with you Rob,

The convaluted tax code was created by lawmakers that are "beholden" to special interest groups.

Now, can someone explain to me again when politicians take money it is considered a "campaign contribution" but if a Government worker accepts anything that cost over $25 it is considered a bride?

 

Sorry Matt, but the little person does NOT bear the brunt of the tax burden. I don't have exact numbers, but it's something like the top 15 percent of the wealthly pay three quarters of the taxes. (again not exact, but close) When newspapers scream that the rich are getting all the tax breaks, it makes me want to scream right back that the rich are paying most the taxes, and deserve the breaks.
Now if you said the middle class pay more tax as a percent of their income, I would agree with you.
On the other hand I had a few clients who, due to child credits or earned income credits, got more money back than they paid in. (which sounds like welfare to me) The truely poor are NOT paying any income taxes, and I mean not a cent.

 

See how unfair this system is? It nauseates me.

 

Morris, what income is considered "wealthy"?

 

^ I think a few folks in Vintage qualify, uppity.

 

^^
I just thought you would need to look over at the Porsche Club membership... to find them..

 

I'm serious, how much? 100K? 200K? 300K? 400K? etc. or over 500K?

 

No, it's a good question. I don't know what the government defines as wealthy. I'd expect about 500K/yr, but I don't know.

 

For what its worth, the notion of wealty, just like the notion of poor and middle class doesn't have real dollar boundries. How we define any of the income and economic classes depends upon who is talking, and what point they are trying to make.

I think what Morris is trying to say is simply that those with the highest incomes pay most of the taxes. That shouldn't come as a great surprise. There are enough people with high incomes that the absolute amount of dollars collected from this group is equal to (I think Morris' number was) 75% of taxes collected. Individually, however, they are not paying the highest percentage of their disposable income in taxes. That honor goes to the middle class.

At the other end of the spectrum, those with the lowest incomes pay virtually no tax. Again, no surprise. In a progressive tax system that too is how it is supposed to be.

The problem is, as always, with the middle class. The middle class, while not paying most of the taxes in absolute dollar terms, are paying more tax as a percentage of their income than the upper classes. That is the issue.

The question that really needs to be addressed is not which group, as a whole, is paying most of the taxes, but which classes, as individual tax payers, are paying the biggest percentage of their disposable income in tax. There are many who feel that the rich should be paying at least the same percentage of their disposable income as the middle class. And, there are many who feel the opposite.

A few of us who are attending the Spring Fling have opted to take the "Legal Bill Challenge". That is we are going to avoid participating in controversial threads until after the Spring Fling. We are all really very good friends, and we don't want to get (to quote Bill) all riled up before the event. As such, I will try not to participate in a controversial way. I will only comment when I think it will clear things up. (It's killing me too, but a deal is a deal).

 

Well, hmm.... I thought you guys were trying to keep Spring Fling a politics-free zone. I guess if you guys want to bow out of controversy until after the meet, that's cool.

For my part, I will continue to poke and prod controversy.