Over the last four years we have heard much about how unfair the current US tax system is, and we re-elected a president based on his promise that he would increase federal income taxes on the rich.
The current progressive US tax system allows 47% of its citizens to pay virtually no federal income tax and places a majority of the federal tax burden upon the remaining 53% of its citizens and businesses.
This is considered fair because those who are well off should pay a higher percentage of their income because they are rich.
Because the current tax system is unable to collect enough taxes from its citizens, it must borrow in order to make ends meet. This is called deficit spending.
In 2008 (a year before our current president took office) the deficit as a percentage of GDP was about 3%. In 2009 it jumped to a little over 10%, and has remained around 8.5% for the following three years.
Now when you compare the Russian system that collects a flat 13% income tax from its citizens and runs a deficit of around 1.5% of GDP, you have to wonder how can people survive in an environment of such unfairness?
I don't know about you, but I want to express my thanks to all of the voters that voted for our current president and his party, and put fairness back into the federal income tax system.
"In your heart you know he is right"
What planet are you on, his tax increases will not pay for the Presidents fleet of aircraft and secret service agents and the helicopters and the limo's and the SUV's and the fighter escort aircraft and Air Mobility Command C-17 Globemaster III's and C-5M Super Galaxy's and of course the two Airforce 1 747 aircraft. Thinking of it another way the tax increases pay for eight days of what our Federal Government Spends. Rich people will move to a different country when you over tax them and they take their assets with them. Companies in the U.S. are already redcung hours for their workers from 40 or more to 27 hours to avoid taxes. Ask some of the people around you if this is happenning, you will find out. Everyone in this country has to contribute to get us out of this mess. I'll bet you have no idea that we are in debt 1 million dollars per worker in the U.S. and the median income is $40,000 per year. Got any ideas how $40,000.00 a year is going to pay a million dollar loan? By the way you will have a little surprise starting with your first paycheck this year no matter how much you make.
"I'll bet you have no idea that we are in debt 1 million dollars per worker in the U.S. and the median income is $40,000 per year."
Not true. US debt is about $100,000 per payroll employee. This does not include self-employed people, so the figure *per worker* is much lower. Average wage is about $43,000. Debt per household is about $80,000, and average household income is about $52,000. US public debt is about 80% of GDP. There is no need to exaggerate the extent of the debt with false numbers. It is very high and needs to be dealt with, but we are not Greece or Japan. We still have the ability to deal with our debt.
I'll assume the rest of your post is similarly incorrect.
In my heart everything the Presi does is wrong. You have to be kidding. That those who work hard have to pay for those's that don't. This country was built on hard working people not on welfare. Get some self Resp and do your part.
you have to be kliddin
"ricky misses two important points."
Wilkes, I am not going to argue with your nutjob ideas. Barack Obama Sr. may or may not have herded goats at some point in his life, he was clearly employed as an economist throughout his adult life. I am not ricky the drive-thru guy. I am ricky the analyst. Likewise, Barack Obama Sr. was an economist from Kenya. So why do you insist on referring to him as a goat herder?
"in the article they are a part of the "taker" portion of the ratio."
Would you care to describe who else is a taker? Government workers & pensioners. Which government workers and pensioners? All of them, or only those paid by the state?
Would you care to describe how they define someone "on welfare"? Does it include working people who may receive some benefits? Or are these people counted as employed? Or simply double counted?
This is a conservative fluff piece, and Forbes should be ashamed of publishing it. Yet it STILL wasn't enough for winholder. He had to add a lie.
"Again you have shown your great ability to deceive and deflect."
Speaking of which, how'd that Russian tax thing work out? This may surprise you, but most people do not think correcting falsehoods and pointing out outright lies is the same thing as " to deceive and deflect". Quite the opposite. I assure you, if you continue to post falsehoods I will continue to correct you.
My suggestion. Follow through on your Ayn Rand threat to move to China or Russia. You'll fit right in.
Wow so many questions, I sure appreciate your interest in my thoughts:
Q 1. A 1. No
Q 2. A 2. I don't know
Q 3. A 3. Not sure
Q 4. A 4. No
Q 5. A 5. I don't know
Q 6. A 6. Not sure
Q 7. A 7. I don't know
Q 8. A 8. I don't understand the question.
o ... "conservative fluff piece," (I am not sure what that is, and am unsure why Forbes should be ashamed they published this article?)
o As to winholder's lie: I find it amazing that when someone on the left tells a falsehood, they are given a pass with words like hyperbole, out of context, error in judgement etc., but let a conservative read an article to fast and erroneously make a mistake in math, then that person should be branded as a dirty rotten liar. Well if that is your position, then so be it. I am so glad that you have never been guilty of such behavior.
o "My suggestion..": Sorry you are not going to get rid of me that easy, and by the way I have never made a threat to move to China or Russia. That must be an example of hyperbole or an error in judgement on your part.
Well that about covers it, but again I really do appreciate your interest in my thoughts.
"In your heart you know he is right"
In 1911 less than 20% of 15–18 years old were enrolled in a high school; less than 10% of all Americans 18 years old graduated from high school. Most quit school after the 8th grade. Yet the country ran a surplus and local government spent more than twice as much as the federal government. State Government spent about 1/5th as much as the local government.
In 2011 over 87% complete High School, 58% do some college, and 40% complete college. With all that education the Federal Government runs a 1.3 Trillion Dollar Deficit and State and local spending is about equal. The Federal Government spends more than the State and Local Governments combined. Thus the saying "when ignorance is bliss, it is folly to be wise." Over 1/3rd of the Federal spending is borrowed money. We can not go on this way. WE must apply our education to rational government at every level.
Gosh, in 1100 almost no one went to school ( there were no schools) and there were almost no taxes. There were few roads and almost no laws. Petty kings ruled their own little fief. There were no deficits either.
That sounds alot like Afganistan and parts of Pakistan.
Let's go back to that wonderful time or move to the steps of Asia.
That is the Republican Plan.
Thinking about buying a house? Or a municipal bond? Be careful where you put your capital. Don’t put it in a state at high risk of a fiscal tailspin.
Eleven states make our list of danger spots for investors. They can look forward to a rising tax burden, deteriorating state finances and an exodus of employers. The list includes California, New York, Illinois, and Ohio, along with some smaller states like New Mexico and Hawaii.
If your career takes you to Los Angeles or Chicago, don’t buy a house. Rent.
These 11 States now have More People on Welfare than they do Employed.
California, New Mexico, Illinois, Ohio, Kentucky, New York, Maine, Mississippi, Alabama, South Carolina, Hawaii.
This information comes from Forbes.
Russia's tax system is regressive. Russia's income tax is a flat 13%, but they get little of their revenue from it. Similar to the US, they have a separate payroll tax on earned income--26% in the lowest bracket and 2% in the highest bracket. Russians don't earn much and corruption is rampant. Almost a third of Russia's Federal revenue comes from excise taxes and royalties on oil & gas. About another third comes from a national sales tax (VAT).
You are correct that Russia keeps a low debt. They were in surplus until the recession hit.
It is a system that would make Romney proud, except for the oil & gas taxes and the budget surpluses.