How do you know when a Republican is lying? (RO)

[elucidator]

Tax cuts? It is to laugh, the competition will be who raises taxes the most, federal, state or city. GeeDub lowered Federal taxes even as he embarked on George’s Excellent Military Adventure, that whole fiasco was on the credit card. The state governments are on the hook for unemployment compensation, for the most part, and Federal support for infrastructure is going to a lot harder to come by. Here in Minnesota, people are much more keenly aware of infrastructure, of late.

School boards are rountinely financed by local property taxes. Who’s child gets left behind? Want to invest, and are untroubled by conscience? Invest in home schooling.

My friend, taxes are going up. Taxes would have gone up even if we had none of these recent problems, just to pay off the Chinese so we can buy more loud, shiny crap. Property taxes will go up, hell, we’ll probably have a no property tax to squeeze a couple bucks out of the homeless!

[gaffa]

@saoirse

Of course she’s an imbecile, but Jimmy Carter, a noo-kyoo-lah engineeah with the Navy, pronounced it the same way.

Actually, the last time that came up, Equipoise contacted the Carter Presidential Library and found video footage of him pronouncing nuclear. He did so with an accent, but he pronounced it correctly.

[Boyo_Jim]

Still waiting for a cite, Weirddave.

[ManiacMan]

Here is a cite that I found…

http://www.brianpowellmusic.com/californiataxes.html

With so much going around about how unfair taxes are in America, how poor people are burdened with all of the taxes while rich people are getting off paying nothing, or little at best, I have decided to look into the matter and discover truly what is going on.

…anyone proclaiming that rich people do not pay enough taxes, or that poor people pay too much, it’s time you looked at the facts. The lower 50% of the people in America pay one of two things, nothing, or next to nothing, while the top 1% of Americans pay 50% of the taxes. To say that the burden falls on the poor, while the ‘poor’ have 6.8 million people to pay 589,688,000, a mere $86.00 per person per year.

Over-taxing of the rich is not the way to solve any problem of any state, much less it the solution to equality. When 1% of all people are paying 50% of all people’s taxes, something tells me that that is wrong, especially, and most importantly, when 50% of people are paying 1% of taxes, and yet they are ones complaining over how much they are burdened. Grow up people. Though it makes no difference, I say balance the media and let opinions other than yours get out.

[askeptic]

@ManiacMan

Here is a cite that I found…

http://www.brianpowellmusic.com/californiataxes.html

Remind me again who Brian Powell is and why we should give a flying fuck what he says.

[neutron_star]

A. Some amateur musician’s website might be an even less authoritative source than your last one.

B. The stuff you quoted has nothing at all to do with the cite that was requested.

But nice try! Sort of.

[Boyo_Jim]

@ManiacMan

Here is a cite that I found…

http://www.brianpowellmusic.com/californiataxes.html

You’re citing some guy’s music website on taxes? And 2002 state taxes at that? Spare me.

Besides, who asked? I am waiting on acite that Obama’s volunteerism program will be mandatory for schools.

[Jolly_Roger]

@Boyo_Jim

You’re citing some guy’s music website on taxes? And 2002 state taxes at that? Spare me.

Besides, who asked? I am waiting on acite that Obama’s volunteerism program will be mandatory for schools.

This is the point, Boyo Jim, where he’s either toying around on purpose or just can’t admit “I don’t have a cite. I may have been wrong”. .

[DianaG]

@ManiacMan

Here is a cite that I found…

http://www.brianpowellmusic.com/californiataxes.html

Well, it’s a little better, inasmuch as it at least includes a link to a credible, if somewhat aged, source.

But do you really, really not get that Brian Powell is, erm… not an economist? And that his ending with a screed against “the liberal media” doesn’t really enhance his credibility? And that the combination of these two factors would incline most thinking people to not accept his interpretation as definitive?

If you want people to take your arguments seriously, give us credible cites. Or, for that matter, relevant ones. Who the hell was talking about 2002 California state taxes? I would assume that the IRS has more recent and relevant data. And a website, which is free of commentary by obscure musicians.

[tagos]

At the risk of injecting easily discoverable facts into this debate:

Tax burden shifts to the middle

Since 2001, President Bush’s tax cuts have shifted federal tax payments from the richest Americans to a wide swath of middle-class families, the Congressional Budget Office has found, a conclusion likely to roil the presidential election campaign.

The CBO study, due to be released today, found that the wealthiest 20 percent, whose incomes averaged $182,700 in 2001, saw their share of federal taxes drop from 64.4 percent of total tax payments in 2001 to 63.5 percent this year. The top 1 percent, earning $1.1 million, saw their share fall to 20.1 percent of the total, from 22.2 percent.

Over that same period, taxpayers with incomes from around $51,500 to around $75,600 saw their share of federal tax payments increase. Households earning around $75,600 saw their tax burden jump the most, from 18.7 percent of all taxes to 19.5 percent

This is from 2004.
Wiki - Taxation in the US

As of 2007, there are about 138 million taxpayers in the United States.[8] The Treasury Department in 2006 reported, based on Internal Revenue Service (IRS) data, the share of federal income taxes paid by taxpayers of various income levels. The data shows the progressive tax structure of the U.S. federal income tax system on individuals that reduces the tax incidence of people with smaller incomes, as they shift the incidence disproportionately to those with higher incomes - the top 0.1% of taxpayers by income pay 17.4% of federal income taxes (earning 9.1% of the income), the top 1% with gross income of $328,049 or more pay 36.9% (earning 19%), the top 5% with gross income of $137,056 or more pay 57.1% (earning 33.4%), and the bottom 50% with gross income of $30,122 or less pay 3.3% (earning 13.4%).[9][10] If the federal taxation rate is compared with the wealth distribution rate, the net wealth (not only income but also including real estate, cars, house, stocks, etc) distribution of the United States does almost coincide with the share of income tax - the top 1% pay 36.9% of federal tax (wealth 32.7%), the top 5% pay 57.1% (wealth 57.2%), top 10% pay 68% (wealth 69.8%), and the bottom 50% pay 3.3% (wealth 2.8%).[11]

Other taxes in the United States with a less progressive structure or a regressive structure, and legal tax avoidance loopholes change the overall tax burden distribution. For example, the payroll tax system (FICA), a 12.4% Social Security tax on wages up to $97,500 and a 2.9% Medicare tax (a 15.3% total tax that is often split between employee and employer) is a regressive tax on income with no standard deduction or personal exemptions. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities states that three-fourths of U.S. taxpayers pay more in payroll taxes than they do in income taxes.[12] The Tax Foundation has stated that the burden of the corporate income tax (a 15-39% tax) falls on customers and workers of the corporations, who are often not rich

[ManiacMan]

@DianaG

Well, it’s a little better, inasmuch as it at least includes a link to a credible, if somewhat aged, source.

But do you really, really not get that Brian Powell is, erm… not an economist? And that his ending with a screed against “the liberal media” doesn’t really enhance his credibility? And that the combination of these two factors would incline most thinking people to not accept his interpretation as definitive?

If you want people to take your arguments seriously, give us credible cites. Or, for that matter, relevant ones. Who the hell was talking about 2002 California state taxes? I would assume that the IRS has more recent and relevant data. And a website, which is free of commentary by obscure musicians.

I thought it was a “worthy” cite that one could extrapolate from…I was being hasty and immature.

[NurseCarmen]

@tagos

At the risk of injecting easily discoverable facts into this debate:

Tax burden shifts to the middle

What the hell? That cite has nothing to do with amateur musicians? How can you claim that to be economically authoritative?

[Lobsang]

Dude. Sorry if this has been said already but… The phrase can be applied to ‘Politicians’ in General.

Don’t know about your country, but in Britain it is a well known fact (well known by people who are not braindead) that when a politician’s lips are moving he or she is fibbing*
I say that as someone who will always support the leftist party. I respect the left a lot more, but I know that as politicians they are just as good at lying as the other side.

*If you want to be more accurate about it: He or she is saying EXACTLY what has been deemed/worked out to be the best thing to say to the general public to support your case/party… which is PROBABLY almost never the truthful thing to say.

[sqweels]

@Weirddave

Compassion is a piss poor way to run a government, there’s always someone else whose sob story merits “compassion”. Compassion is not the province of government. Basic needs met for the truly destitute and that’s it. Anything beyond that is just varying degrees of socialism.

The province of government is whatever the voters and leaders decide it is. Many aspects of the conservative agenda, from pro-life to one of the justifications for invading Iraq, are based on feelings of compassion. And calling something “socialism” doesn’t automatically render it anathema. That’s just, like, your opinion, man.

If you feel such compassion for the less fortunate, then you should help them on your own hook. I do. Why do you need government to force you to do the right thing?

Don’t make us laugh. Poorly funded though the government is, how much money would it have to work with if taxes were voluntary? Or how much more would the people who do care have to pay to make up for the money withheld by the people who don’t?