D. Peter Maus wrote:
On 1/25/10 14:56 , wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 18:14:13 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

And don't feed me the limpBALLS classic line about that the rich do pay
taxes.... most don't pay anymore then, and more then less then we do.
Proven fact

TOo true

The "they pay most of the taxes" is a false claim, misdirection, and
totally stupid way of trying to deflect the core principles



According to the IRS:


86% of all Federal Income Taxes are paid by the top 25% of income earners.

97% of all Federal Income Taxes are paid by the top 50% of income earners.

50% of all Federal Income Taxes are paid by the top 1% of income earners.



From the Wall Street Journal:

"Notably, however, the share of taxes paid by the top 1% has kept
climbing this decade -- to 39.4% in 2005, from 37.4% in 2000. The share
paid by the top 5% has increased even more rapidly. In other words,
despite the tax reductions of 2001 and 2003, the rich saw their share of
taxes paid rise at a faster rate than their share of income.



How much of the wealth do these people control? What percentage of
their cash flow do they pay in taxes? You do realize that Obama wants
to restore the tax rate to the same as Reagan?

On Jan 26, 8:46*am, dave wrote:
D. Peter Maus wrote:
On 1/25/10 14:56 , wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 18:14:13 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

And don't feed me the limpBALLS classic line about that the rich do pay
taxes.... most don't pay anymore then, and more then less then we do.
Proven fact

TOo true

The "they pay most of the taxes" is a false claim, misdirection, and
totally stupid way of trying to deflect the core principles

According to the IRS:

86% of all Federal Income Taxes are paid by the top 25% of income earners.

97% of all Federal Income Taxes are paid by the top 50% of income earners.

50% of all Federal Income Taxes are paid by the top 1% of income earners.

*From the Wall Street Journal:

"Notably, however, the share of taxes paid by the top 1% has kept
climbing this decade -- to 39.4% in 2005, from 37.4% in 2000. The share
paid by the top 5% has increased even more rapidly. In other words,
despite the tax reductions of 2001 and 2003, the rich saw their share of
taxes paid rise at a faster rate than their share of income.

How much of the wealth do these people control? *What percentage of
their cash flow do they pay in taxes? *

Those are, of course, two separate things. You've already been
told the percentage of their income that they pay in taxes, so
why do you care that despite paying most of the taxes in this
country, they manage to keep SOME of it? Is it envy?

On 1/26/10 08:15 , wrote:

You mean the tax rate on the wealthy that not one ever went broke
paying?



So that's your goal?

Why am I not surprised.

On Jan 26, 9:45*am, "D. Peter Maus"
wrote:
On 1/26/10 08:15 , wrote:

You mean the tax rate on the wealthy that not one ever went broke
paying?

* *So that's your goal?

* *Why am I not surprised.

Well, sure! "Tax the rich, feed the poor,
'til there are no rich no more..."

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 08:45:15 -0600, "D. Peter Maus"
wrote:

On 1/26/10 08:15 , wrote:

You mean the tax rate on the wealthy that not one ever went broke
paying?



So that's your goal?

No, the goal is for them to share in the expense of running a society

Commeasurately with the wealth they have.

What is the obligation of the citizen who pays no taxes for the expense of
'running society?'

On 1/26/10 11:10 , wrote:
On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 08:45:15 -0600, "D. Peter Maus"
wrote:

On 1/26/10 08:15 , wrote:

You mean the tax rate on the wealthy that not one ever went broke
paying?



So that's your goal?

No, the goal is for them to share in the expense of running a society

Commeasurately with the wealth they have.



They already pay far more than commensurate taxation would assess
by orders of magnitude.

What you propose is not sharing the expense but punitive
confiscation for providing the impetus that drives the economy.

On 1/26/10 14:04 , wrote:
On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:05:32 -0600, "D. Peter Maus"
wrote:


They already pay far more than commensurate taxation would assess
by orders of magnitude.

Nonsense

they pay a pittance on the wealth in percentage of what they "earn"
where the bottom earners pay nearly all of their income after living
expenses.



Go back a few posts. The IRS numbers are there.

wrote:

On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 14:35:04 -0600, "D. Peter Maus"
wrote:

they pay a pittance on the wealth in percentage of what they "earn"
where the bottom earners pay nearly all of their income after living
expenses.



Go back a few posts. The IRS numbers are there.

They pay less of their wealth than the poor do.

Period.

You're obviously having yours, boy.

I am a bussy, bussy Bee.I woiks on sumpin teel I gits tarred of tHat,
tHen I woiks on sumpin else till I gits tired of that, tHen I woiks on
sumpin else.On and on and on it goes,,,,

Looks like Mike Rowe on Dirty Jobs, tHe Discovery channel, caints
operate a left handed monkey wrench.
Left handed monkey wrenches really do exist.
cuhulin

On 1/26/10 18:14 , wrote:
On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 14:35:04 -0600, "D. Peter Maus"
wrote:

they pay a pittance on the wealth in percentage of what they "earn"
where the bottom earners pay nearly all of their income after living
expenses.



Go back a few posts. The IRS numbers are there.

They pay less of their wealth than the poor do.

Period.




They pay their taxes. And the poor's too. And most of the middle
classes, as well. All for services that they, themselves do not use.
And have no access to.



Your position isn't about fairness.