I hadn’t realized it until I saw a link in the comment threads, but the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy recently updated its comprehensive survey, “Who Pays? A Distributional Analysis of the Tax Systems in All 50 States,” and Washington once again tops the list of the Ten Most Regressive State Tax Systems… and by far.
Hooray for us!
Let’s put this in perspective. If we were to totally eliminate our state and local sales tax, property tax, B&O tax and various excise taxes and fees (gasoline, alcohol, tobacco, etc.), and replace the revenue with a single graduated income tax that levied a 2.9% rate on our wealthiest households (those with an average income of $1.8 million), and a 17.3% rate on our poorest (those earning an average of $11,000), with those in the middle three quintiles paying between 9.5% and 12.7%, it would have the same exact impact on Washington families as our current tax system does now.
Can anybody reasonably argue that such a system would be fair? I don’t think so.
But that’s exactly what we have now.
when taxes are outlawed only outlaws will have taxes.
why not just get rid of all the taxes and start fresh: EVERYONE pays 15%(I use 15% just as a random number) of their income. no more user taxes, no sales taxes, no deductions, no gas taxes, no cig taxes, NO OTHER TAXES….only a single income tax for the feds, and a single income tax for the states.
that is simple and fair.
and to go a step further – a constitutional amendment that puts a ceiling on what the tax % is going to be….and another constitutional amendment that requires the govt to balance its budget EVERY year.
Great Post
I wonder if the reality might be worse?
Generally, high incomes correlate with even higher levels of wealth. Poor folks have minimla if any wealth.
If I am correct the part of one’s wealth that is taxed would, in effect be greater than 100%
Consider this. A person earning 20,000 is able to cover all of her expenses including taxes, Her taxes, based on Goldy’s chart are 17.3% or about $3500. Her net worth might be as little as $1000 (garage sale prices for clothes and Goodwill furniture). So, she is paying a “taxe” that is 350% of her net worth!
The implication is that a poor person can not save. Since unearned income is taxed at a very LOW rate, the wealthy person gets a huge benefit that increases via compound interest.
As a Jerrdonian, I find this form of regressive taxation utterly unAmerican. The founding fathers on both the right and the left, including the Tea Baggers’ favorite Sam Adams, highly valued ownership of property BECAUSE property values do increase in time. In contrast our current tax system discourages poor people from saving.
SJ and his pals, Alexander Hamilton, Abe Lincoln, Sam Adams and Tom Jefferson all want a fair tax, a wealth tax! Maybe our group needs to start its own version of the Tea Baggers. Any body want to suggest a name?
That is fair.
But how does that help the democrats.
If poor people had to pay a few bucks in tax they would now be concerned about the federal debt and list of taxes that democrats want to impose on taxpayers.
Would poor people vote to increase their tax burden? Would the poor vote for a democrat knowing it was going to cost them more?
That’s why democrats are against a fair tax.
lebo@2–
A flat tax is probably the most fair….however there are consequences when it comes to encouraging investment that will create jobs. But I prefer that to the current system which reminds me of a birdsnest in a fishing reel. Sometimes you just need to cut the line and re-spool the reel. We are at that point.
“fair” is a subjective, highly debatable term.
Is it fair for folks to live in this country or State…use services much in excessive of what they pay??
Arguably not.
We are buying services…we should all pay.
Is it fair for a family who makes $1 million/yr. to pay 1000 times or whatever more taxes than a family that makes $30,000/yr. when then lower income family actually uses more services??
Arguably not FAIR…but mighty charitable.
Fair is probably the wrong word.
Is Equitable better??? Goldy is the wordsmith.
What do you think?
Goldy, Goldy, Goldy——–
The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy!
Wow. Sounds mighty official…until you look at the website and Board of Directors.
http://www.itepnet.org/board.htm
Specifically………..
ITEP is governed by a group of leaders from academia, labor, and the policy community.
No one from the business community or CPA/Actuarial Firms…hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm??
And you go down to the very bottom of the page and the very last Board Member and you find this gem——
Dean Tipps
Service Employees International Union
Ahhhhhhhhhh yes…
SEIU.
All this is is a Ponzi-type scheme trying to force Marxist Tax reform meaning take more money from the private sector.
Goldy, there will ALWAYS be a bottom-10.
Duuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
So you focus on the “bottom-10″…continually pushing for less regressive taxes…meaning by your own words in Washington a TAX INCREASE.
Nice try Goldy==No Sale!
re 4: If there are 5 customers in a barber shop and 4 of them earn approximately $60,000 a year and the 5th earns $500,000 a year, do you think it would be fair and accurate to state that their average income is $148,000 a year.
Obviously not.
Therefore, a 15% tax on everyone irrespective of their income, would put a heavier burden on the poorest citizens. Certainly does not sound like the Christian principles YOU say the US is founded upon.
I suppose your answer to my challenge is that I am a racist.
The only way to semi-justify a flat tax is to base it on marginal income — above what is necessary to avoid abject poverty and destitution.
IOW, exempt the first $xx in income from this flat percentage, then tax everything above that, including dividends, capital gains, and other such money-making-money.
We could argue about where to set that exemption line, but without acknowledging the “safety net” needs of all of us (especially the poorest of us), there’s nothing to discuss.
What we need.
Progressive income tax, sales taxes on cigs, booze and gas and that’s it. Replace local sales taxes with revenue sharing from the state sales tax.
RE: flat tax and so on.
It doesn’t make any sense for people who make below a living wage paying taxes.
I’d like to see a 25¢ surcharge on every retail sale of booze with the money going into a dedicated fund to help pay for alcoholism treatment programs.
Hmmm…could it be that despite the screeches and groans from the right about how horrible the tax burden is in Washington State, that our tax structure actually contributes to the high ratings we seem to receive for being “favorable to business”?
@11 Considering the portion of the retail price of alcholic beverages here that’s either tax or liquor-store profits, that’s essentially already a done deal.
Now, how about sticking a similar surcharge on each gallon of gas, or onto auto license fees, to help pay for the consequences of people become raving lunatics whenever they get behind the wheel? Or a surcharge on bullets to help better teach people not to shoot them at themselves or each other?
Maybe we could do away with taxes althogether, and just charge “user fees”. Betcha when all was said and done, it would more or less come out in the wash. Everyone would still feel overburdened, and government would still be strapped trying to provide services where they were needed.
“It doesn’t make any sense for people who make below a living wage paying taxes.”
Likewise, it doesn’t make sense for someone with an income about 10% above the poverty line to be pushed into poverty by a 15% flat tax.
Of course Wingnuts like Mr. Cynical Qaeda aren’t really serious about a pure flat tax anyway. There would be howls about how “anti-family” a pure flat tax would be if, say, a family of 6 had to pay the same flat 15% as a family of one earning the identical income. So, already, we are on the slippery slope to dependents, deductions, exemptions, schedules, worksheets, loopholes, tax-deferrals….
ArtFart @12:
Regressive taxation is certainly favorable to businessowners and business investors.
No wonder Forbes or the WSJ or whoever it is that ranks business-favorability puts WA at or near the top of their list … it’s not Big Business that’s getting screwed by our tax structure.
Pssst, everyone, guess what?
The top 50% pay 96% of all income taxes.
The bottom 50% pay 3% of all income taxes.
@2 “that is simple and fair.”
It’s neither simple nor fair. For starters, it creates “free goods” in the form of government services that currently require payment of fees, and we all know what the supply-demand curve says about demand for valuable goods that are free. But it does have the advantage of being understandable by conservative simpletons who can’t understand any word with more than one syllable or any number larger than one digit.
@5 “A flat tax is probably the most fair….however there are consequences when it comes to encouraging investment that will create jobs.”
So utterly Klownish: The Owning Class shouldn’t pay taxes; only the working class should pay taxes.
I’ll agree to a flat-rate state income tax, provided there’s a reasonable personal exemption (so the poor don’t pay taxes on subsistence income) and it isn’t loaded up with deductions and tax credits that turn it into a gift tree for the wealthy.
@6 This is your idea of a refutation?
Tax Reform
The principles of tax reform, if not the actual policy, are pretty simple.
1. Everyone agrees that we need some form of taxation to pay for common needs, If there were no taxes, then the gummint would have to print money to pay for these same needs. Isn’t that the real idea behind Reaganism?
2. Taxes need to interfere minimally with opportunity. That is we WANT everyone to earn as much as they can. Doesn’t that conflict with labor/democratic ideas of fairness?
Income taxes, especially progressive taxes, seem to violet the second principle. Obviously we do not want to discourage folks from working harder and earning more money.
BUT (the inevitable conjunction)
An income tax that prevents poor people from saving is even worse since this relegates the largest part of the productive population to permanent low productivity.
This is why I favor a wealth tax. Money invested in cars (even SJ’s wonderful Ferrari), fine wines, waterfront mansions, or gold coins (Beck’s faves) is not productive. A tax system biased toward income actually encourages acquisition of non productive wealth!
I had a friend in Seattle who was a multimillionaire in Real Estate. Ed worked vigorously to increase his holding and minimize his “income.” Despite a very impressive life style (three homes, a plane, a boat, an ex wife and a new wife), most years Ed managed to pay NO taxes.
Not only was this unfair, Ed’s choice of investments in non productive real estate was harmful to our economy.
This is why I favor a wealth tax like the one in Sweden. The tax should not only be progressive, it should emphasize non productive assets.
There are interesting conservative implications in a wealth tax. …If we have a wealth tax, then there is a strong argument AGAINST an estate tax. … A wealth tax is a copunter incentive to the transfer of wealth through family foundations.
BTW … for those who wann throw tea into the harbor, Sam Adams was strongly opposed to John Hancock because Hancock believed that the new state should protect his wealth,
Maybe we need to bring back the Sam Adams Movement, wasn’t that called the Sons of Liberty? Imagine Of course as libs we would want to call ourselves something non sexist, howsabout The “Seed of Liberty?”
Seems to me that from tiny acorns great teas grow while teabags just rot away.
Damn .. just learned that the effin TBers already use the term seeds. I suppose we could be the Tree of Liberty? Adams’ Progeny? Heirs of the Founders?
@13 “Maybe we could do away with taxes althogether, and just charge “user fees”. Betcha when all was said and done, it would more or less come out in the wash.”
This is the next-to-holy-grail of wingnut tax policy. For them, the ideal policy is making wage earners pay all the taxes so inheritances and income derived from ownership of assets aren’t taxed at all. The second-best policy is eliminating taxes and charging user fees for all government services. For example, if your house catches fire, you pay the fire department to put the fire out. If Medic One comes to your house because granny had a heart attack, you pay for what essentially is a private service. The poor would not be able to use public libraries without paying. I think you can see what a lousy idea this is without my having to provide additional examples.
@14 “There would be howls about how “anti-family” a pure flat tax would be if, say, a family of 6 had to pay the same flat 15% as a family of one earning the identical income.”
You can solve this problem in a single line of the tax form by giving a personal exemption for each dependent just like on the federal tax form. There should be no deductions or exemptions beyond that. Otherwise you’ll get the complexity, special-interest favoritism, and distortions that litter the federal tax code.
@16 Parroting Rush Limbaugh talking points, I see. Here’s a fact check.
The top 50% earns 86.19% of all income.
The bottom 50% earns 13.81% of all income.
So before you ask your representatives to shift the tax burden to the “bottom 50%”, ask them to shift the share of the overall national income to the bottom 50% first.
@16 “The top 50% pay 96% of all income taxes.”
Psst, guess what everyone, the top 10% earn 46% of all income.
@23 A Republican’s idea of a “fair” income tax is taxing the subsistence income of a poor family at the same rate as the portion of a billionaire’s income that is spent on mansions, yachts, private jets, hunting lodges, mistresses, and fourth and fifth homes.
35 years ago I wrote my senior thesis promoting a flat rate (federal) income tax of 10%, on all monies earned above the poverty level for a family of 4. It raised tens of billions of dollars more then the (then) current system. No deductions, no exemptions, no credits for dependents. Nothing. You earn it, you pay your 10%.
I was resoundly booed by my professor and my classmates as a heartless cad. What about the family with 10 kids they boo hood? What about the person struggling to buy a home they wailed.
They were wrong then and they are wrong now. People want to buy homes, and I guess some people want to have 10 kids. Not my problem. Same with all other benefits. Our system is broken (I like the bird nest analogy above). We need to cut the line and move on.
Our State’s most regressive taxes are on business owners, with the despicable B&O tax. Get rid of it.
Go to a flat rate income tax. The only caveat being that increases in the percentage MUST be approved by a super majority of voters. Our Legislature and our Congress have lost our trust to govern.
the facts that will be meaningful and comprehensivble are to say “A family making $25K pays an extra $X,000 in state and local taxes in our system, so it costs you $x,000 more to live here than in Idaho or Oregon. And this benefit is going to the richest such that a family making $1,000,000 is saving $40,000 a year (whatever) by living here rather than in Idaho or Oregon. So, we have made a system of class warfare, teh rich attacking the poor. We’re going to end it by ensuring TAX RELIEF to all familes making under $40K a year. They are struggling to pay for food housing and eduction already, we shouldn’t tax the poor to help the rich.”
The double reverse irony of this post is how people in graduate seminars talk. this kind of talk is why we progressive do not connect. It gets an F in political communication. NObody every won an eight hour day by going around saying “our state ranks number one in terms of the regressivity social sectorwise of the relative share of the labor sector versus the capital sector diurnally as a percentage of blah blah blah blah blah blah blah ….”
You go around saying “8 hour day!”
We need to be saying “Stop taxing working families!” “total tax relief if you make under $30K” that kind of thing.
The problem with going to an all income tax is that in an economic downturn, those are the jurisdictions that get hit the hardest. States that rely solely on income tax are in far worse financial shape than those whose taxation systems are diversified. A blended approach is what will work best for states.
That said, a REALLY flat tax at the federal level would be the most equitable. No exemptions and no deductions. Period. That way it doesn’t matter if your income is from flipping burgers or selling stock.
More importantly, if you’re a corporation (which is, after all, a citizen under our federal law) and you’re showing profit to your stockholders – then you’re paying taxes. No deductions, no exemptions.
As far as estate tax goes, if money or its equivalent (securities, stocks, etc) exchanges hands, then it’s taxed. If it’s capital investments, not taxed until converted to cash or its equivalent.
“State Sales Tax or State Income Tax Deduction – If you itemize deductions, you have the option of claiming either state income or state sales taxes, whichever one is larger. You can’t claim both. You can use either your actual expenses or the state sales tax tables to figure your sales tax deduction. You could fill out the worksheet and use the optional general sales tax tables in the Schedule A instructions for Form 1040 or make it easier on yourself by using the Sales Tax Deduction Calculator on the IRS.gov Web site”
http://www.nj.com/warrenreport.....uld_s.html
So, those with “low” income can deduct the full amount (if itemized) or use the IRS calculator for sales tax deductions from federal taxes.
AND those “low” income wage earners fall in the ~50% of wage earners who don’t pay any taxes….
I checked out the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. Pretty much your standard socialist and accademics on the board of directors. Funded by organizations and people of the same ilk.
Yawn…same shit, different day.
We should be proud to be number one on the list.
Well, if we take all these percentages at face value, seems to me they provide a powerful incentive for success. Poor people should work harder and improve their situation so they can get taxed at a lower rate.
@26…..right on!
@26 “35 years ago I wrote my senior thesis promoting a flat rate (federal) income tax of 10%, on all monies earned above the poverty level for a family of 4. It raised tens of billions of dollars more then the (then) current system. No deductions, no exemptions, no credits for dependents. Nothing. You earn it, you pay your 10%.”
Historically, federal spending has fluctuated within a fairly narrow range of 18% to 22% of GDP. A 10% flat-rate tax would not raise enough money to support this level of spending.
“Our State’s most regressive taxes are on business owners, with the despicable B&O tax. Get rid of it.”
Although the B & O tax is regressive, the sales tax is even more regressive, and tax relief for low income households should get higher priority than tax relief for businesses. Ideally, we should adopt a state income tax that provides tax relief for both groups.
Oh my GAWD!! How terrible!!!
A study done by people from academia (very smart people), labor (people who fight for working middle-class families) and the policy community (people who understand how policies can be best crafted to suit the needs of the majority of the governed – We The PEOPLE!)
Mr. C does make one good point though — “No one from the business community or CPA/Actuarial Firms…” YEAH!?!? Who in the HELL is looking out for the interests of the AIG’s, Bank of America’s and other Wall Street Fat Cats of the world???
Sheeeez, how stupid do you have to be in order to believe the conservative line of bull shit?
@32 “Poor people should work harder and improve their situation so they can get taxed at a lower rate.”
Poor people should inherit millions of tax-free dollars so they can be successful, too. By the way, no one works harder than the poor. They have the dirtiest and most physically arduous jobs. They work two or three jobs to make ends meet. They work nights, weekends, and holidays. And they’re still poor. “Hard work” isn’t what produces high incomes in our system; owning assets does.
Wage earners can’t work their way to wealth in this country. Wages aren’t high enough, and taxes on wages are too high. For most people, buying lottery tickets is a better capital accumulation strategy than working at a day job.
@36
“Wage earners can’t work their way to wealth in this country.”
Wrong! This country, more than any other country, provides this opportunity…
That’s why so many risk everything to get here…
Your glass half empty attitude is your obstacle, don’t project it on to others..
“They have the dirtiest and most physically arduous jobs. They work two or three jobs to make ends meet. They work nights, weekends, and holidays. And they’re still poor.”
WOW..THEY DO? And???? Can they read? Can they write, speak english? Do they have criminal records? I mean, all children in this state are offered a free high school education. Did they graduate? HOw many of these “poor” Roger are working youth? How many are working entry level jobs? Have roomates, share rent, utilities etc?
You suffer from Entitlementitis, where everyone “deserves” a flat screen tv, high speed internet, two cars and a house.
I don’t blame you, it’s the result of liberal thinking.
@#16:
The “top 50%” aren’t paying any taxes at all. Neither are the “bottom 50%”. Families and individuals pay taxes, not groups of people. And what matters is how much those individuals and families earn versus how much they pay in taxes.
In Washington State the families and individuals who earn the least pay the highest percentage of their income in taxes. It’s that simple. End of story.
Now, if the entire top 10% of income earners pooled all their cash in one bank account, bought a big house to live together in, and signed domestic partnership agreements with each other, then you might have a point.
But they haven’t – so you don’t.
@26 The Duke
Gosh, you may not care about the parents buy you sure as hell need to think ab out the kids. Unless the kids get help, we end up with as permanent under class … you know like any other third world country.
Hows about instead a flat tax of 2% on all non productive wealth? You buys a Porsche, you otta pay for the same flat tax for that privildge my gardner pays for the bike he owns. Ooops he uses the bike to get to work so HE should pay no tax?
@ 28 country girl
Nice if you do not mind the fact that wealthy folks rig their income to be as much in capital (savings>) as possible so they do not pay any tax.
37. Right Stuff spews:
what world are you from? The US record of upward mobility has failed for a good decade. We actually are headed in the other direction.
“EVERYONE pays 15%(I use 15% just as a random number) of their income”
Right. Let’s tax the rich man’s yacht money and the poor man’s rent at the same rate.
@41
“what world are you from? The US record of upward mobility has failed for a good decade. We actually are headed in the other direction”
I don’t live in the world of Liberal dementia if that’s what you mean…
Oh, and last I checked, people were risking it all, meaning their lives, to get a chance at our birthright. That’s a fact!
Yes I know about studies that indicate that poor kids are at a disadvantage with respect to closing income gaps generation to generation. There is one fundamental truth however, rich or poor, the INDIVIDUAL gets to decided their fate. Individual initiative still pays in the USA…
@28 “That said, a REALLY flat tax at the federal level would be the most equitable. No exemptions and no deductions. Period. That way it doesn’t matter if your income is from flipping burgers or selling stock.”
You’re dead wrong. Nothing could be more INEQUITABLE that what you’ve proposed. Taxing income that pays rent, buys food, and pays for medical care isn’t the same as taxing income that buys yachts and European vacations.
Trolls @various: Where are the wage earners’ yachts?
re 43: At a certain point in pulling yourself up by your bootstraps, you will need access to a reasonable amount of capital that you can pay back at a low rate over a long time period.
Energy, pluck, and brains will only get you so far. In any given business endeavor, the guy with the most money can undercut competitors for long enough to buy them out or run them out, and then the price goes up.
The people who already have the most money generally make sure that they keep it that way.
the rabbit appears to want to tax everyone to the point that all people have the same post-tax income
if you make $45k – you get taxed $5k and have $40k left over
if you make $90k, you get taxed $50k and have the same $40k left over
aaahhh, you gotta love these out of touch socialists….
reality check: not everyone is equal and not everyone deserves to be paid the same.
quit your jealousy.
Tax everyone at the same rate, no deductions and no other taxes…end of problem and end of story.
the rabbit appears to want to tax everyone to the point that all people have the same post-tax income
if you make $45k – you get taxed $5k and have $40k left over
if you make $90k, you get taxed $50k and have the same $40k left over
aaahhh, you gotta love these out of touch socialists….
reality check: not everyone is equal and not everyone deserves to be paid the same.
quit your jealousy.
Tax everyone at the same rate, no deductions and no other taxes…end of problem and end of story.
GBS replied…
If you watched Glenn Beck’s show yesterday… many of those fat cats you are complaining about are Mmmm Mmmm Mmmm’s economic advisors. Glenn went through the myriad connections of all these fat cats.
You should download yesterday’s Glenn Beck show. Glenn identified how Mmmm Mmmm Mmmm complains about the Wall Street Fat Cats while giving them applause in the background and hiding his administrations connections to them behind the scenes.
PRICELESS.
Wow Raven, that’s another of many of your irrelevant comments.
The yacht is taxed when purchased. The yacht is taxed when it’s re-licensed every year. The yacht is taxed when used and moored in the port slip.
What a maroon.
@50 Puddy is getting senile
yachts depreciate and are deducted by corporate types.
there is no use tax (unless you count the taxes on fule that do nt include highway taxes).
If a second hime get fed tax ddeuction
Slips can be port or starboard
Rent …
taxed every time it is paid (we call that the real estate tax)
no value to “property” acrues to renter
Yachts
licensing fees n yachts are minimal .. they are regi9stered with Fed govt for one thing rather than being lisenced by the state.
Right Stuff correctly wrote:
And you know what? Dick Turban Durbin killed the WA DC Opportunity Scholarship Program this year for helping over 1500 poor black and hispanic kids getting the education gaps which help close income gaps generation to generation.
Democratics don’t want poor inner black and hispanic kids to get the needed education to help close income gaps generation to generation. They want black and hispanic kids dumb, drug using and dependent on Democratics.
This is because Democratics get out their knee pads and kiss specific areas of the NEA body as needed.
SeattleJew lost it again
Who said the yacht was for corporate types?
Wrong again dude. A friend has a 35 footer at the Everett Marina. He pays monthly fees for his boat to be moored there. That’s a “use tax” as you call it. He uses the services provided by Everett Marina. Another friend has his boat in a shed at his house. He doesn’t pay this tax.
While you can’t deduct rent from Federal taxes, some states allow you to deduct rent from state taxes as long as you are filing as the head of a household. Butt, a rent deduction can be claimed on Federal taxes if the rent is for a facility used for business. Also if you can prove you run a home business you may be able to deduct part of the rent on their home or apartment from their federal taxes if they can show that a certain area of the home or apartment is used for the purpose of conducting business.
Check with the IRS SeattleJew.
Stay stupid my friend.
Puddy @ 53–
Excellent!
SeattleJew is just allowing his misplaced anger to justify makin’ shit up.
Corporate Deductions for Yachts?
Very, very, very limited…just like Country Clubs and 3 martini lunches.
SJ…it’s almost 2010, not 1976.
SJ also fails to acknowledge all the taxes, fees the wealthy pay on certain asset classes.
Like Algore, it’s an Inconvenient Truth.
So SJ…as a Yacht owner, why not stage a protest and sink your boat?!!
It would be a classic and get you front page headlines.
Although you would have to pay for the clean-up.
Based on the data in the report on page 110, I charted the actual dollar amounts in taxes paid by income levels.
As somebody stated above, defining how to measure “fair” is very subjective.
Chart is here.
IMO, fair would be something like the FairTax (www.fairtax.org), where everyone but the poor pays a flat rate (and the poor actually get a pre-bate to offset their living expenses – which they can save).
THE last person I would ever listen to as a source of information/news is Glenn Beck.
No citations as to why are necessary when Glenn Beck’s name is mentioned.
16 Troll
Who besides you is talking about the federal income tax? Totally beside the point.
But if you look at the distribution of income and wealth in this country then your figures make perfect sense. The people who don’t have any money don’t pay a lot in taxes. Not exactly a surprising conclusion.
20 SJ
If only you had any evidence at all that a progressive income tax did any such thing. Data is nice. Try it some time.
Do you think that rich people are just pining away to be poor and try all of the time to achieve that desirable state?
Or do you think that a rich person, facing, for the sake of argument, a “progressive” 50% tax on all income over $1 million, might actually choose to earn an extra million for the $500K he/she would bring home instead of purposely foregoing the additional $500K because the tax just irks him/her so much? “Sorry boss, but you can just keep that bonus. After all, why should I settle for a paltry $500,000?”
rate-schmate. Income tax and other taxes are not about tax rates.
It’s ALL about what qualifies as taxable income and taxable goods. And those with the money to buy politicians have been pretty good at getting the stuff they receive/use/invest/collect exempted from taxation or subjected to more favorable rates. And I am including capital gains and inheritance.
And if you think that some exemption-free tax will pass in any real-world legislature, you’re probably too stupid to participate in this discussion. Cynical, I’m looking at you.
It’s truly remarkable that we’re number one on the list, given the socialist I-5 corridor in Washington. It takes a lot of work by those opposed to wealth re-distribution (through an income tax) to defeat the socialist mindset along I-5. Those of us who oppose an income tax for this state should be proud of ourselves.
Gbs retorts:
Glenn has a red phone with a public number. Every day Glenn asks the whitey house to call him if he gets his facts wrong. He shows the red phone taunting the whitey house to call him.
They don’t because they can’t find anything wrong with his facts on Democrat political connectivity to Wall Street connectivity.
Stay stupid my friend.
BAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA
Holy SHIT BatPUDDY are you saying Glenn Beck has a BAT PHONE?!?!?!?
BAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA
And the fact that the President of the United States of America doesn’t have time to call and refute every single lie is somehow proof positive in BAT SHIT CRAZY WORLD that Glenn Beck is telling the truth????????
BAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA
And then . . . . BAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA
. . . you have the gonads to tell ME to “Stay stupid”?????
BAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA
I’m keeping this one. What a GEM!!
Thanks for the Christmas present, Puddy.
I’d like to see another study: “Who Benefits? A Distributional Analysis of the Transfer Payment Systems in all 50 States.”
The poor claim a disproportionately high share of taxpayer-funded benefits such as 1) Basic Health or Medicaid 2) Early learning subsidies 3)in home care subsidies for the elderly 4)dental, podiatric or eye care 5)mental health services for the poor 6) GAU payments 7) Higher education need-based grants 8) Food stamps 9) Apple Health, a.k.a. cover all kids healthcare up to 300% of the poverty level. 10) Unemployment insurance.
There are other transfer payments they receive, of course. I just named a few that occurred to me off the top of my head. I would be curious to see how the percentages would change when direct transfer payments were accounted for. Rich people, in general, do not claim any of the direct benefits named above. And the most expensive benefit of all, public education, is not generally claimed by the rich either. They prefer to pay for a private education for their children.
Cash Making Opportunities – The Beginning The working life is already tough enough, but the worries of being out of work was even tougher. The unsecured working environment have prompted me to search the internet for an alternative source of extra income so that I could learn how to Make Money Work for me and be Financially Independent. I listed down a number of Free Internet Business Opportunity Ideas while researching ways how people earn money online while working-from-home…….
onlineuniversalwork