If you want to include payroll taxes, then also include as income SSDI, Medicare, Medicate, SS, etc...as income. You are in theory paying yourself with your payroll taxes.
Hmmm, payroll taxes cap out at about $110,000. Who pays the full amount every time? The rich. Now, should they keep paying more, eliminate the cap?
The question was about the relative percentages paid in taxes. If you change the definition of "taxes" to exclude payroll taxes, then you end up with the misleading results the Tax Foundation reports.
The rich do not pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes than the middle and working class. If you evaluate total incomes instead of adjusted incomes (since the wealthy are able to make far better use of the tax code, which after all, was written for them), then you see that the rich pay a far lower percentage of their incomes - their true incomes - in taxes.
The Tax Foundation is an advocacy group for energy and pharma corporations that don't want to pay taxes. Period. They are as phony as a three dollar bill. And their "reports" are excellent examples of how you can mislead with statistics.
And not SINGLE citation refuted anything about the IRS data the Tax Foundation has used, or the conclusions they've reached.
Tax Foundation didn't include payroll taxes in their calculations. Compare the percentage of income that someone making over $500,000/yr pays with the percentage of income someone making $50,000 year pays. Since payroll taxes make up 34% of all government revenue, you will quickly see how including payroll taxes changes the look of the Tax Foundation's conclusion.
You shouldn't need me to spoon feed you this stuff. I'm surprised you didn't see it straight away.
A problem is a problem. It's just that simple. It doesn't matter if affects you, or me, or anyone else on earth. A problem is a problem.
Who told you that? Is it a problem? Well, it depends.
By your logic, if something is a problem for one person, then it's a problem for everyone. There is an 90 year old woman on the block for whom climbing three flights of stairs is a problem. There are three flights of stairs in my house, but is it a problem? Not for me it ain't. For someone without fingers, a keyboard represents a problem. Does that mean keyboards are a problem for everyone? Of course not.
The CBO gets their data from the IRS. If you think everyone is lying then point to your own solid analysis based off of IRS data.
The CBO only uses the data they are told to use. For example, specifically the report that you linked to omitted payroll taxes, which make up 34% of all federal revenue (income tax is 42%). When you factor in that the percentage of their income that the rich pay in payroll taxes is vanishingly small compared to the percentage of total income that the rest of us pay, those little bar graphs look completely different. If you factor in total income instead of just adjusted income, it skews the results even further away from what the Tax Foundation is claiming.
See, that's how your citation is useless. The CBO was just doing their job by reporting on only the data that Congress allowed them to use. And that friend, is how you use statistics to tell a lie. It's how congress does it and it's how the "Tax Foundation" does it.
And the data - is it in question? It comes from the IRS data itself, and has been published by the Tax Foundation for years and years. If it was in error, wouldn't someone have caught it by now?
Yes, it's in error, and yes, the Tax Foundation has been "caught" more than once.
The BBC isn't perfect but it's less imperfect than almost anything else of its size.
The BBC is an instrument of the confluence between government and corporations. It's mission is to maintain the status quo. The run-up to the Iraq War and fallout from the 2008 financial crisis are two recent examples of their inability to be "independent". They are a tool of control. And North Koreans don't need more control. They already have plenty.
People are still citizens when they move overseas, corporations are not always.
Because corporations are magical persons who can change nationality, location and regulation by saying the magic words, "Free Market" while rubbing currency in the crack of a politician's ass.
How about we just lower our tax rate to 15%? We would then be a favorable place to have business and while not cashing in on $0 at the higher rate we would at least cash in on some taxes.
How about we just all just take a pay cut at our jobs and tithe 60% of our incomes to corporations to pay for their use of the commons so they will still love us and not run away like daddy did?
Slashdot Mirror
SSDI, Medicare, SS etc ARE counted as income.
Of their adjusted income. The middle/working class get to make vastly fewer "adjustments".
The question was about the relative percentages paid in taxes. If you change the definition of "taxes" to exclude payroll taxes, then you end up with the misleading results the Tax Foundation reports.
The rich do not pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes than the middle and working class. If you evaluate total incomes instead of adjusted incomes (since the wealthy are able to make far better use of the tax code, which after all, was written for them), then you see that the rich pay a far lower percentage of their incomes - their true incomes - in taxes.
The Tax Foundation is an advocacy group for energy and pharma corporations that don't want to pay taxes. Period. They are as phony as a three dollar bill. And their "reports" are excellent examples of how you can mislead with statistics.
Why does the Tax Foundation leave out payroll taxes? That's the question you need to ask yourself.
Tax Foundation didn't include payroll taxes in their calculations. Compare the percentage of income that someone making over $500,000/yr pays with the percentage of income someone making $50,000 year pays. Since payroll taxes make up 34% of all government revenue, you will quickly see how including payroll taxes changes the look of the Tax Foundation's conclusion.
You shouldn't need me to spoon feed you this stuff. I'm surprised you didn't see it straight away.
Not quite as self-serving as a company that makes a product that's prone to breakage and cannot be repaired.
It might be the DMT kicking in.
There's no film.
Does it hold images? Does it have a buffer? Is any data moving from the camera to the cloud when the camera is off?
Who told you that? Is it a problem? Well, it depends.
By your logic, if something is a problem for one person, then it's a problem for everyone. There is an 90 year old woman on the block for whom climbing three flights of stairs is a problem. There are three flights of stairs in my house, but is it a problem? Not for me it ain't. For someone without fingers, a keyboard represents a problem. Does that mean keyboards are a problem for everyone? Of course not.
You got a problem with that?
The CBO only uses the data they are told to use. For example, specifically the report that you linked to omitted payroll taxes, which make up 34% of all federal revenue (income tax is 42%). When you factor in that the percentage of their income that the rich pay in payroll taxes is vanishingly small compared to the percentage of total income that the rest of us pay, those little bar graphs look completely different. If you factor in total income instead of just adjusted income, it skews the results even further away from what the Tax Foundation is claiming.
See, that's how your citation is useless. The CBO was just doing their job by reporting on only the data that Congress allowed them to use. And that friend, is how you use statistics to tell a lie. It's how congress does it and it's how the "Tax Foundation" does it.
http://www.cbpp.org/research/p...
You're asking if the Congressional Budget Office is "lying liars"?
What do you think?
Now the mainstream media is going after BLACK FRIDAY. When will their War on Christmas end?
If you look above to my reply to Lynwood Rooster, you'll see citations to my proof that the Tax Foundation is not what it says it is.
Yes, it's in error, and yes, the Tax Foundation has been "caught" more than once.
http://economistsview.typepad....
http://www.cbpp.org/archives/t...
http://www.nj.com/opinion/inde...
http://mathbabe.org/2014/02/14...
http://angrybearblog.com/2012/...
http://www.citizensforethics.o...
The Tax Foundation is as phony as a three dollar bill.
The BBC is an instrument of the confluence between government and corporations. It's mission is to maintain the status quo. The run-up to the Iraq War and fallout from the 2008 financial crisis are two recent examples of their inability to be "independent". They are a tool of control. And North Koreans don't need more control. They already have plenty.
Is it an "ad hominem" to simply link to the people who make up "tax foundation dot org"?
I think you need to look up the meaning of "ad hominem".
The BBC would not be at the top of my list of examples of "media independence".
Let's see...who exactly is this "tax foundation dot org"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Mom and Pop are sole proprieters. They're paying personal income tax, just like you and me.
Yes, Texas has mandated teaching of religion in schools.
http://pandasthumb.org/archive...
http://www.slate.com/articles/...
http://io9.com/a-map-showing-w...
Why do they get to "choose"? You and I don't get to choose, and corporations are people, my friend. Right?
Because corporations are magical persons who can change nationality, location and regulation by saying the magic words, "Free Market" while rubbing currency in the crack of a politician's ass.
Rich people don't want their taxes to go up to 15%.
And the effective corporate tax rate in the US is about 12%
http://money.cnn.com/2013/07/0...
How about we just all just take a pay cut at our jobs and tithe 60% of our incomes to corporations to pay for their use of the commons so they will still love us and not run away like daddy did?