reIvan
    don't you have a pill for this? an "all is lost, can't be captured by the enemy" pill?

    Swallow, rinse, repeat as needed.

    Or, you could actually act on your convictions.

    My guess is you'll do neither but continue to complain.

    Could you at least find something useful to complain about? Like secret govt programs to create the "Amero". At least that stuff is entertaining.
    By snarkybird @ 08/04/09 11:09:19 AMreport abuse
  • Stans #1 fan
    I agree with Stans fans 2nd paragraph. It was inserted by the New Deal when the 2nd Bill of Rights couldn't be passed by FDR. Over Jeffersons and Madisons objections (two evil old white slaveholders who warned of this back door). We just haven't come to realize it since it has become the catch all for all things government!
    By Bob @ 08/04/09 11:02:22 AMreport abuse
  • reACE
    I think neal would like a similar tax applied to all with some compensation for the poor.

    I think the fairtax is rooted in consumer habits which tend to be price sensitive whereas our existing prog tax assumes people will want to make more money. I think that is more realistic.

    I think neal has this same conservative "oh! the welfare brood mares are destroying our country" mentality that is just ignorant of what we spend our federal budget on. The majority of which is interest on debt and defense. I don't understand why we'd accept that toilet seats cots $600 and never think that maybe the biggest part of our budget is the place to look for savings first. Ike was right.

    people who think welfare is the problem with our govt spending are not paying attention. they're the same people who think tax cuts without cuts in spending to offset them are different than borrowing money and spending it.

    I think neal loves america but would rather go back to an age when only wealthy, white, male land owners were allowed to vote.

    I also think neal and many other conservatives constantly whine about how bad things are here when, reality shows us otherwise.

    nothings perfect but, the constant complaining about the tax burden of the wealthy and how the poor are "livin large" is just crap.
    By snarkybird @ 08/04/09 11:01:03 AMreport abuse
  • What's fair?
    That's an easy one. The Left's idea of the rich's "fair share" is when the rich have no more money than the rest of those from whom they're trying to purchase votes. So Jeff, it'll be enough once the producers wealth have been dwindled away to the point that all are financially mediocre (at best) and "equal" in terms of their monthly bank statements. Sad day we've reached in this country. Sad indeed.
    By Chris @ 08/04/09 10:57:04 AMreport abuse
  • Re: Jeff WHERE EXACTLY does it say this in the Constitution of the United States???? Where???
    It doesn't say that anywhere – that type of wording comes from Marxism, I think that's his point. That its no where in the Constitution.

    Oh, and in case anyone is wondering, the 'general welfare' phrase was meant by the founding fathers to be in the context of only section 8 of the Constitution, and not as a rationale for a smörgåsbord of wealth redistribution schemes.
    By ACE @ 08/04/09 10:56:47 AMreport abuse
  • 1% taking 23%
    The top 1% are not *taking* 23% of the income, they are EARNING it. If you got off your a** and worked to achieve something, you could earn that much also. Why should those people who work so hard to get where they are give any of their money to you? You may work hard, but if you are only qualified to work as a cashier in a grocery store, then you are only able to earn up to a certain amount, no matter how hard you work at that job. You have to work hard to get yourself qualified for a high-paying job and then work hard at that to earn a lot of money. There are no shortcuts.
    By Rob @ 08/04/09 10:53:30 AMreport abuse
  • I Will Be In That Top 25%
    I'm not a CEO. I'm not a bank president. I am not even a small business owner. I am a Corrections Officer. This means at any given time one or all of the 124 inmates on my housing unit can take me out. However because of a contract settlement that lasted 2 years. My reward? Paying more taxes. Thanks to all of you who voted for Obama.
    By Rockhound @ 08/04/09 10:52:46 AMreport abuse
  • ACE
    they will take it in their shorts. because the Statists will get the IRS to them in jail. they're families will be homeless without a dime.

    that's the way the Statist get their way. through the use of force.

    you get the government you deserve.
    By tshirt-doctor.com @ 08/04/09 10:49:58 AMreport abuse
  • top shelfers
    So if the top 10% of the top 1% of income earners amount to only 141,000 people, the that averages out to only 2,820 of these top shelfers in each state. Subtract your pro-atheletes and other celebs and that leaves you with maybe 2,500 in each state who pay 20% of all federal income taxes. Yeah, that's logical...
    By Hank Williams' Beard @ 08/04/09 10:46:39 AMreport abuse
  • Constitution
    It says in the preamble to the Constitution that "we the people, in order to...promote the general Welfare," which has been legislated over the years by Congress and interpeted by the Supreme Court to mean "each according to his needs." I'm not saying it's right, just that's where it came from.
    By Keith @ 08/04/09 10:44:51 AMreport abuse
  • FYI to snarkybird
    You are wrong on every single point (not even going to break it down). Not only that, but your party is so damn stupid they actually think that what they are doing is helping. All it is doing is speeding up the pace at which this country is failing. The Democrats are literally bankrupting this country. Have you ever wondered who might try to foreclose on us once we are completely destitute? Sure the Republicans did this, but the Democrats are multiplying our problems exponentially. There is no way out of this except for to literally start our populace over at square one. There is no mathematical way to pay this debt off EVER. Perhaps if we taxed people at 100% we may see the debt go away in a decade. Other than that there is no way.
    By Ivan @ 08/04/09 10:43:15 AMreport abuse
  • Some Taxes we pay
    Taxes and fees imposed by federal, state or local laws.

    * Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)
    * U.S. capital gains tax
    * Corporate income tax
    * U.S. estate tax
    * U.S. excise tax (includes taxes on cigarettes and alcoholic beverages)
    * U.S. federal income tax



    * Federal unemployment tax (FUTA)
    * FICA tax (includes Social Security tax and related programs)
    * Gasoline tax
    * Generation Skipping Tax
    * Gift tax
    * IRS penalties



    * Local income tax
    * Luxury taxes
    * Property tax
    * Real estate tax
    * Recreational vehicle tax
    * Rental car tax
    * Resort tax (also known as Hotel/Motel tax, occupancy tax)
    * Road usage taxes (Commercial Vehicle Operators)
    * Sales tax and equivalent use tax



    * School tax
    * State income tax
    * State unemployment tax (SUTA)
    * Tariffs
    * Telephone federal excise tax
    * Vehicle sales tax
    * Workers compensation tax

    at what point have we reached "ENOUGH"?
    By Jeff @ 08/04/09 10:41:25 AMreport abuse
  • Grammar
    Apparently Neal was educated at a government school because he used the word 'comprised' when he should have used the word 'composed.' 'The bottom 95% of taxpayers is COMPOSED of 134 million people' OR 134 million people COMPRISE the bottom 95% of taxpayers.'
    By Christine @ 08/04/09 10:40:03 AMreport abuse
  • Re: snarkybird please, poop or get off. Have you ever considered that Neal may be patriotic?
    That maybe he doesn't like the direction this country is headed?
    Do you actually think that this road to Statism won't end in a brick wall?
    As to the fair tax – why do you have a problem with that?
    Could it be that it would limit the ability of Statist Demonrats to control the economy?
    By ACE @ 08/04/09 10:35:35 AMreport abuse
  • Hey Stan's no1 Fan
    "This is why the founding fathers declared in our constitution that the government should provide for the general welfare by giving to each all that they need and demanding all that they can from everyone. I just makes sense."


    WHERE EXACTLY does it say this in the Constitution of the United States???? Where???

    Awaiting an answer that'll never come
    By Jeff @ 08/04/09 10:34:34 AMreport abuse
  • taxes
    I work a part time job at Dominos and for most of the people that I work with, it's their only job. Well one guy that works there is married with one child and probably rents. At tax time he was thrilled that he was getting back $8,000. He couldn't wait to get a new TV and game system. I could have explained that 6k of that was welfare, but it wouldn't have made any difference.
    By panfish @ 08/04/09 10:32:32 AMreport abuse
  • I don't understand....
    What I find interesting about all these numbers is that the rich don't mind paying all those taxes. I mean let's think about it, if it were such a burden wouldn't they demand the government pass The Fair Tax. Wouldn't we hear their voice loud and clear about the injustice?

    They have enough money to launch a campaign across the media supporting the Fair Tax. The Fair Tax wouldn't need any donations because these billionaires could give them all they wanted.

    Also, I'm sure many of the over-taxed rich give thousands and thousands in campaign contributions to politicians that don't support the Fair Tax.

    Could it be that many of these billionaires don't mind paying the piper to ensure that their bought and paid for politicians do their bidding to maximize their profits?

    The only people squawking about it is conservative talk radio.

    Now having said all that, I agree it's unfair and we should pass the Fair Tax but we could use the financial support of the unfairly taxed rich to support a nationwide campaign to heavily paint the message throughout the media in all outlets. Yet they give hundreds of thousands of dollars to politicians that DO NOT support the Fair Tax. Go figure.
    By Patriot til' Death @ 08/04/09 10:32:09 AMreport abuse
  • Ha
    I laugh at these libs who just want to keep punishing those who produce, because they are clueless as to how much they power the economy. Keep punishing them? Go ahead. They'll just take their money elsewhere. And guess who will be next on the radar. That's right-the middle class. Because it all rolls downhill. Govt will get their money no matter who it is.
    Guess libs forget what happened when Clinton tried that stunt.
    By Mark @ 08/04/09 10:23:22 AMreport abuse
  • Stan's Fan is an Idiot
    Like the American "working poor" is so "third world." C'mon, spare me.

    The average "working poor" has multiple cars out front, a few actually functional, has tv's in every room of the house, has air-conditioning to stay cool in the summer, and has enough cell phones to keep texting through the worst of disasters.

    "Third world" is squatting on dirt in a mud daub hut with a grass roof.

    Americans have never had it better, and Americans, for the most part, have more stuff than anyone else on the planet. What they lack, for a huge part, is sense, honor, and respect.

    The "GIMME GIMME GIMME IT ALL" Generation is upon us and will destroy us, Obama and the hippies and office keepers in the house and senate hammering the blows.
    By John @ 08/04/09 10:22:07 AMreport abuse
  • pot
    please, poop or get off. The whining about tax burdens of the rich and famous is getting old. You don't like it, please go galt - PLEASE!! Do something! leave the country. But for god sakes, please stop whining about the burdensome tax load of whose who are in the top 1 percent.

    it just makes you look like suck ups or whiners.

    and please give up the fair tax idea. it puts you right up there with birthers. it will never happen. let it go now and save yourself the heartache.

    either way, the rest of us who get it are tired of the complaining from those of you who want more for less. you racked up a $10t debt with that approach. you're welcome - now let us fix it and quit complaining.
    By snarkybird @ 08/04/09 10:21:26 AMreport abuse
  • Uh, Neal?
    I agree with your point, but you might want to find a better resource. Those tables show that while the tax percentage paid by the rich has doubled, their share of income has tripled. That doesn't exactly make your point, does it?

    The reason it shows that is that it measures *adjusted* income, not gross income and so the poor and middle class show up with almost no adjusted income.

    I suggest using figures from Cato or Heritage or somewhere that doesn't do the bogus adjusted income BS.
    By MikeS @ 08/04/09 10:08:55 AMreport abuse
  • Top 1%
    A friend and I were talking over breakfast about this. We take the people who are arguably the most productive in America and tax the living daylights out of them. Imagine if we let them keep just half of this 40%, and the government tightened its belt a little. Now you would only do that if you really wanted the economy to recover. That would be real stimulus!

    President Obama does not want the economy to recover. He only wants to control you. How much more proof do people need?
    By Matt @ 08/04/09 10:07:11 AMreport abuse
  • Re: Stan's #1 Fan Where is Stan anyways?
    Hope you don't mind me correcting you, but your second sentence in the second paragraph of your positing should read: “IT just makes sense. “
    By ACE @ 08/04/09 10:05:17 AMreport abuse
  • Hugo the useful idiot
    Hmmm... Hugo states: "Ever notice that Neal never points out how much of a percentage of their incomes that the rich are paying in taxes? Or the middle class, or the poor? Isn't it interesting that Neal only talks about federal income tax and not the overall tax burden of the different income brackets?"

    Let's see... If I take 3/4 of 1 second and look at the far right side of table #1 we can see that the top 1% have an average of a 22.45% tax rate and their average income slit is $410k. Further, if we go to the bottom of the chart we can see that the bottom 50% have a 2.99% and $33k average respectively.

    First off - Neal doesn't have to state all of the numbers - if you were smart enough to read - you could see the numbers summarized quite nicely in a small 12X8 chart. Second the chart quite clearley supports Neal's position and makes you look like a buffoon.

    So, I'll finish with this... What percentage of taxes would you like for the top 50% to pay Hugo? 90%? 95%? 100%? If I'm in that bracket and you tax me enough - I'm going to find a way to hide my income or I'm going to quit. If you think that it won't happen - you're just a fool...
    By Axeman @ 08/04/09 10:05:07 AMreport abuse
  • Hugo, so forgetful
    He is not counting all the "refundable" tax credits the lower portion always seem to get every year. And all the free to them benefits they get at our expense.

    We could do away with ALL loopholes, if Hugo and his buddies would pay just 1-5%!!! Instead of getting back money they never paid.
    By Joyce M/Blythe @ 08/04/09 10:05:00 AMreport abuse
  • @Hugo's Ghost
    >>>>Isn't it interesting that Neal only talks about federal income tax and not the overall tax burden of the different income brackets?<<<

    Overall tax burden? What?? What other taes do these parasites pay? You think these leeches have a stock portfolio and pay capital gains??? NOT.... Maybe they benefited from the slobbering Barney Frank-in-the-mouth's subprime mortgage lending and have a couple of properties they have to pay tax on??? NOT.

    What, pray tell, taxes do these parasites pay that would make their burden so overbearing, Hugo? Huh??? Enlighten us... Other than some sales tax on cigarettes, bear claws, twinkies, and beef jerky, what on earth do they pay?

    Good grief, you libs are beyond stupid. Not only are your positions mornic, your defense and explanation of those braindead positions really sets the bar down to a level that is unimaginable.
    By Club-a-Liberal @ 08/04/09 10:01:54 AMreport abuse
  • Re: Bob - Thank you. Situations like that make you wonder why Leftists can't learn from history, that going against human nature will always result in massive Failure.
    Leftists always think of themselves as the smartest people on the planet, but they can never learn from simple lessons like that.
    What do the Statist think is going to happen to them when the rich chuck-it and go on strike and the Goodies stop flowing to the moochers.
    Anyone know of the identity and whereabouts of a Mr. John Galt?
    By ACE @ 08/04/09 09:58:57 AMreport abuse
  • @ Stan's #1
    I suggest you study the creation of wealth. There is not a fixed some of it out there. Just because someone else gets "wealth" doesn't exclude you from doing so. Understand the principles of wealth creation, then you will understand the rest of the story
    By Matt R @ 08/04/09 09:57:46 AMreport abuse
  • Response to Hugo
    Obviously you have not been listening to Neal. The poor do not pay any taxes, and he has been recomending that everybody looking for a job avoid states that withold income tax. I could go on and on...I do not uderstand your mistaken assumptions.
    By Greg @ 08/04/09 09:49:54 AMreport abuse
  • Taxes and "fairness"
    The problem with the wealth-envy shills like hugo is that, to them, "fair" is not the same as "equitable." Hugo, answer this: why the hell should "percent of income" matter? As a "percent of income," the bottom 50% pay zero. So who's getting the better deal?
    By MeFein @ 08/04/09 09:49:12 AMreport abuse
  • Taxes
    Just a perspective on the proportion of income to taxes that a small business owner has, last year my business income qualified my in the top 1%. If you subtract the taxes from the total amount I was able to take out of the business for my own use, the remainder was less than 50%. For those who attended guvmint schools, this means that I have an effective rate of more that 50%.
    By JimmyC @ 08/04/09 09:43:44 AMreport abuse
  • Why are 1% taking 23% of the income
    I agree with Stan. It's extremely disturbing that 1% of Americans get 23% of the benefits. Why should they be allowed to suck up all that wealth when I get squat? I thought this was supposed to be a free country? It sounds like a lot of people are getting a free ride from everyone else. How can you look at those numbers and think that the rich can't afford a few more dollars in taxes so that everyone can have medicine, clothing, and food?

    This is why the founding fathers declared in our constitution that the government should provide for the general welfare by giving to each all that they need and demanding all that they can from everyone. I just makes sense.

    Why should 99% of the country suffer like some 3rd world person while the Neals of the world take it all? How is that freedom?
    By Stan's #1 Fan @ 08/04/09 09:39:43 AMreport abuse
  • Be careful for what you wish for
    To Hugo's Ghost

    The wealth Envy crowd can onky assume we must have inherited or won our money in a lottery. Nothing could be further from the truth. I am deep into the top 1% and have begun making plans to stop doing business as usual. I will pay off all debt (which motivated me to work)invest in asset classes which will not generate taxable income or at a lesser rate. This means my tax bill will fall from above $500k to well below $100k. Since I have no debt I can live quite well on much less money. The bad news is 8 people will lose their jobs who have no money to fall back on. Only a socialist or idiot cannot understand this
    By Greystone @ 08/04/09 09:35:28 AMreport abuse
  • Payroll taxes
    Hugo's crying about overall tax burden. But those payroll taxes are just about the only skin the bottom 50% have in the game. FICA taxes are "contributions" or "insurance premiums". Waiving them for lower-income people would require that SS and Medicare/caid become nothing more or less than a straight up welfare program.
    By mpercy @ 08/04/09 09:27:21 AMreport abuse
  • @ACE
    Andrew Mellon became Treasury Secretary in the 20's. He "inherited" a 20 billion dollar hole, with a 72% top marginal rate. He reduced tax rates to 25%, collected massive new revenue(and a surplus). His point was taxes need to be as high enough to generate revenue, but low enough not to be worthwhile to create legal avoidance behavior (i.e. Tax Free Muni's for one). FDR was elected and raised the rates into the 70's then 91, AND RAISED 50% of the income tax revenue under Coolidge/Mellon. Some historical data for your point.
    By Bob @ 08/04/09 09:23:16 AMreport abuse
  • Hugo
    Here's the numbers from the same Tax Foundation page.

    Average Effective Tax Rate (Federal Income Taxes only)
    0.1% 21.46%
    1.0% 22.45%
    5.0% 20.53%
    6-10% 12.66%
    11-25 9.43%
    26-50% 7.01%
    <50% 2.99%
    By mpercy @ 08/04/09 09:22:12 AMreport abuse
  • Some good reading on Taxes and tax implications (not just income):

    Former Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon's book Taxation: the Peoples Business.

    Chapter 10 of New Deal or Raw Deal by Burton Folsom.
    By Bob @ 08/04/09 09:13:01 AMreport abuse
  • keep your hands off my wallet
    The wife and I are not in the top 1% but we are firmly in the top 5% and I can assure you that we pay upwards of 38% straight into the federal coffers.

    If you include the social security theft, just add another 28k on top.

    The high earners are not only paying their fair share, they are paying your fair share too.
    By esorcire @ 08/04/09 09:11:39 AMreport abuse
  • Hugo WTH are you saying
    What are you talking about? If you have a point you'd like to make then make it. Instead you just throw out some insinuation.
    By Raul @ 08/04/09 09:11:34 AMreport abuse
  • i hate it, but it seems about right
    I think the "Fair Tax" is the right way to go (have 4 autographed copies ;).
    But, 22.8% of the income earned pays 24.8% -and- 12% of the income pays 20% is not nearly as bad as I thought it would be. I hate to say it but that seems about right.
    By mitch @ 08/04/09 09:09:07 AMreport abuse
  • Do you Statist Demonrats actually think the rich are going to continue to take it in the shorts?
    Punish an activity and you get less of it.
    How long would you work if every week a thief stole most of your income?
    What would you're tipping point be? 50% 60% 70% 80%
    As taxes go up fewer and fewer people on both ends of the income spectrum will pay them, until – as with every other Statist system – the economy implodes.
    By ACE @ 08/04/09 09:05:58 AMreport abuse
  • That does it!
    From now on all transactions will be in cash only, and will not move through any banks!
    By Greg @ 08/04/09 09:05:44 AMreport abuse
  • The Generous Super Rich
    I LOVE the 141,000! Long time!
    By Jeff @ 08/04/09 08:58:52 AMreport abuse
  • Lies, Damn Lies...
    and Statistics.

    Ever notice that Neal never points out how much of a percentage of their incomes that the rich are paying in taxes? Or the middle class, or the poor? Isn't it interesting that Neal only talks about federal income tax and not the overall tax burden of the different income brackets?

    I wonder if it's because it might make his rich a$$ look bad. Say it ain't so, Neal!
    By Hugo's ghost @ 08/04/09 08:56:56 AMreport abuse
send to a friend  view as printer-friendly  RSS feeds
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement