On May 25, 5:51*pm, "Sid9" sid9@ bellsouth.net wrote:
"RD Sandman" wrote in message

... "Sid9" sid9@ bellsouth..net wrote :

"RD Sandman" wrote in message
. ..
Gray Ghost wrote in
96.97.142:

RD Sandman wrote in
1:

"Scout" wrote in
:

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
On 5/24/2011 12:21 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
John *wrote in
:

On 5/24/2011 11:40 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
John * wrote in
:

On 5/24/2011 10:47 AM, gfn wrote:
...
Sure it is. *It gives a clear, concise and true picture of
who
pays the federal income tax burden in this country. *If you
want to talk about all taxes and all revenue that goes to the
government then your right. *I know of no place that compiles
that data. ...
OK. *Then, please cut and paste the relevant parts here, I
need
them pointed out to me.
If you can't understand the date presented at that site, you
have no hope of understanding any data presented to you. *Which
explains some of your ideas.....
If it is so simple, as you pretend, it would be no problem ...
you are attempting a circular argument ...

Just post something which proves your point ... if you can, from
the site you are claiming explains it openly ... DUH!
I didn't make that claim, however, here is the data:

2008

Top 1% * * AGI$380,354 * Percentage 38.02
Top 5% * * AGI$159,619 * Percentage 58.72
Top 10% * *AGI$113,799 * Percentage 69.94
Top 25% * *AGI$ 67,280 * Percentage 86.34
Top 50% * *AGI$ 33,048 * Percentage 97.30
Bottom 50% AGI$ 33,048 * Percentage *2.70

2007

Top 1% * * AGI$410,096 * Percentage 40.42
Top 5% * * AGI$160,041 * Percentage 60.63
Top 10% * *AGI$113,018 * Percentage 71.22
Top 25% * *AGI$ 66,532 * Percentage 86.59
Top 50% * *AGI$ 32,879 * Percentage 97.11
Bottom 50% AGI$ 32,879 * Percentage *2.89

Here is the site:

http://ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

The Virginian-Pilot
� May 15, 2011
By Don Tabor

Who really pays the baker's taxes? The baker may write the check,
but he does not bear the cost, and in that paradox lies the cause
of much of the bitter partisanship and polarization that poisons
our political process. But to understand that problem, we must
consider how taxes are applied to the production of goods and
services.

So, how does the loaf of bread the baker sells come to market?

A farmer grew and harvested wheat for sale to the miller to be
made into flour for the baker. The farmer paid income taxes based
on his profit from the sale and property tax on his farm and
equipment. Those taxes were, from his point of view, just another
cost of doing business in the course of earning his living, no
different from fuel for his tractor or wages and taxes for
employees.

Since every other farmer had roughly the same expenses and taxes,
the price they charge the miller must cover their expenses and
taxes, plus their after-tax disposable income and savings.
Otherwise, there would be no point in growing wheat. All of these
costs and taxes were passed on to the miller, embedded in the
price of wheat.

Likewise, when the miller sold the flour ground from the wheat to
the baker, his taxes, plus the income and Social Security taxes
he
withheld from his employees, plus the farmer's taxes, were all
passed on to the baker.

The baker then sold his bread made from the flour, carrying with
it his own taxes plus those of his employees, plus all those
previous taxes from the farmer, miller and their employees,
hidden
in the price of that loaf of bread. The buyer and his family ate
the bread, and, having done so, could not sell it to anyone else
and pass the taxes along, as the baker and everyone else before
had done.

So, it is the consumer who paid the baker's taxes, along with the
farmer's taxes, the miller's taxes and the taxes they withheld
from all of their employees. From bread to automobiles to brain
surgery, the price of everything we buy carries in it the hidden
taxes of everyone who contributed to the production of that
product or service to the tune of, on average, 23 cents of every
dollar we spend for federal taxes alone.

Our complex, pervasive and expensive tax code is, in reality, a
scheme to draft businesses and individuals as unpaid and
unknowing
tax collectors to gather a hidden sales tax and to keep voters
from realizing who really bears the burden of those high taxes.

There is no way around this central reality that all income and
business taxes are a deception and that all taxes are eventually
paid by the consumer, hidden in the price of goods and services.
It doesn't matter what tax rate is applied to which tax bracket,
or what deductions you receive. These devices change only the
degree to which you are a tax collector, but the burden taxes
place on your life depends solely on what you spend.

Paying this hidden consumption tax is unavoidable, but the
illusion of income-based taxing does a great deal of harm. First,
it distorts our economic decisions. Goods and services that are
provided by highly taxed individuals and companies, like health
care, are artificially more expensive than necessary, while raw
materials and natural resources are underpriced, leading to
overconsumption and waste.

But even worse, these hidden taxes distort the political process,
encouraging government overspending by politicians who exploit
the
mistaken belief of many voters that government spending can be
paid for solely by taxing corporations or the "rich." All of the
exploitation of envy and demagoguery - which brings so much ill
will to our politics and drives wedges between Americans who
would
be better served by mutual respect and compassion - is ultimately
the meaningless exploitation of a lie.

Our income tax system, with its escalating marginal rates,
appears
progressive, but the reality is extremely regressive. Currently,
the lower income 45 percent of wage earners may pay no income tax
directly, but in reality, with their FICA taxes added to the
hidden embedded tax, their true federal tax burden is almost 30
percent of their meager income.

Voters might well choose differently were they aware that
government spending is ultimately paid for by everyone, through
an
invisible sales tax disguised as a high cost of living.

Guest columnist Don Tabor of Chesapeake is a grandfather,
Libertarian activist and proprietor of TidewaterLiberty.com. He
is
a dentist in Norfolk and Hampton.

A flat tax, and NO OTHER TAXES! *PERIOD!

Agreed. A flat tax. Mr A buys a product he pays the same tax as Mr..
B.

Mr. A pays the same rate of taxes on his income that Mr. B does.

No exceptions, no exclusions, except those which apply to ALL.

If you're going to exempt Mr. A housing, food, medical, then Mr B
gets the exact same exemptions.

Otherwise, it's not a flat tax.

And it won't fix the problem he is whining about....which is the
rich
not paying a hundred times what the poor do.

And truthfully you never will. It is childish whining to think so.
The
best you can hope for is that everyone pays the same percentage
without a plethora of deductions and weasel outs.

Which is what my flat tax proposal does.

AFter, of course, you tell me exactly how much the guv needs and why..

GG, somehow I doubt that decision is up to you.

Paying the "same percentage" is not fair.

The BURDEN is much less on the wealthy.

The wealthy are paying most of the income tax burden. *You wouldn't be
happy with any tax scheme that didn't penalize the wealthy and not charge
you a dime.

.
.
They pay the aggregate of most of the money and it has far less impact on
their lives than the ordinary working American.
To that extent it's unfair.

The progressive income tax, restored by removing the inequities that have
been put there by the wealthy, would fix it.

Serious question: restored to what point in time? Please keep in
mind that the income tax has been tinkered with on a regular basis
since it came into existence.

Restoring the inheritance tax to eliminate the loop holes that have neutered
it would help, too.

Neither the Bushes, the Harrimans, the Kennedys, nor the Rockefellers heirs
got poor because of this tax.

Then remove the caps from the SS tax and the Medicare tax.....


The cap for Medicare was removed in the mid 1990's.

The cap (wage base) for Social Security is used to limit both the
income that is taxed, and the benefit derived. Would you also remove
the cap from the benefit?

Voila! No more fiscal problems!

Then cut the **** out of the military budget.