As one who often does not side with Republicans on issues of taxation, I have to admit that I’m a bit annoyed with the Democrat’s latest mantra — “those rich are not paying their fair share of taxes, damn it!”
What does that even mean — fair share?
Apparently, America’s upper class are not paying their fair share in taxes because multi-billionaire Warren Buffett’s income tax rate is less than his secretary’s (although, in all fairness, I should mention that he still payed over 8 million dollars in taxes this year).
That certainly seems a bit odd, but is that actually the rule for the wealthy or just for the few Warren Buffetts of the world?
I find facts are often helpful in such discussions: (Source: CBO)
-
The richest 1% pay a 31% effective tax rate (far greater than a secretary).
-
The top 10% of earners pay nearly 70% of all US income taxes.
-
The average worker pays less than a 14% effective tax rate.
So, that rich guy who is paying only 31% of his income (over double the average national percentage, who is part of that small group that is paying 70% of all US taxes) is not paying his “fair share”?
That selfish bastard!
Wait a second….
Perhaps, though, what the Democrats mean to say is a bit different.
Maybe what they mean to say goes something like this:
“In these desperate economic times, part of our national recovery requires additional taxation to generate desperately needed revenues. As the wealthy have done far better than the poor and middle class over the past generation and are in a far better position to further assist their country, we now appeal to the wealthiest amongst us to make an even greater personal sacrifice on behalf of their country– to pay an even greater percentage of their incomes to help save a country that has been so good to them. In return, we will honor this extra generous sacrifice with a pledge to use these additional revenues in as efficient and effective manner as possible.”
Oh, in that case, I understand.
And agree.
.
the politically challenged 
Mr. Pou….Greetings!!,
Our entire tax code is in need of a complete overhaul. There is something inherently wrong with the fact that nearly 47% of households do not pay income tax. I am aware that they pay Medicare and Social Security taxes but no income taxes. What this means is that we’re reaching a point where no politician will ever be elected unless they keep promising goodies. If a smaller and smaller sector of the electorate are the ones paying the taxes than the majority of those not paying will only elect those that will keep increasing the taxes on the “increasing” minority of those who do. Eventually we may reach something like France where a proposal is now in the works to increase the top marginal rate to somewhere north of 75%. Who in their right mind would get up in the morning to work knowing that up to 75% of their income will go to taxes?
Like Margaret Thatcher said, “the problem with socialism is that eventually we run out of other people’s money.” (I’m paraphrasing a bit). I’m not saying that we’re becoming Socialists or anything along those lines but we continue to move down the path of taking more and more from fewer and fewer.
No discussion on taxes can take place without a true discussion about reducing government spending. I would never agree to a tax increase of $1 to anyone unless a top to bottom analysis of our budget/Federal Government is done so that waste and unneeded programs are removed. Many liberals love to point to Germany as an example of a well run socialist government. Yes it is true that their government is intricately involved in the market place. Here’s one major difference, from time to time they do a top/down review of their government programs, expenditures, etc., and they get rid of those that are no longer useful. I think Newt said something about doing a Six Sigma analysis of our entire Federal Government. He was right on that issue.
Name the last time our government got rid of any government programs or departments that no longer served a worthwhile cause?
Finally, I would like to get your thoughts on the expiring Bush Tax cuts later this year. Contrary to popular belief, those not just “tax cuts for the Rich”..Many in the middle class are going to receive sticker shock when they do their taxes in 2013.
What do you think!
I am very happy to have found this blog where perhaps the exchange of ideas can happen without the usual vitriol.
Regards,
The Prof.
As I sat down to read your comments, I prepared myself for fierce debate …. But I agree with everything you say!
1. I think nearly everyone should pay at least some taxes, to have some “skin in the game”. It serves to build civic pride and a sense of personal responsibility.
2. I would only agree to any increase in taxes if there was some sort of “guarantee” that this revenue would not just disappear into our vast government bureaucracy. For example, permitting a $1 increase in revenue for every $4 cut in government spending, or a guarantee that all additional tax revenues go directly toward the national debt….
3. In theory, I am for letting ALL the Bush tax cuts expire (including those for the middle class). I am concerned, though, that returning the middle class to the Clinton era tax rates might put the brakes on our very tepid recovery. If the economy was flourishing, though, I would be in favor of returning everyone to the Clinton tax rates. The country prospered during the Clinton years, despite these higher rates — including the creation of 22.7 million jobs (versus Bush II’s 1.1 million jobs during much lower tax rates).
4. Ultimately, I am for serious fiscal responsibility – which will require massive changes to all our entitlement programs, a dramatically simplified tax code and, I believe, a return to Clinton-era tax rates.
Lastly, having now stated my strong opinions, I might add that I am often wrong.