Odd Time for a "Taxed Enough Already" Movement

Federal, state and local taxes — including income, property, sales and other taxes — consumed 9.2% of all personal income in 2009, the lowest rate since 1950, the Bureau of Economic Analysis reports. That rate is far below the historic average of 12% for the last half-century. The overall tax burden hit bottom in December at 8.8.% of income before rising slightly in the first three months of 2010.
Click to expand...

I'd like to know where they get this information. I guarantee I pay at a higher percentage than the above paragraph claims. Anyone care to explain? The way I figure it I pay about 30%-35% combined taxes. Is this the plight of being a middle class earner or am I missing something here? Also, I've been an "earner" through 4 presidents and have seen no significant increase or decrease in my taxation. So I conclude that they all blow smoke as far as those in my earning bracket are concerned.
 
Topspin said:
I'll tell you after I finish owning you and you make an apology for your remark

The effective rate on 2009 is the taxes actually paid divided by the income for 2009.
You said 2009 effective rate vs 2008 income. In fact you even increased the font to like 100 on your mistake. lol
Click to expand...

The effective rate being discussed is on TOTAL taxes toppy... not just income... the article quotes 2009 numbers... there is NO WAY THAT includes income taxes for 2009. The IRS is still sorting out the bulk of 2009 returns. Those numbers reported include the 2009 FILINGS of 2008 returns toppy.
 
Look I was a tea party guy before there was a tea party and so were you, in regards to spending.
That said, I will continue to mock anyone who has not problem with the two wars (including Obama), or the war on drugs in regards to waistfull spending.
My opinion is dems will seriously cut spending as it's obvious that it can't go on.

Now tell me again how 2008 income determines 2009 effective tax rates. lol
 
Superfreak said:
The effective rate being discussed is on TOTAL taxes toppy... not just income... the article quotes 2009 numbers... there is NO WAY THAT includes income taxes for 2009. The IRS is still sorting out the bulk of 2009 returns. Those numbers reported include the 2009 FILINGS of 2008 returns toppy.
Click to expand...
It can't, corporate taxes aren't even due yet. Those are due in three more days, and many will file extensions... The reality is, they cannot calculate this year's returns until December and into January of 2011.
 
leaningright said:
I'd like to know where they get this information. I guarantee I pay at a higher percentage than the above paragraph claims. Anyone care to explain? The way I figure it I pay about 30%-35% combined taxes. Is this the plight of being a middle class earner or am I missing something here? Also, I've been an "earner" through 4 presidents and have seen no significant increase or decrease in my taxation. So I conclude that they all blow smoke as far as those in my earning bracket are concerned.
Click to expand...

The federal government tax as a % of the GDP alone is 20%. I don't know where these numbers come from.
 
yes I'll explain leaning, they are talking income taxes not combined.
As a teacher your income could be mostly salary, no offense.

when someone has higher income and income from dividends and cap gains they get taxed at a lower rate and they likely have higher deductions lowering the rate further.
 
leaningright said:
I'd like to know where they get this information. I guarantee I pay at a higher percentage than the above paragraph claims. Anyone care to explain? The way I figure it I pay about 30%-35% combined taxes. Is this the plight of being a middle class earner or am I missing something here? Also, I've been an "earner" through 4 presidents and have seen no significant increase or decrease in my taxation. So I conclude that they all blow smoke as far as those in my earning bracket are concerned.
Click to expand...

1) the BEA does not include social security taxes, they call those 'insurance payments'. It also includes everyone who was laid off in the past year (thus most of their income tax rates went to zero or near zero). It also includes the fact that the market losses offset income to an extent. It also includes the fact that declining home values means the property taxes went down. It also includes the fact that during a recession people spend less, thus sales tax revenues went down.

This is all nothing more than a stupid diversionary tactic by morons on the left who wish to pretend that because 2009 tax revenues went down as a percent of income that somehow means the tea party cannot protest higher future taxes that are expected due to the massive spending that has happened and that is projected to continue to happen.

2) All of this is on the other thread, but once again Jarod the moron has started a second thread on the same fucking topic and now wants everyone to rehash everything they have already typed 100 times on the other thread.
 
Do you even bother reading the board to see if this is under discussion already? Nigel posted a thread with this same thing, we've already spent over 100 posts telling people what the heck is the issue.

It's the spending, Stupid. <- I'm going to start selling bumper stickers.
 
Superfreak said:
1) the BEA does not include social security taxes, they call those 'insurance payments'. It also includes everyone who was laid off in the past year (thus most of their income tax rates went to zero or near zero). It also includes the fact that the market losses offset income to an extent. It also includes the fact that declining home values means the property taxes went down. It also includes the fact that during a recession people spend less, thus sales tax revenues went down.

This is all nothing more than a stupid diversionary tactic by morons on the left who wish to pretend that because 2009 tax revenues went down as a percent of income that somehow means the tea party cannot protest higher future taxes that are expected due to the massive spending that has happened and that is projected to continue to happen.
Click to expand...

Without the stimulus we would've went into depression and future generation would've had to pay even higher taxes.
 
Damocles said:
Do you even bother reading the board to see if this is under discussion already? Nigel posted a thread with this same thing, we've already spent over 100 posts telling people what the heck is the issue.

It's the spending, Stupid. <- I'm going to start selling bumper stickers.
Click to expand...

time to close his duplicate threads...

:good4u:
 
Superfreak said:
1) the BEA does not include social security taxes, they call those 'insurance payments'. It also includes everyone who was laid off in the past year (thus most of their income tax rates went to zero or near zero). It also includes the fact that the market losses offset income to an extent. It also includes the fact that declining home values means the property taxes went down. It also includes the fact that during a recession people spend less, thus sales tax revenues went down.
Click to expand...

Your criticism of what the BEA includes and doesn't include is irrelevant as the relevant comparators (previous years) do not include payroll taxes either.

And I find it hilarious that you don't mention the fact that Obama cut income taxes for a whole hell of a lot of people as a reason why tax revenues went down. Apparently, when Obama cuts taxes it doesn't count.
 
Damocles said:
Dude, you don't even understand that SF is right. This article is not about this year's tax returns, it is about the returns from 2009 which covered the 2008 tax year.
Click to expand...

Maybe it's because I'm an accountant, your wrong to. The taxes paid in 2009 represent an effective 2008 tax rate on 2008's income, not 2009 effective rate on 2008 income. Dam
 
Mr. Spite said:
Without the stimulus we would've went into depression and future generation would've had to pay even higher taxes.
Click to expand...

While I agree it might have been worse, the point lies more in the fact that they are CONTINUING to project $1 TRILLION+ deficits for the next ten years. Add in the fact that the 'stimulus' has been poorly implemented into the system. Thus far, the stimulus has done nothing more than push back the problems.

Deficit spending is not always bad, but please explain why it is necessary for them to need to outspend revenue to such an extreme over the next decade.
 
NigelTufnel said:
Your criticism of what the BEA includes and doesn't include is irrelevant as the relevant comparators (previous years) do not include payroll taxes either.

And I find it hilarious that you don't mention the fact that Obama cut income taxes for a whole hell of a lot of people as a reason why tax revenues went down. Apparently, when Obama cuts taxes it doesn't count.
Click to expand...

95% went down, that was a wise move by Obama. took the supply side issue from under thier noses.
 
OK, anyone (left or right) care to address this part of my conclusion?

Originally posted by leaningright

Also, I've been an "earner" through 4 presidents and have seen no significant increase or decrease in my taxation [as a percentage of my income]. So I conclude that they all blow smoke as far as those in my earning bracket are concerned.
Click to expand...
 
NigelTufnel said:
Your criticism of what the BEA includes and doesn't include is irrelevant as the relevant comparators (previous years) do not include payroll taxes either.

And I find it hilarious that you don't mention the fact that Obama cut income taxes for a whole hell of a lot of people as a reason why tax revenues went down. Apparently, when Obama cuts taxes it doesn't count.
Click to expand...

LMAO...

1) HE did not cut income taxes. The tax brackets remain where they were under Bush and for a year and half Obama has done NOTHING to stop them ALL from expiring.

2) The $400 tax credit is not a significant contributor to the drop.

3) he asked how the number got low... I explained the BEA does not include social security taxes. That is one big factor in why he couldn't get his rate to equate. It was an explanation you fucking moron. I did not state that it had anything to do with the drop from one year to the next.
 
Topspin said:
yes I'll explain leaning, they are talking income taxes not combined.
As a teacher your income could be mostly salary, no offense.

when someone has higher income and income from dividends and cap gains they get taxed at a lower rate and they likely have higher deductions lowering the rate further.
Click to expand...

Makes some sense topper. Thanks. My income is all salary. The SSI taxes SF mentioned makes sense too. If that is the cas then the article is a bit misleading, IMO.
 
Superfreak said:
LMAO...

1) HE did not cut income taxes. The tax brackets remain where they were under Bush and for a year and half Obama has done NOTHING to stop them ALL from expiring.

2) The $400 tax credit is not a significant contributor to the drop.

3) he asked how the number got low... I explained the BEA does not include social security taxes. That is one big factor in why he couldn't get his rate to equate. It was an explanation you fucking moron. I did not state that it had anything to do with the drop from one year to the next.
Click to expand...

wait are you saying because 95% got a tax credit that's not a reduced income tax. LOL this should be brilliant
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top