+32 32 0
Published 8 years ago by spaceghoti with 6 Comments
Additional Contributions:

Join the Discussion

  • Auto Tier
  • All
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Post Comment
  • Cobbydaler
    +3

    Unfortunately, it's very unlikely to happen.

  • Texchicago
    +1

    This is absurd. The 1% this and that. Well guess what happens to those " Middle Class Families?" They get thrown under the bus again. If you think $250k a year for gross income is a lot of money for a family, then you are mistaken. The top 1% make over 2 mil a year. These added taxes only put more strain on middle income families. Originally it was supposed to raise rates on millionaires.... Well that dropped to $250,000 a year. Toss out the deductions and add in the Alternative Minimum Tax and your 250k per year couple now pays the same taxes as the 1mil a year couple. See below for more laughter-

    In 2012, President Barack Obama struck a deal with Republicans in Congress to enact legislation that increased taxes. That included increasing the top income tax rate from 35 percent to 39.6 percent, increasing the top tax rate on dividends and capital gains from 15 percent to 20 percent, and phasing out personal exemptions and deductions starting at an annual income level of $250,000.

    An additional 3.8 percent tax on dividends, interest, capital gains and royalties--that was embedded in the Obamacare law--also took effect in 2013.

    The largest share of fiscal 2015's record-setting tax haul came from the individual income tax. That yielded the Treasury $1,540,802,000,000. Payroll taxes for “social insurance and retirement receipts” took in another $1,065,277,000,000. The corporate income tax brought in $343,797,000,000.

    • spaceghoti
      +7

      If you think $250k a year for gross income is a lot of money for a family, then you are mistaken.

      As someone who struggles to provide for a family of four on less than $50k a year, I am not mistaken about how much $250k a year will buy. My best friend recently received a raise that brought his income up to $150k and he freely concedes it's more than he needs to support his family.

      I don't know what your hypothetical family is doing with "only" $250k, but I guarantee they're not struggling to put food on the table.

      In 2012, President Barack Obama struck a deal with Republicans in Congress to enact legislation that increased taxes.

      That's hilarious. From 2011 to 2013 Congress repeatedly failed to pass a budget because House Republicans wouldn't take "yes" for an answer. The only taxes that were "raised" in 2012 were those tax cuts already scheduled to expire. In other words, there were no deals struck to raise taxes, simply inaction on the part of Congress.

      The largest share of fiscal 2015's record-setting tax haul came from the individual income tax. That yielded the Treasury $1,540,802,000,000. Payroll taxes for “social insurance and retirement receipts” took in another $1,065,277,000,000. The corporate income tax brought in $343,797,000,000.

      Big numbers are very impressive, and framed correctly can look very scary. Here's another big number for you: $426,000,000. That's the number by which all that revenue we took in failed to match spending.

      I know that conservatives like to argue that US taxes are too high while simultaneously bemoaning the federal debt, but they're inseparable. If you're really serious about eliminating federal debt you have to generate sufficient revenue for the task.

      • Texchicago
        +3

        +1 on the comment , I know you meant $426 billion deficit.

        My point that I failed to explain was that if the 1% are making 2+ mil a year on just income and their federal income taxes are raised from 35% to 40% they still have over $100k a month of gross income to invest as they choose.

        I guess there is not a true fair way to distribute the tax burden on every citizen, but it would put more money in the earners/spenders of the economy (middle class) if we were allowed the middle class to retain more of the income every month.

        • spaceghoti (edited 8 years ago)
          +6

          The point being made in the article is that taxes are not too high for the 1%. Raising taxes to different levels for different tax brackets would have quantifiable results that could be used to fund programs we need or simply close out the deficit and start running a surplus to pay off the debt. Even the highest tax level proposed at 45% wouldn't beggar the rich or give them cause to flee the country as conservatives like to claim. So while it wouldn't redistribute wealth sufficiently to break the wealthy, it could have demonstrable benefits for the entire nation.

          Neither Clinton nor Sanders are proposing to punish the rich for being rich, they're instead looking for ways to fund the programs that voters expect the government to run without putting the burden on the poor and middle class to pay for it.

        • PensiveApe
          +4

          The 1% make more like $300k - $400k per year. This link has data by state, but it gets the point across. link

Here are some other snaps you may like...