Why not 10 grand each?
- Thread starter WVUCOOPER
- Start date
My newsfeed is filled with folks of his ilk...baby’s first omnibus. It would be cute if I knew these people weren’t voting. We should have courses on how the government works and you need to pass it before you can vote.
Let's try this - $10k for what purpose? In addition to something else or in replacement to something else?
How about you have to pay taxes before you vote and you have to have a picture ID to vote!
It'd be cute if I knew you understood what was happening. The offshore handouts to their friends is what lines their pockets. We should have courses on how money laundering works, and you need to pass it before you post.
OceanTide83 still doesn't know what an omnibus bill is and that it doesn't have anything to do with the covid relief despite having ample time to google it. Unless of course OceanTide83 just find out yesterday that the US sends money overseas. That's the only thing that would explain today's crankiness.
Really is unimpressive how stupid liberals are when it comes to this. Wonder how much of that 10 mill to ugly women of Pakistan goes to women? How much goes into arms procurement?
Women studies in Pakistan? What could be worth that over there? Has to be a political payoff with money coming back t liberals.
Joe Biden often talks about repealing President Trump’s “tax cuts for the wealthy,” claiming in a town hall that “about $1.3 trillion of the $2 trillion of the tax cuts went to the top 1/10th of 1 percent” of earners.
But did the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) disproportionally benefit high earners? Comparing the income tax data for 2017 (the year before the TCJA became law) with 2018, clearly demonstrates that it did not.
According to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation, the TCJA reduced effective tax rates “for all income groups in 2018.” Because we have a progressive tax system, high earners pay the highest rates and received the largest rate reductions. However, lowering rates for a group of taxpayers does not necessarily reduce their share of the tax burden.
Let’s look at the TCJA’s impact on the top one percent of taxpayers. In 2018, 1.6 million taxpayers reported earning $500,000 or more. While the amount all taxpayers owed the IRS in 2018 declined by $64 billion, the amount these high earners owed increased by $16 billion.
Their share of the tax burden also increased. They accounted for 22 percent of total income in 2018 (a 0.5 percentage point increase over 2017) but their share of total income taxes rose to 40 percent (a 2.3 percentage point increase).
By the way, you read that right. About 1.6 million, or one percent of all taxpayers, bore 40 percent of the income tax burden due to the federal government.
So, as a result of the TCJA, high earners paid more taxes to the government, while everyone else paid less. They also paid a larger percentage of all taxes, while everyone else paid a smaller percentage.
But what about the middle class specifically? While there is no accepted definition for the “middle class,” median family income in 2018 was $63,179, so let’s look at taxpayers making between $50,000 and $100,000.
In 2018, there were about 35 million taxpayers in this bracket, an increase of roughly one million over 2017 (a growing middle class). In total, they owed $31 billion less in 2018 than in 2017. In other words, the middle class got nearly half of the $64 billion decline in taxes owed under the TCJA.
As for their share of the tax burden, it also declined. While they accounted for 22 percent of total income (roughly the same as in 2017), their share of income taxes was 13 percent (over a percentage point less than in 2017).
Let’s look at taxpayers making under $25,000. The number of taxpayers in this bracket was 52 million in 2018, a drop of 2.3 million taxpayers from 2017. In total, their tax liability declined 16 percent or $4 billion, from $25 billion in 2017 to $21 billion in 2018.
Their share of the tax burden also declined. Those taxpayers accounted for 4 percent of total income (roughly the same as in 2017) but their share of taxes was one percent (slightly less than in 2017).
So here are the results of the Trump tax cuts:
--The income tax burden for high earners increased $16 billion to 40 percent of the total owed.
--The income tax burden for middle class earners decreased by $31 billion to 13 percent of the total owed.
--The income tax burden for low wage workers decreased by $4 billion to 1 percent of the total owed.
Doesn’t sound much like a tax cut for the wealthy.
But did the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) disproportionally benefit high earners? Comparing the income tax data for 2017 (the year before the TCJA became law) with 2018, clearly demonstrates that it did not.
According to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation, the TCJA reduced effective tax rates “for all income groups in 2018.” Because we have a progressive tax system, high earners pay the highest rates and received the largest rate reductions. However, lowering rates for a group of taxpayers does not necessarily reduce their share of the tax burden.
Let’s look at the TCJA’s impact on the top one percent of taxpayers. In 2018, 1.6 million taxpayers reported earning $500,000 or more. While the amount all taxpayers owed the IRS in 2018 declined by $64 billion, the amount these high earners owed increased by $16 billion.
Their share of the tax burden also increased. They accounted for 22 percent of total income in 2018 (a 0.5 percentage point increase over 2017) but their share of total income taxes rose to 40 percent (a 2.3 percentage point increase).
By the way, you read that right. About 1.6 million, or one percent of all taxpayers, bore 40 percent of the income tax burden due to the federal government.
So, as a result of the TCJA, high earners paid more taxes to the government, while everyone else paid less. They also paid a larger percentage of all taxes, while everyone else paid a smaller percentage.
But what about the middle class specifically? While there is no accepted definition for the “middle class,” median family income in 2018 was $63,179, so let’s look at taxpayers making between $50,000 and $100,000.
In 2018, there were about 35 million taxpayers in this bracket, an increase of roughly one million over 2017 (a growing middle class). In total, they owed $31 billion less in 2018 than in 2017. In other words, the middle class got nearly half of the $64 billion decline in taxes owed under the TCJA.
As for their share of the tax burden, it also declined. While they accounted for 22 percent of total income (roughly the same as in 2017), their share of income taxes was 13 percent (over a percentage point less than in 2017).
Let’s look at taxpayers making under $25,000. The number of taxpayers in this bracket was 52 million in 2018, a drop of 2.3 million taxpayers from 2017. In total, their tax liability declined 16 percent or $4 billion, from $25 billion in 2017 to $21 billion in 2018.
Their share of the tax burden also declined. Those taxpayers accounted for 4 percent of total income (roughly the same as in 2017) but their share of taxes was one percent (slightly less than in 2017).
So here are the results of the Trump tax cuts:
--The income tax burden for high earners increased $16 billion to 40 percent of the total owed.
--The income tax burden for middle class earners decreased by $31 billion to 13 percent of the total owed.
--The income tax burden for low wage workers decreased by $4 billion to 1 percent of the total owed.
Doesn’t sound much like a tax cut for the wealthy.
the giving of 10K dollars sounds good, and it does, but what is the negative, from your point of view in doing this? What damages are created by giving people 10k dollars? Nothing is free of a consequence so what is the consequence to giving away money? I give money to the homeless and there is a consequence albeit one I accept. What is an acceptable consequence to giving 10k dollars? Also, is this a one time thing or is it monthly and for how long? Life?
For me more needs said on the 10k dollar give away. I support the concept but the devil in is the politicians and media selling it and the details. That damn devil and the love of money.
I've been right time and time again. I was right about Obama's "Stimulus", I was right about the "ACA", I was right about the impact of Trump's "Tariffs"... all things I was opposed to.
One day you ladies will learn that I'm right, and deal with it.
Trumper I may be , but disagreed with the giving ...I disagree with it no matter the president or has control of the house . We as a country are broke , we as a people need to learn the difference between a need & a want .
I support a flat tax for all ...no matter the income .
So under Biden I'm back up to a 21 % effective tax rate instead of 17% & that's supposed to make me a happy camper?
Biden ( a 47 year politician...the country is in debt ) knows how to spend MY money more than me ? Ok then ....except for military please tell me what the government does correct....
Agree completely cut all taxes , simplify & get on with it ...under Trump I dropped about 4% & lost a great big loop hole I've used for years & years, never bitched, it was the quickest I'd ever filed taxes I loved it ...
consumption is the way to go...that way everyone pays their taxes. What i like about the Fair Tax is that you are only taxed on New goods. Great book if you haven't read.....
Haven't read , but I could get behind this in a big way , I'm not against the gas tax , I'm not against paying taxes as long as they go to our country....we are broke we can not pay for other countries...plain & simple ....they hate our freedom hate our capitalists, exceptionalism, hate our freedom of religion, but love our handouts..
I have family members who hate me because I have what they want , they just dont want to work for it
The Fair Tax by Neal Boortz and John Linder. Been out since 2005. Great idea then and now.
We are close to retirement so it wasn't a big deal, but we still would have preferred to pick the timing ourselves. She may do something in the winter next year or take on some part time projects. This situation has really screwed alot of people so we shouldn't complain.
None of that would work , how would politicians use it as a issue during an election?
all of them need to die... so tired of my guns....abortion....social security......all die
ITT we laugh at the Libtards that are trying to look educated by saying there are two separate bills. Yes two separate bills, but it's all a show and you bought the ticket for the front row per your libtard talking points.
It still shows that the folks you support in DC are willing to send billions of dollars to countries overseas while giving the American a tiny morsel in a time of need.
Opening the country for all businesses is what is really needed, but if the government is going to shut people down, then they need to pay for them.
It still shows that the folks you support in DC are willing to send billions of dollars to countries overseas while giving the American a tiny morsel in a time of need.
Opening the country for all businesses is what is really needed, but if the government is going to shut people down, then they need to pay for them.
The argument for foreign aid is often that sending some money is cheaper and easier than having to send troops later. Whether you buy that or not, that's usually the logic. Of course there are exceptions. I'll also note that $1 billion is roughly $3/American. Take that into consideration when you look at what is being sent abroad.
They just don't like that it hit NY and CA the way it did. Oh, and now people are moving from those terrible states.
For stopping communism in Cambodia ???? Yea.....Ike,JFK,LBJ,the British and the French never did learn and see the big picture in that region.....How did all that work out?