Trump

[SHOCKvalue]

I'd say I mostly think of middle class in the roughly 70-120k range (maybe a wider range but clustered in this area), but maybe I'm way off. What do you think is the range?

I'm not sure what exactly you're refuting. If the middle class does overlap into the top 20%, it's the very bottom fringes of it. The report found that the average savings for the top 20% would be in the millions per year. That's not the case for any middle class family.

Where do you keep getting this seven figure savings number for the "average" top 20% household? I mean just look at the bottom half of this chart, from your source.

[jdshock]

Where do you keep getting this seven figure savings number for the "average" top 20% household? I mean just look at the bottom half of this chart, from your source.

I'm not going to go back to the source right now and confirm, but I think you're right that I misread or misremembered the numbers. It looks like I was thinking about the very top percentages. I got the Bernie Sanders syndrome and could only think of the BILLIONAIRE CLASS.

But I actually think that's more in line with what I'm talking about anyway. Look at how the percentages increase drastically as you get to the ultra wealthy.

[wufan]

You're referring to the big tax breaks for the wealthy?

If Trump agrees with you, why did he originally promise the biggest tax breaks for the middle class?

Thank you for posting the link. In the same article that he stated a 35% tax cut for the middle class (which is apparently only for the upper middle class) he stated he would cut business taxes from 35% to 15%, so yes, I would say he agrees with that philosophy.

[wufan]

I'm not going to go back to the source right now and confirm, but I think you're right that I misread or misremembered the numbers. It looks like I was thinking about the very top percentages. I got the Bernie Sanders syndrome and could only think of the BILLIONAIRE CLASS.

But I actually think that's more in line with what I'm talking about anyway. Look at how the percentages increase drastically as you get to the ultra wealthy.

The ultra wealthy already pay more than the wealthy, who pay more than the upper middle class, who pay more than the middle, who pay more than the lower middle, who pay more than lower, who pay more than the poor. Trumps plan brings these percentages slightly closer together, while cutting for almost everyone. This is still a progressive tax. It is true that the wealthiest get the largest cuts. I guess my question is, what is the right percentage for everyone if you disagree with the current proposal?

[wufan]

I'm not going to go back to the source right now and confirm, but I think you're right that I misread or misremembered the numbers. It looks like I was thinking about the very top percentages. I got the Bernie Sanders syndrome and could only think of the BILLIONAIRE CLASS.

But I actually think that's more in line with what I'm talking about anyway. Look at how the percentages increase drastically as you get to the ultra wealthy.

Based on this graphic, the top 0.1% will save about a million a year. They already pay millions more than others (and a higher percent) into the tax system. Howmany millions extra is appropriate? Is 40% correct? 50, 60, or 90%? Why not the same percent? Why not a flat tax?if equality is important, specifically economic equality, then why not make the tax system equal?

Is equality important only for poor people? Middle class? Minorities? Transgenders? Is equality only granted based on what you think is equal?

[jdshock]

The ultra wealthy already pay more than the wealthy, who pay more than the upper middle class, who pay more than the middle, who pay more than the lower middle, who pay more than lower, who pay more than the poor. Trumps plan brings these percentages slightly closer together, while cutting for almost everyone. This is still a progressive tax. It is true that the wealthiest get the largest cuts. I guess my question is, what is the right percentage for everyone if you disagree with the current proposal?

I'm not really looking for an in depth tax discussion since (in my memory) we had a really good one somewhat recently.

My point is just that Trump lied and middle class voters were taken advantage of. On his own web page he says they get the biggest cuts, but the biggest cuts--both in dollars and percentages--go to the wealthiest.

That's a fine thing to support. I don't believe that's what most of his middle supporters thought they were voting for, though.

[WSU and Reds Fan]

Based on this graphic, the top 0.1% will save about a million a year. They already pay millions more than others (and a higher percent) into the tax system. Howmany millions extra is appropriate? Is 40% correct? 50, 60, or 90%? Why not the same percent? Why not a flat tax?if equality is important, specifically economic equality, then why not make the tax system equal?

Is equality important only for poor people? Middle class? Minorities? Transgenders? Is equality only granted based on what you think is equal?

So If the US takes in 4.6 trillion in payroll and income taxes and we divide that equally as you propose. We will take 4.6 trillion divided by 320 million and each citizen is responsible for $14,375. To put this in perspective since I have 4 kids that would mean just my payroll and income, not counting sales tax or property tax will be $86,250. Which does not leave much left for food, let alone Shocker tickets.

[jdshock]

Is equality important only for poor people? Middle class? Minorities? Transgenders? Is equality only granted based on what you think is equal?

Come on... You're more reasonable than that. You know my answer will be that a progressive tax is the only way to impose an equal burden even if the percentages are different. This is something we're just going to fundamentally disagree on, but you couldn't have really believed you put me in a logical trap with that analogy.

[wufan]

Come on... You're more reasonable than that. You know my answer will be that a progressive tax is the only way to impose an equal burden even if the percentages are different. This is something we're just going to fundamentally disagree on, but you couldn't have really believed you put me in a logical trap with that analogy.

Not trying to put you in a logical trap, just pointing out that what Trump voters ACTUALLY voted for. They didn't vote for a tax cut, they voted against everyone that thinks working class America is somehow lesser America.

[wufan]

So If the US takes in 4.6 trillion in payroll and income taxes and we divide that equally as you propose. We will take 4.6 trillion divided by 320 million and each citizen is responsible for $14,375. To put this in perspective since I have 4 kids that would mean just my payroll and income, not counting sales tax or property tax will be $86,250. Which does not leave much left for food, let alone Shocker tickets.

I don't know what to say. Please read my post again. HINT: Look up the definition of percent.

[SHOCKvalue]

So If the US takes in 4.6 trillion in payroll and income taxes and we divide that equally as you propose. We will take 4.6 trillion divided by 320 million and each citizen is responsible for $14,375. To put this in perspective since I have 4 kids that would mean just my payroll and income, not counting sales tax or property tax will be $86,250. Which does not leave much left for food, let alone Shocker tickets.

If you have four kids, then you are already a notable beneficiary of our tax code.

Nothing against your kids or anything on a personal level, but the loopholes (deducations and credits) created for dependents, RE taxes, student loan interest, and so on and so forth are a big reason why our tax code is the cluster fark that it is. Those deductions and credits are exhibit number one as to why only 50% of US households are actually paying income taxes, net. Many of the lower 50% are getting more back than they put in, via programs such as EIC, which is essentially an extension of the welfare system.

[im4wsu]

I'm not really looking for an in depth tax discussion since (in my memory) we had a really good one somewhat recently.

My point is just that Trump lied and middle class voters were taken advantage of. On his own web page he says they get the biggest cuts, but the biggest cuts--both in dollars and percentages--go to the wealthiest.

That's a fine thing to support. I don't believe that's what most of his middle supporters thought they were voting for, though.

I don't propose to know what the value of X and Y should be in this equation, but a tax decrease of x% for a middle income family may be more significant than a Y% change to the wealthy. A thousand dollars means more at some level than $10,000 at a higher level. Thus the middle class may feel like it gets a bigger cut than the wealthy becuse the each dollar is more significant.

[WSU and Reds Fan]

I completely understand the benefits come tax time of my kids. My point was the quote that wufan made "if equality is important, specifically economic equality, then why not make the tax system equal?" To me equal means every person paying their fair share, which in my case would be over 80,000 a year. I do have a problem with people who want to do away with corporate tax, as the corporations also benefit from the taxes paid into the system...maybe more since they get more use from the roads that bring their employees and customers to their business than I do.

EIC is a welfare system, but again if people were paid a wage high enough, then like me they would not qualify for the EIC.

I guess long story short. I would rather be in my position of having to pay taxes, then to not make enough where I would get more back then I put in.

[SHOCKvalue]

I do have a problem with people who want to do away with corporate tax, as the corporations also benefit from the taxes paid into the system...maybe more since they get more use from the roads that bring their employees and customers to their business than I do.

The concept of taxation upon business/corporate entities is a bit of a pass-though shell game. Ultimately, the burden of ALL taxes falls on the individual/household. Taxes are just an expense for a business, and all expenses are passed down to the final user of the good or service. It's just an economic cascade.

We, the private individuals/households, would have a heart attack if we could quantify the actual proportion of our income that goes to the government.

Via rough averages....

FY 2015 US Budget - $3.8B
US Population - 320M
Workforce Participation Rate - 60%

Equates to roughly $20K/year in taxes per employed/working US resident, and even that scary number assumes all those employed/working are also paying income taxes, which we know is not true.

[wufan]

I completely understand the benefits come tax time of my kids. My point was the quote that wufan made "if equality is important, specifically economic equality, then why not make the tax system equal?" To me equal means every person paying their fair share, which in my case would be over 80,000 a year. I do have a problem with people who want to do away with corporate tax, as the corporations also benefit from the taxes paid into the system...maybe more since they get more use from the roads that bring their employees and customers to their business than I do.

EIC is a welfare system, but again if people were paid a wage high enough, then like me they would not qualify for the EIC.

I guess long story short. I would rather be in my position of having to pay taxes, then to not make enough where I would get more back then I put in.

In my post, your fair share would be a percent of your income, not a percent of the debt. I.e. Everyone pays 25% of their income, not everyone owes x number of dollars.