Hmmmm Not sure the person that writes Joe’s Facebook posts shouldn’t have someone review them before hitting send.
Top 1% of earners in the US, pay almost 40% of all taxes collected by the Federal government
Top 5% of earners in the US pay almost 60% of all taxes collected by the Federal government
Top 50% of earners in the US pay almost 97% of all taxes collected by the Federal government
This is incomplete data. What percentage of total earnings and wealth do the top 1% get? The top 5%?
The bottom 50% earns what percentage of total income? It’s not a free ride to pay little in taxes if you make very little.
Stop carrying water for the ultra wealthy. They don’t care about you and they will never allow you into their club. You are not and will not ever be one of them. Your only use to them is to propagate this kind of tripe on their behalf.
It’s so unfair how the poor don’t pay as much in taxes as the rich just because they don’t have any money.
The observation that a tiny percentage of rich people pay an increasingly disproportionate percentage of income tax isn’t an argument that the tax system is biased against them; it’s evidence that income and wealth inequality is increasing and that those on the bottom are making so little that a significant percentage of their income is below the basic tax thresholds.
That’s not “getting a free ride”; that’s getting dragged behind the vehicle.
You forgot the “income” part of the “income taxes” collected by the Federal government. Those numbers are probably true, but only if you ignore all the other taxes (including payroll taxes, of course) collected by the Feds. Care to try again? Maybe someone should review your posts before hitting Submit.
Okay so it’s not “free”; the point is that when the top 1% of income earners take home 20-25X more than the bottom 99% and when you have wealth inequality the worst it’s been since, what, 1913? Something’s gotta change.
That might be better fixed through salary caps rather than hiking income taxes (although I am also in favor of closing all loopholes for the rich.)
Someone proposed some law whereby the highest-paid employee and lowest-paid cannot be a gap of greater than 100X or something like that. In other words, if you’ve got a CEO who’s paid $3 million a year, then the lowest-paid employee must make $30,000 a year. Something like that. Although this would probably be rife with loopholes as well or lead to unintentional consequences.
Who said anything about “earners”? Part of the problem is that the ultra-rich mostly aren’t “earners”, and the tax code in this country says that you deserve to keep most or all of the money you don’t earn.
Let’s take the previous president as an example. How much tax did he pay, again?
It’s impractical, whereas taxation is a time-tested solution. One problem, though, is our current taxation has been geared to deeply incentivize investment, which doesn’t sound like such a bad thing on the surface, but in reality, executives who comprise these socioeconomic elite tie their “performance” to stock asset prices, which are values on paper. Moreover with things like 401Ks, IRAs, or just plain old stocks, investments have become democratized - more people view what’s happening with the market as fundamental to their retirement strategy. There’s less emphasis on, and concern with, wage growth and wages keeping up with inflation as a result.
I agree. The ones getting a free ride aren’t the people who actually earn their money (top entertainers, athletes, highly skilled professionals, etc.). The ones getting a free ride are the guys who sign their paychecks. People like Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, the Walton family, the various owners in the NFL and NBA, and so on. And of course #45.