"What is the cost of being a citizen of the most free, most fair, most safe country with the greatest opportunity of personal success that the world has ever known? Quite literally, that cost is the annual budget of the United States divided by the number of citizens: $3.8 trillion divided by roughly 300 million citizens, or $12,730 per person per year. That is the fair tax.
A single percentage income tax on all would not be fair. If we were all taxed at say, 3%, a person with income of $10,000 would only pay taxes of $300 while those earning $100,000 would pay $3,000 and those earning $1,000,000 would pay $30,000. And yet we all benefit from national defense, services that lead to social stability, the interstate highway system, etc. Why would it be "fair" to ask some citizens to pay only $300 a year for those benefits, and others $30,000? When we go to the grocery store, there is one cost for all for a loaf of bread. Why are government services so different?
But our system doesn’t even stop there. Our system uses the following graduated tax table:
Marginal Tax Rate[1]
10% $0 – $8,375
15% $8,376 – $34,000
25% $34,001 – $82,400
28% $82,401 – $171,850
33% $171,851 – $373,650
35% $373,651+
According to this current tax table, a person with income of $10,000 pays tax of $1,081, while those earning $100,000 pay $21,709 and those earning $1,000,000 pay $327,644 in federal income taxes. What is fair about that? Someone works hard to increase their earnings 100 times, only to also earn the dubious requirement of paying 303 times more taxes – for receipt of the exact same services.
Let's put this in perspective: if millionaires paid 303 times more for everything, they would pay $600 for every loaf of bread, $1,179 per gallon for gas, $2,485 for a single movie ticket, $5,357 for each pair of Wrangler jeans. Yet the liberals in this country have the audacity to declare that "the rich" should carry even more of the tax burden.
I know this is an oversimplification, and that I have not addressed things like the myriad deductions that skew the taxes actually paid. But that is a different argument altogether. My point is that it is disgusting that our President and the Democratic party are actually calling for more "shared sacrifice." Already, 43% of all Americans pay no federal income taxes.
What -exactly- are they sacrificing?"
[1] United States 2010 federal tax rates per IRS.gov.
~~
Excellent questions.
Thank you once again, dear Sandy. You're one of my heroes.
~~~
22 comments:
If the regulators regulated and corporations paid the proper tax things would be a lot better.
"$3.8 trillion divided by roughly 300 million citizens, or $12,730 per person per year. That is the fair tax."
You're suggesting that we tax every man, woman, and child, working or not, pre-schoolers, retired persons $12,730 per year? Where will your children or grandchildren be working to earn enough money to pay your "fair tax"?
"When we go to the grocery store, there is one cost for all for a loaf of bread."
National defense is not bread.
"Already, 43% of all Americans pay no federal income taxes."
Let's see. How much did GE pay?
Those 43% of Americans got the same deductions and tax credits to offset their income, just like higher income earners. Higher income earners had more income above their deductions and credits.
Those 43% also paid state and local taxes, Social Security taxes, Medicare taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes, gasoline taxes, license fees, property taxes and all sorts of taxes.
"I know this is an over simplification".
More than that it's ridiculous. There are many calling for a "flat tax" where everyone pays the same percentage of income for federal taxes. There are good arguments for and against this.
But charging a flat dollar amount to each American (let alone each tax payer) is simply loony.
Hi King~ You're probably right. Also, if 57% pop. didn't have to pay 100% of taxes, things would likely be better, or at least more "fair."
Jim~ Our author is not advocating for a 'fair tax' per person, but rather providing us a baseline for what our nat'l budget costs per person (in theory). This 'baseline' illustrates how ridiculous the Dems sound when they lambaste "the rich" for not paying their "fair share." If it 'costs' $12,730/person/year to run America, then MILLIONS of people are getting off freakin' SCOT FREE, while millions of others (i.e., 'the rich') are paying $12,730 X 100's or 1000's. And that's not fair, sir.
"But charging a flat dollar amount to each American (let alone each tax payer) is simply loony."
That's not what our author is advocating - methinks you've missed her point. But I waste my key strokes while you're off chasing rabbits...
Come back Alice!
Yes, the 43% is unreal when considered with what the media likes to portray the current system as.
"Someone works hard to increase their earnings 100 times"
What does this mean? A mine worker shoveling coal a mile below the West Virginia surface for an eight hour shift works a million times less hard than a hedge fund manager on Wall Street?
Does Paris Hilton work a thousand times harder than you, Suzanne?
"What -exactly- are they sacrificing?"
Hmmmm. Choosing between food or medications? Reduction in loans available for college tuition? Reduced number of weeks of unemployment insurance? Higher heating oil costs? Fewer teachers and higher classroom sizes? Broken down schools?
When someone making $10,000,000 a year has to live on $460,000 less for a year, is this too great a sacrifice, too much of a hardship in lowering the deficit and debt while helping fellow citizens?
To paraphrase Sandy, I think it's disgusting that our Republicans in congress believe that millionaires and billionaire hedge fund managers are being asked too much to help their country and their fellow citizens.
Suzanne,
Sandy surely does not advocate "graduated" tax rates. No conservative does. Furthermore she says, "A single percentage income tax on all would not be fair."
So she doesn't like a flat tax either.
So either Sandy advocates everyone pay the same amount ("Why would it be "fair" to ask some citizens to pay only $300 a year for those benefits, and others $30,000?"), or she advocates no income tax.
Does Sandy want a national sales tax? What else is left?
If this is just about the fact that 43% of Americans pay their taxes by means other than Federal income taxes, Why doesn't Sandy just say so? Why wait to the last two sentences of a rather long post to say so?
Slamd! Welcome!! Glad you stopped by & decided to say hey! Yep. Let's keep beating this drum, shall we. People are not hearing us yet...
Jim~ My name - as you well know - is not Suzanne. Should you continue to address me as such, I'll happily ignore your comments.
Now - "Someone works hard to increase their earnings 100 times" Means that one musters all their talents, gifts, ingenuity they possibly can in order to derive the best benefits (i.e., financial success) that this society has to offer. For some, this means that they build a life & livlihood from "shoveling coal a mile below the West Virginia surface," & for others it means being a hedge fund Mgr., or (if they like sl*tting themselves about) a 'Paris Hilton.' That's what's great about America -- we have the FREEDOM to achieve, or NOT achieve; the freedom to use our God-given talents to the best of our ability, and that does NOT mean that we'll all have equal lifestyles, work hours, or sense of positive well-being derived from our vocation. (BTW, you're clearly equating wealth w/ happiness/pos.well being, which I do not. So, the assumption-basis of your argument is flawed at the outset.)
See Jim, that's the problem w/ the Left - you guys insist that everyone should be the SAME. And if they're not then, dam&*%, we should FORCE those who are more 'fortunate' (by whose standards??) to "sacrifice" more - entitling those who "sacrifice" very, very little to do @#$% for the benefits provided by the 57%.
And FURTHER, why - oh dear Jim - why should those who've already paid more than their fair share of taxes -- & had their $$ SQUANDERED by a Government that refuses to live w/in its means -- be forced to cough up EVEN MORE $$ to that same grotesquely irresponsible institution? AKA the Federal Govt.
They shouldn't & won't, if some of us have ANY say in the matter...And we do.
As for the philosophical points Sandy made in her piece, & your questions --- I'll leave that response for her, when she has time to stop by.
What I advocate is a reduction of the numerator in my fair tax calculation. What is loony is a government that ACTUALLY spends $12,730 for (in Jim's words) every man, woman, and child, working or not, pre-schooler or retired, taxpayer OR NOT.
I don't think that the income of a hedge fund manager, Paris Hilton, Warren Buffet, Joe the Plumber, a coal miner or the whore on the local street corner is any of my business, Jim's business, or Big Brother's business b/c I know the a-hole, communist, Democrats in DC will use the knowledge just as they are - to confiscate the fruits of other's labors and redistribute as they see fit and in the manner than most benefits their corrupt political careers.
Even so, I am not advocating a flat amount of tax for every citizen. While this would be truly fair, we all know that society is just too full of those who are incapable of survival in a fair environment. There will always be those of us who have to pay more than our fair share. I do it every year, without fail. No cheating or funny stuff on my tax return.
Why? Because I love this country down to my little toes. I love that I can state without fear what I think is fair and unfair in our system. I love it that Jim is free to rebut with his own delusional and illogical opinions. I even love that the son of an African with the last name Obama can ascend to our Presidency.
Because I love this country, I cannot sit silently while the government proposes policies to discourage, punish, and pillage the most productive among us. We are TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY. The problem is the numerator.
Susannah, I humbly beg your pardon for the slip of the keyboard.
"and that does NOT mean that we'll all have equal lifestyles, work hours, or sense of positive well-being derived from our vocation."
I've never heard of anyone in this country who believes such a thing.
"BTW, you're clearly equating wealth w/ happiness/pos.well being"
Clearly I am doing no such thing. We were talking about how "hard" someone works. I was asserting that it was nonsense to suggest that wealthier people work harder than the less wealthy.
"So, the assumption-basis of your argument is flawed at the outset."
Ummm, nope.
"See Jim, that's the problem w/ the Left - you guys insist that everyone should be the SAME. And if they're not then, dam&*%, we should FORCE those who are more 'fortunate' (by whose standards??) to "sacrifice" more - entitling those who "sacrifice" very, very little to do @#$% for the benefits provided by the 57%. "
Gifted in the art of straw man making, aren't you, Susannah? Nobody insists any such thing. Certainly not I, nor anyone else I've ever heard or read about. This is a conservative straw man, nothing more.
"What I advocate is a reduction of the numerator in my fair tax calculation."
That's all well and good. I don't think many people would disagree. But the current president and Democrats cannot be solely held responsible for the "sins" of congress and administrations since 1980.
"I know the a-hole, communist, Democrats in DC will use the knowledge just as they are - to confiscate the fruits of other's labors and redistribute as they see fit and in the manner than most benefits their corrupt political careers."
It's amazingly hypocritical of you to suggest that such goings on should be attributed solely to the Democrats when all but about $4-5 Trillion of the current debt was incurred by Republican presidents from Reagan to Bush 43.
"communist, Democrats". Pffft!
"I love it that Jim is free to rebut with his own delusional and illogical opinions."
Name one delusional or illogical opinion on this post. Please. Don't just say it. Point it out.
"discourage, punish, and pillage the most productive among us."
I guess "income" equates to "most productive" in your world. Well, I fall into your "most productive" category, income-wise, and I don't feel discouraged, punished or pillaged in the least.
You LOVE this country SO much. How can you love a country that apparently steals the fruits of your labor?
Sandy, darling~ I hear choirs singing, harps thrumming & the joyous rustling of angels' wings (ok - maybe not on the 'wh@re' word)...and I am standing & applauding. (Oh, & I LOVE the tee!!)
Jim, dear~ No scarecrows, sir. I've blogged w/ you long enough to know your position pretty well: "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." Or pretty close, eh? I'd say my argument addressed that pretty closely.
'Straw man,' is what you holler when the redistributionist cr@p has been refuted & darned well put in its place. Dog won't hunt here, Jim. Try again - use some logic this time.
re: loving our country - it's BECAUSE people like Sandy love this country that she & those like her will no longer sit silently by & allow the Govt. to squander, ad nauseum, the 'fruits' of anyone's labor. In addition, it's people like Sandy who have been fussing about the Republicans' overspending, fiscal irresponsibility long before BHO arrived. Sorry to let the air out of your tire, Jim. She's still right.
"I've blogged w/ you long enough to know your position pretty well: "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.""
Ummm, no. You must be thinking of someone else. I've never said it, implied it, believed it or advocated it. Better reread your blog. It's someone else, apparently. Not me.
No, straw man is when you create a "position" that your opponent doesn't hold in order to argue against it. See "from each" above.
"In addition, it's people like Sandy who have been fussing about the Republicans' overspending, fiscal irresponsibility long before BHO arrived."
This might be more believable had she not said, "I know the a-hole, communist, Democrats in DC will use the knowledge just as they are - to confiscate the fruits of other's labors".
Not buying it.
James~ By the context of my comment, one can infer that I know full well the defin. of "straw man," & we simply - strenuously - beg to differ.
Most everything you've posted along the way indicates you're far more in sync w/ Karl Marx than, say, John Burch. No? Know thyself, dear Jim. Denial can be a lonesome place to live.
(But now we're off topic...)
A couple of decades ago, a fellow employee from Africa was naturalized. We all went with him and his family to the ceremony. Afterward, we handed him a gag invoice for his part of the national debt. I forget the amount now, but it was several thousand dollars.
His wife wasn't amused as I remember.
What are they sacrificing? OUR SANITY!
Crucis, good one!
Z! "Sanity" Amen!
You deleted my post? Why?
The big issue with America is that both parties the Democratic Party and the Republican Party have rich people as their voters and supporters; so, neither of the two parties will confront the real problems of which the tax problem is only one of them.
It is the rich that bring all those third world people into the country to do the dirty jobs for them. It is the rich who contribute , actively and passively, to lowering of expectations in schools and places of work so that to enable the descendants of these workers ( in order to maintain quiet) - to become what they are not so fit for.
Now, that one of these descendants got president, the rich started to whine style "I want my country back". Oh yeh? It's a bit too late. It could lead to civil war.
What the world should learn from America is: don't allow people to get too rich, keep an eye on the so-called 'liberalism', and be very selective about immigration. Otherwise, your country will go kaput.
Well my last post, deleted apparently, must have really struck a nerve because I didn't swear or call anybody names.
Jim: "How can you love a country that apparently steals the fruits of your labor?"
Like most liberal/progressives, you believe that the government is the country.
It is the government that confiscates our money to waste it on "bridges to nowhere," not the country.
If we were still a government of the people, by the people and for the people that case might be made.
But we have become a people of the government, by the government and for the government.
In the mean time, there is not one person who does not have the opportunity to be as rich or as poor as he/she chooses. Not even physical handicaps can get in the way. Witness: Steven Hawking.
Now don't misunderstand. There ARE people who CANNOT work because of life circumstances, and they should be taken care of. Whether by the government or other entities is discussable.
As to taxes: A flat tax on every earned dollar above the poverty line is the only way to tax fairly. Every other way is unfair to somebody.
"Like most liberal/progressives, you believe that the government is the country."
Another straw man. I've never said it, believed it, or advocated it, nor have I read anybody else saying it, advocating it, or believing it.
You've made that up or borrowed it from someone else who made it up.
"It is the government that confiscates our money"
It's never confiscated one cent of my money. I don't like paying taxes anymore than anybody else, but I DO know that I have to contribute to the things I need and want my government to do for its citizens.
"But we have become a people of the government, by the government and for the government."
Excuse me but I think you are confusing "the government" and Wall Street. Do you honestly believe that "the government" acts on its own behalf and not on behalf of those who put money in the campaign coffers of the lawmakers?
"there is not one person who does not have the opportunity to be as rich or as poor as he/she chooses."
"The" opportunity. Do you believe that everyone has the same, equal opportunity to become wealthy? It's just a matter of working "hard enough", huh?
"Witness: Steven Hawking."
Hawking is English. I doubt he is exceptionally wealthy. No doubt makes most of his money from book sales, but I'm pretty sure he's not in Trump's league.
"A flat tax on every earned dollar above the poverty line is the only way to tax fairly. "
Why should people below the poverty line get off? That's not fair.
You obviously haven't figured out that millionaires make their money through capital gains and dividends which are taxed at 15%. The same as someone who makes 20.000.
Buy a vowel. Do something to get a clue.
Post a Comment