Barber wrote:Why does the social contract only come to play when someone is being deprived of benefits. Doesn't the social contract also mean that Californians ought to be able to reallocate some of the $68B we send to the rest of the country so that we can put our own economic house in order, and then resume paying for others?
the S contract is always in play, through state and federal congress. Signed, sealed and delivered. Reallocation will adjust as belts snug and people suffer, the starving will not be thrown from the boat, none want a mutiny.
Barber wrote:Mike? So? Corporations pay those taxes as a result of money we give to them for services. We still, ultimately, pay the revenues that pay the taxes.
1. that money ends up with the feds, not in the corporations pocket (as a whole, there is disparity among corporations as well). We all paid paid prices we could bear, or took on credit. 2. The main "SO" was the ratio of corp/individual compared by nation. the corporations don't exactly get a free ride.
Barber wrote:No I'm not, because about.com is not a government site. It may say "usgovinfo" but it is no better or reliable a resource than is Wikipedia. I use blue (since you didn't like my red) to highlight where this is hardly authoritative or unbiased reporting.
----According to the ---Office of Tax Analysis---,
cynic wrote:"Feeling overtaxed? Under the U.S. income tax system, most of the taxes collected are supposed to be paid by the people who make the most money. Thanks to President Bush's tax cuts, that is exactly the way the system works, says the U.S. Treasury Department.
----According to the ---Office of Tax Analysis---, the U.S. individual income tax is "highly progressive," with a small group of higher-income taxpayers paying most of the individual income taxes each year.
•In ---2002--- the latest year of available data, the top 5 percent of taxpayers paid more than one-half (53.8 percent) of all individual income taxes, but reported roughly one-third (30.6 percent) of income.
•The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 33.7 percent of all individual income taxes in 2002. This group of taxpayers has paid more than 30 percent of individual income taxes since 1995. Moreover, since 1990 this group’s tax share has grown faster than their income share.
•Taxpayers who rank in the top 50 percent of taxpayers by income pay virtually all individual income taxes. In all years since 1990, taxpayers in this group have paid over 94 percent of all individual income taxes. In 2000, 2001, and 2002, this group paid over 96 percent of the total.
The White House has announced it will lobby Congress to pass legislation making most of President Bush's tax cutting measures permanent."
It appears this document hasn't been updated for roughly five years. I might also note that "top 50% of all taxpayers" is a ridiculous measurement. In 2007, using the statistics of The Tax Foundation, the average income for the top 50% was $1,083,243. Average. Go back and look at that number. Average. ----I'm in the top 20% and can assure you my own income is nowhere near a million buck, so somebody is skewing the average towards the top----- and it's above my own bracket.
The average for the bottom 50% is $32,261. Average.
In 2007, the top .1% -- one tenth of one percent -- of taxpayers earned 11.98% of the income in the country. The bottom 50% earned a smidge more: 12.26%.
(The source cited by the Foundation is the good ol' US IRS)http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/23408.html
the numbers work steve "•The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 33.7 percent", the top 20% just doesn't put you in the "ultra", it's a modified bell curve.
the '05 data from Office of Tax Analysis indicate an even more "ridiculous measurement"http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/rep ... s_0508.pdf
Department of the Treasury May 2008 (page 2)
cynic wrote:unless of course you insist that only reps & teabaggers and cash based criminals cheat on taxes?
Barber wrote:Not in the least. But I'd be willing to bet that there are more dollars at stake when a .1% person cheats than if a 50%er cheats. And, well, who is going to have the better accountant, even if they're not cheating?
absolutely, an interesting approach has been the move to investigate swiss bank funds, which is going nowhere fast.