Fair tax ?

[Tim]

Govt spending is 50 grand per household...

I seriously doubt that number.

In 2010 there were 118,682,000 households with an average income of $67,530 per household for a total of over $8 trillion.
The federal government spent $29,121 per household which is about $8,500 more per household than they should be spending based on the "Zero deficit line"
Since the federal government accounts for $29,121, you must be claiming that state and local account for $20,879 per household. I believe that's wrong.
And don't forget we are ONLY talking about personal income.
There are trillions in corporate profit you aren't accounting for in these calculations.
In 2010 only 41.6% of the $3.456 trillion dollars the government spent came from individuals. That's only $12,114 per household...

So be careful when you throw around a $50k number that each household is responsible for, because it's not true, not even close.

In 2010 each household on average paid $12k in federal taxes.

 

[Stone]

Because your dumb ass model isn't based on income, it's based on consumption ( sales)

Already responded to..will paste here for forum convenience.


Let me try it this way.
With all incomes totaled up{corps ,individuals gains..everything}.....What percentage of that do you feel is fair for the Govt to obtain from those earnings{forget the flat tax for a moment}
You argued for a budget increase the other day..so if you refuse to answer this question you are merely being intentionally difficult.

No....you didn't respond to my quote above.

With all incomes totaled up{corps ,individuals gains..everything}.....What percentage of that do you feel is fair for the Govt to obtain from those earnings{forget the flat tax for a moment}

And I'll repeat.....between your flat tax on consumption and progressive taxation, I favor progressive taxation because it is a fairer model for the US.
I've never met anyone in my tax bracket that was pleased with the rates paid, even under Bush.
I've never been pleased with my own tax rates.
But I see the need for a progressive model that allows for a healthy economy of a society rather than your stilted tax model that's leverages wealth at the expense of a society's economic health.

so if you refuse to answer this question you are merely being intentionally difficult.

Looks like you are just going to have to keep on whining

 

[The Man]

I seriously doubt that number.

In 2010 there were 118,682,000 households with an average income of $67,530 per household for a total of over $8 trillion.
The federal government spent $29,121 per household which is about $8,500 more per household than they should be spending based on the "Zero deficit line"
Since the federal government accounts for $29,121, you must be claiming that state and local account for $20,879 per household. I believe that's wrong.
And don't forget we are ONLY talking about personal income.
There are trillions in corporate profit you aren't accounting for in these calculations.
In 2010 only 41.6% of the $3.456 trillion dollars the government spent came from individuals. That's only $12,114 per household...

So be careful when you throw around a $50k number that each household is responsible for, because it's not true, not even close.

In 2010 each household on average paid $12k in federal taxes.

Govt spending was 6.1 trillion for 2011 Fed state and local...go run the math by the households ..post back your figure,,,hell may even be a little higher than 50 grand

 

[The Man]

I seriously doubt that number.

In 2010 there were 118,682,000 households with an average income of $67,530 per household for a total of over $8 trillion.
The federal government spent $29,121 per household which is about $8,500 more per household than they should be spending based on the "Zero deficit line"
Since the federal government accounts for $29,121, you must be claiming that state and local account for $20,879 per household. I believe that's wrong.
And don't forget we are ONLY talking about personal income.
There are trillions in corporate profit you aren't accounting for in these calculations.
In 2010 only 41.6% of the $3.456 trillion dollars the government spent came from individuals. That's only $12,114 per household...

So be careful when you throw around a $50k number that each household is responsible for, because it's not true, not even close.

In 2010 each household on average paid $12k in federal taxes.

12k in fed taxes alone!
Now tack on state and local and post back
Also the payroll taxes will be about 10 to 11 k for federal income tax paid in,
You will be hitting that 50 k before you know it tim...keep digging !!!!

Its actually much easier to go by the revenues
6.1 trillion divided by households...is what the govt spent per household.
But revenues were about a half a trillion less...I have given the link a few times around here

 

[The Man]

....gibberish edited out...

Moose stew sure is good

 

[Stone]

I seriously doubt that number.

In 2010 there were 118,682,000 households with an average income of $67,530 per household for a total of over $8 trillion.
The federal government spent $29,121 per household which is about $8,500 more per household than they should be spending based on the "Zero deficit line"
Since the federal government accounts for $29,121, you must be claiming that state and local account for $20,879 per household. I believe that's wrong.
And don't forget we are ONLY talking about personal income.
There are trillions in corporate profit you aren't accounting for in these calculations.
In 2010 only 41.6% of the $3.456 trillion dollars the government spent came from individuals. That's only $12,114 per household...

So be careful when you throw around a $50k number that each household is responsible for, because it's not true, not even close.

In 2010 each household on average paid $12k in federal taxes.

It's really irrelevant........~35% of the net worth of the US is owned by the top 1%ers.
Then consider the top 10% has about 85% of the nations net worth.......
Average household liability for government spending as TM projects becomes irrelevant in a progressive tax plan.

The average household simply isn't paying the same tax rates and thus hasn't the same tax liability as those in the 10%+ class.
This is what TM wants to change with a flat tax.


( couldn't find a 2010 or 2011 graph, but I would imagine the middle class has less today)

 

[Stone]

Moose stew sure is good

One of your better posts....

 

[Tim]

Govt spending was 6.1 trillion for 2011 Fed state and local...go run the math by the households ..post back your figure,,,hell may even be a little higher than 50 grand

Ok, I went to that site where you got the $6.1 trillion number from. It's bullshit!

The last year that used actual numbers was 2010 where they claim it was $5.9 trillion. But you need to look at the sources like I just did. According to THEIR sources the federal government spent $3.456 trillion (exact match to my earlier post and source) and the state and local governments collected $1.3 trillion in taxes.

Federal = $3.456 trillion spent which 41.6% came from individual taxes which comes out to $12,114 per household
State and local = $1.3 trillion collected which 55.3% came from individual and property taxes or $6,057 per household

That's a grand total of $18,171 in tax per household from their average income of $67,530 which works out to 26.9% effective tax rate....

So my answer is 26.9%

Happy now???

 

[The Man]

It's really irrelevant........~35% of the net worth of the US is owned by the top 1%ers.
Then consider the top 10% has about 85% of the nations net worth.......
Average household liability for government spending as TM projects becomes irrelevant in a progressive tax plan.



The average household simply isn't paying the same tax rates and thus hasn't the same tax liability as those in the 10%+ class.
This is what TM wants to change with a flat tax.

It's really irrelevant........~35% of the net worth of the US is owned by the top 1%ers.

And if they paid the average of all earners they would be paying more...the tax system is to their advantage..I believe you have stated that as well..why you would argue otherwise now..is simply for our entertainment.

 

[Accountable]

I proctored standardized tests for the last 8 school days. You couldn't pay me to pick up a calculator right now.

 

[Stone]

And if they paid the average of all earners they would be paying more...the tax system is to their advantage..I believe you have stated that as well..why you would argue otherwise now..is simply for our entertainment.

And if they paid the average of all earners they would be paying more

What the hell does that even mean
I need translation.

the tax system is to their advantage

A progressive tax rate plan would benefit low income earners compared to your fixed consumption tax that taxes them to a greater degree.

.I believe you have stated that as well

I've stated the above many times.

why you would argue otherwise now

You are confused

 

[Tim]

I proctored standardized tests for the last 8 school days. You couldn't pay me to pick up a calculator right now.

Your proctologist did what for 8 days?

 

[The Man]

Ok, I went to that site where you got the $6.1 trillion number from. It's bullshit!

The last year that used actual numbers was 2010 where they claim it was $5.9 trillion. But you need to look at the sources like I just did. According to THEIR sources the federal government spent $3.456 trillion (exact match to my earlier post and source) and the state and local governments collected $1.3 trillion in taxes.

Federal = $3.456 trillion spent which 41.6% came from individual taxes which comes out to $12,114 per household
State and local = $1.3 trillion collected which 55.3% came from individual and property taxes or $6,057 per household

That's a grand total of $18,171 in tax per household from their average income of $67,530 which works out to 26.9% effective tax rate....

So my answer is 26.9%

Happy now???

Nope not happy...spending is spending..if you want to compile all the sources of income go ahead.excise tax..fees. tariffs social taxes...blah blah blah...have fun...there is actually a break down of it somewhere on that site I think.
As I said earlier we have a very complicated tax structure...that goes beyond just income state and sales tax.
Govt spending comes to about 50 grand per household...when we divide the total spending{6.1 trillion} divided by the households.
Oh and tim...use 2011 figures if you will

 

[Stone]

Ok, I went to that site where you got the $6.1 trillion number from. It's bullshit!

The last year that used actual numbers was 2010 where they claim it was $5.9 trillion. But you need to look at the sources like I just did. According to THEIR sources the federal government spent $3.456 trillion (exact match to my earlier post and source) and the state and local governments collected $1.3 trillion in taxes.

Federal = $3.456 trillion spent which 41.6% came from individual taxes which comes out to $12,114 per household
State and local = $1.3 trillion collected which 55.3% came from individual and property taxes or $6,057 per household

That's a grand total of $18,171 in tax per household from their average income of $67,530 which works out to 26.9% effective tax rate....

So my answer is 26.9%

Happy now???

Interesting....but you got suckered into one of TM endless fallacies.

 

[The Man]

...jibberish edited out for better forum appeal...

.
A1 on fries not bad..give it a try

 

[Stone]

Nope not happy...spending is spending..if you want to compile all the sources of income go ahead.excise tax..fees. tariffs social taxes...blah blah blah...have fun...there is actually a break down of it somewhere on that site I think.
As I said earlier we have a very complicated tax structure...that goes beyond just income state and sales tax.
Govt spending comes to about 50 grand per household...when we divide the total spending{6.1 trillion} divided by the households.
Oh and tim...use 2011 figures if you will

But connecting the average household liability to government spending is irrelevant because of progressive taxation.

 

[The Man]

... dishonesty removed for the purpose of correct topic flow...

bacon and egg farts.

 

[Stone]

.
A1 on fries not bad..give it a try

Trust me, that one of your better explanations

 

[Tim]

Oh and tim...use 2011 figures if you will

I won't use numbers that are clearly labeled as "guesstimated"

 

[robdawg1]

What more data do you need?
A percentage of your earnings at time of spending{same for all}..pretty simple.

As far as "rich paying more"...they would be as they are spending more.
Also to consider this way welfare isnt via tax breaks..but rather a check to aid in the hardship.

What do you think is a fair percentage?

I do find it interesting that you want those with more children to pay more {burden}...but are also in favor of those that make more pay more...how would they be a larger burden?

25% of earnings at the time of spending....? how does that work? you bring your w-2's to the grocery store to pick up a gallon of milk?