Taxes--The Latest on Who Pays What

[TrainTrac]

From Neal Boortz's web site, http://boortz.com today:

Tuesday, September 5, 2006



THE LATEST ON WHO PAYS WHAT



Well, it's time to put a stop to the whining about income inequality and those big huge tax breaks the evil rich have received from George Bush. The Treasury Department is about to release the numbers for 2004, and as usual the highest achievers are taking it on the chin.



The Democrats, with no small amount of help from Republicans, are making headway on their goal of shifting the entire federal tax burden in this country onto a minority of income earners. In 2004 the bottom one-half of income earners paid only 3.3% of all federal income taxes. That's down from the Clinton years. In fact, that's the lowest share paid by the bottom half ever.



According to The Wall Street Journal, the majority of American families with incomes less than $40,000 pay no income taxes at all! When you factor in the welfare program known as the Earned Income Tax Credit, many of these families are coming close to getting a completely free ride!



OK ... but what about the evil rich?



In 2004 the top 1% of all income earners earned about 19% of all income. So ... the rich really are benefiting from Bush's tax policies, aren't they? Just 1% earning 19% of all income? Sorry to burst your bubble, but that figure was higher in the Clinton years. During the time Clinton was in office this figure went from 13.8% to nearly 21%. Funny how you didn't read a lot of newspaper stories during the Clinton years about growing income inequality, isn't it? Now, under bush, the share of total income earned by the wicked rich has fallen!



But what about the income taxes! Surely George Bush has all but wiped out income taxes for the nasty rich, hasn't he?



Nope.



In 2004 the top 1% of income earners -- that crowd that earned 19% of all income -- paid 36.9% of all income taxes. The top 5% of income earners paid a whopping 57.1% of all income taxes. That's an increase under Bush. So much for "tax cuts for the rich."



OK .. well how about the super-rich? What about the top one-tenth of one percent of income earners? Lordy, I don't even know how much you have to earn to be in this crowd. From 2002 to 2004, with the hated Bush tax cuts firmly in place, the top 0.1% of income earners saw their share of total income taxes paid go from 15.4% to 17.4%. That's up a full 2% for those of you who went to government schools.



OK ... that's income taxes. But what about capital gains taxes and taxes on dividends? Bush cut those taxes too, didn't he? That's where the rich are making out like bandits, right? Well ... glad you asked. Since Bush's tax cuts the Imperial Federal Government has seen an increase of 79% in capital gains taxes, and 35% for taxes on dividends.



Just remember these figures the next time you see some Democrat whining about income inequality and the need to redistribute income. It looks like we're doing quite a bit of redistribution as it is.

Yet another case for the Fair Tax...

 

[Ryan Schaecher]

Just remember these figures the next time you see some Democrat whining about income inequality and the need to redistribute income. It looks like we're doing quite a bit of redistribution as it is.

High hopes, but it will still be ignorned. The sheeple of America love their slogans and "No Blood For Oil" and "Tax Cuts For The Rich" resonate for idiotic reason....

 

[Tom Schindler]

When the Democrats take back the Whitehouse, watch our 401(k)'s go through the roof.



Finally, we will no longer be under the rule of King George III. We will be able to grow as a country under the freedom America deserves.





Tom

 

[Ryan Schaecher]

watch our 401(k)'s go through the roof

401(k)'s won't grown as fast as the taxes on them

 

[Bill Ellis]

We each can believe what we want. However, nobody can predict the future to the extent that we can count on our 401K's "going through the roof" or "going up in smoke" just by who may or may not get into the White House. One thing you can count on though.....in order for 401K's to "go through the roof", interest rates would have to rise substantially. That, of course, would further slow the economy and ultimately cause a recession. So, in effect, Mr Cayman is predicting that those of us who have significant funds in a 401K would be able to watch it "go though the roof" while we collect our unemployment checks; if a Democrat is elected President. Doesn't sound like a bright future to me. But, what do I know.

 

[Tom Schindler]

So, in effect, Mr Cayman is predicting that those of us who have significant funds in a 401K would be able to watch it "go though the roof" while we collect our unemployment checks; if a Democrat is elected President. Doesn't sound like a bright future to me. But, what do I know.

Then again, during the last Democrat we had in office, not only was my 401(k) making me money, there were jobs out the yin-yang. It isn't that way today.



This country needs a change. The currant regime in office is not moving this country foreword.



Few people are happy with Bush's performance as president. Are that many people dumb that think he is doing a bad job or are those few that think he is doing a great job even dumber?



I am betting it is the latter of the two.





Tom

 

[Thomas Rogers]

I don't think Bush is doing a great job, but I did vote for him twice and don't regret that. As bad as he is, this term and last, he was better (IMHO) for our country than either of the lame candidates the Dems ran against him. Want to blame the woes of this country on someone; blame the Democrats for not being able to field a candidate that is able to beat Bush...that's a sad statement in of itself.



TJR

 

[Rich Stern]

+1 on the Fair Tax. Would make peoples lives better (except, perhaps, CPAs, attorneys, and IRS employees).



Tom, what kind of specific action are you looking for from the next administration?

 

[Gavin Allan]

I remember when Jimmy Carter was in office and the economy was gone to hell in a handbasket. Jobs were scarce, inflation was rampant, and taxes were increasing faster than you can say "*******".

 

[Fred]

EEE-YAHH! EEE-YAHH! EEE-YAHH!

 

[TomT]

I don't think Bush is doing a great job, but I did vote for him twice and don't regret that. As bad as he is, this term and last, he was better (IMHO) for our country than either of the lame candidates the Dems ran against him. Want to blame the woes of this country on someone; blame the Democrats for not being able to field a candidate that is able to beat Bush...that's a sad statement in of itself.

Amen to that. And if the best the Democrats can do is Hillary for the next election then we are really in trouble.

 

[Fred]

Double Amen, TomT.