an excellent read from the ACLU

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
in.local...
In article , says...

"Trevor" wrote in message
...

"Pete Stavrakoglou" wrote in message
...

Greece is in the state it's in because of government spending, overly
generous government benefits, lack of adequate tax collection,

Dead right there, just as the US would be OK *IF* they actually collected
taxes from the rich and big corporations.
It's certainly not the poor where most of the money went in either country!

Trevor.

Per my last post. The top 1% pay over 40% of all federal income taxes, the
top
5% over 70% and te top 10% over 80%.

Source?

Source is the IRS, a little checking will turn it up
http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/indtaxst...133521,00.html

You can take all of the money rich people
have and it would not put a dent in the deficit because our federal
government
has an insatiable appetite to spend.

"tony cooper" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 08:41:46 -0500, "Pete Stavrakoglou"
wrote:

"Trevor" wrote in message
...

"tony cooper" wrote in message
news Governments do the buying with taxpayers money, taxpayers rarely have any
say in it.

The government employees who do the buying are, themselves, taxpayers.
In fact, they are sharing the burden more than many since they are
employed - usually at rather good salaries

That's the problem, it's not their money they waste, and they usually have a
far better life style than many others.


and paying income taxes, property taxes, and taxes on purchases.

Which is why they love flat taxes so much. The old days of progressive taxes
where those who could afford it actually paid more, are just about gone
unfortunately. The new paradigm is the richer you are, the better the
accountant you can afford, shelf companies you can set up, family trusts you
can utilise, off shore tax havens you can register, and the less tax you
actually pay. The tax burdon now falls almost entirely on the middle class
and
poorest members of the community because they have no ability to escape it.

Trevor.

Your claim tha the burden falls on the middle class is wrong. 40% of all
federal income taxes are paid by the top 1%, the top 5% pay over 70% of all
federal income taxes, the top 10% pay over 80% of all federal income taxes.

The validity of the claim depends on what you think "the burden"
means. If you consider that the group paying the highest percentage
of all income taxes paid has the burden, then the statement is wrong.
If you consider that the group paying out the highest percentage of
their income has the burden, then the statement is correct.

There's no obfuscating on this. The "rich" pay their fair share while the
bottom 50% of income earners pay zero federal income taxes. The top 10% of
earners are shouldering the tax burden for 80% of the country. That is quite a
"burden" no matter how you try to spin it.

On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 23:03:10 -0500, tony cooper
wrote:

On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 13:18:55 +1100, "Trevor" wrote:


"PeterN" wrote in message
...
As smart people know, you can't con an honest man, it takes a gun or
government to rob him instead :-(


Were they forced to buy?

Governments do the buying with taxpayers money, taxpayers rarely have any
say in it.

The government employees who do the buying are, themselves, taxpayers.
In fact, they are sharing the burden more than many since they are
employed - usually at rather good salaries - and paying income taxes,
property taxes, and taxes on purchases.

In other words, its a money-go-round. But too few give value for
money.


Was there coercion?


Regards,

Eric Stevens

"PeterN" wrote in message
...
As smart people know, you can't con an honest man, it takes a gun or
government to rob him instead :-(

Were they forced to buy?

Governments do the buying with taxpayers money, taxpayers rarely have any
say in it.

Was there coercion?

Governments control the police force, armies, national guard, security
agencies etc. How much more coercion do you need! :-)

Here is the contest of my question/comment. Your Snipping clearly shows
intellectual dishonesty?

Your trying to change the subject to something I never commented on shows
intellectual dishonesty.


You said: " It was the US banks that sold them truck loads of worthless
junk bonds though. Stupid of the Europeans to think US banks were
motivated by anything other than outright greed though, which of course
is what the Eurpopeans were also doing when they bought them!
As smart people know, you can't con an honest man, it takes a gun or
government to rob him instead..."

that way the comment to which I asked my question.

So you are happy to ignore the rest of what I have said in the thread, and
yet complain about my snipping?
Google is there for people who can't remember what was posted, and don't
have their own copy. Snipping simply highlights what is actually being
referred to.

Your response to my question was a meaningless rant

As opposed to your meaningless rant?

Trevor.

"tony cooper" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 08:41:46 -0500, "Pete Stavrakoglou"
wrote:
Governments do the buying with taxpayers money, taxpayers rarely have
any
say in it.

The government employees who do the buying are, themselves, taxpayers.
In fact, they are sharing the burden more than many since they are
employed - usually at rather good salaries

That's the problem, it's not their money they waste, and they usually
have a
far better life style than many others.


and paying income taxes, property taxes, and taxes on purchases.

Which is why they love flat taxes so much. The old days of progressive
taxes
where those who could afford it actually paid more, are just about gone
unfortunately. The new paradigm is the richer you are, the better the
accountant you can afford, shelf companies you can set up, family trusts
you
can utilise, off shore tax havens you can register, and the less tax you
actually pay. The tax burdon now falls almost entirely on the middle
class and
poorest members of the community because they have no ability to escape
it.


Your claim tha the burden falls on the middle class is wrong. 40% of all
federal income taxes are paid by the top 1%, the top 5% pay over 70% of
all
federal income taxes, the top 10% pay over 80% of all federal income
taxes.

The validity of the claim depends on what you think "the burden"
means. If you consider that the group paying the highest percentage
of all income taxes paid has the burden, then the statement is wrong.
If you consider that the group paying out the highest percentage of
their income has the burden, then the statement is correct.


I seriuosly doubt it is correct in either case, and *certainly* not in
Australia. But I do note he purposely limits the argument *solely* to
"federal income taxes" and not TOTAL tax revenue, federal, state and local,
which is the only meaningful statistic.

Trevor.

"Pete Stavrakoglou" wrote in message
...
There's no obfuscating on this. The "rich" pay their fair share while the
bottom 50% of income earners pay zero federal income taxes. The top 10%
of earners are shouldering the tax burden for 80% of the country. That is
quite a "burden" no matter how you try to spin it.

*IF* it were actually true, *and* IF there were no other federal state and
local taxes, levies, duties, excises etc. etc. then I might agree with you.
Given the number of millionaires and billionares paying very little tax at
all, it's hard to feel too sorry for them though. Still if they're paying so
little, and it really is 80%, then it's no wonder the USA has such a
deficit!!! And throwing mud at the Greeks is sort of glass house stuff :-)

Trevor.

"tony cooper" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:17:09 -0500, "Pete Stavrakoglou"
wrote:
Speaking of spin...the original statement deals with the middle class.
What you have pointed out is that the *bottom* 50% of the wage earners
pay no taxes.

Bet they wish it were actually true! I know I do!!!!

Trevor.

"tony cooper" wrote in message
...
Where do you get the idea that government employees love the flat tax
approach?

The high income ones you mentioned. It's the rich who keep pushing
governments for lower progressive income tax and more flat taxes, and keep
winning.
Not all government employees are rich though, and there might even be one or
two of the rich who aren't motivated by outright greed. Unfortunately nobody
is listening to them.

Trevor.

"tony cooper" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:17:09 -0500, "Pete Stavrakoglou"
wrote:

"tony cooper" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 08:41:46 -0500, "Pete Stavrakoglou"
wrote:

"Trevor" wrote in message
...

"tony cooper" wrote in message
news Governments do the buying with taxpayers money, taxpayers rarely have any
say in it.

The government employees who do the buying are, themselves, taxpayers.
In fact, they are sharing the burden more than many since they are
employed - usually at rather good salaries

That's the problem, it's not their money they waste, and they usually have
a
far better life style than many others.


and paying income taxes, property taxes, and taxes on purchases.

Which is why they love flat taxes so much. The old days of progressive
taxes
where those who could afford it actually paid more, are just about gone
unfortunately. The new paradigm is the richer you are, the better the
accountant you can afford, shelf companies you can set up, family trusts
you
can utilise, off shore tax havens you can register, and the less tax you
actually pay. The tax burdon now falls almost entirely on the middle class
and
poorest members of the community because they have no ability to escape
it.

Trevor.

Your claim tha the burden falls on the middle class is wrong. 40% of all
federal income taxes are paid by the top 1%, the top 5% pay over 70% of all
federal income taxes, the top 10% pay over 80% of all federal income taxes.

The validity of the claim depends on what you think "the burden"
means. If you consider that the group paying the highest percentage
of all income taxes paid has the burden, then the statement is wrong.
If you consider that the group paying out the highest percentage of
their income has the burden, then the statement is correct.

There's no obfuscating on this. The "rich" pay their fair share while the
bottom 50% of income earners pay zero federal income taxes. The top 10% of
earners are shouldering the tax burden for 80% of the country. That is quite
a
"burden" no matter how you try to spin it.

Speaking of spin...the original statement deals with the middle class.
What you have pointed out is that the *bottom* 50% of the wage earners
pay no taxes.

I pointed out a lot more than that and I'm not the one trying to spin this one
Tony, you are.

"Trevor" wrote in message
...

"tony cooper" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 08:41:46 -0500, "Pete Stavrakoglou"
wrote:
Governments do the buying with taxpayers money, taxpayers rarely have any
say in it.

The government employees who do the buying are, themselves, taxpayers.
In fact, they are sharing the burden more than many since they are
employed - usually at rather good salaries

That's the problem, it's not their money they waste, and they usually have
a
far better life style than many others.


and paying income taxes, property taxes, and taxes on purchases.

Which is why they love flat taxes so much. The old days of progressive
taxes
where those who could afford it actually paid more, are just about gone
unfortunately. The new paradigm is the richer you are, the better the
accountant you can afford, shelf companies you can set up, family trusts
you
can utilise, off shore tax havens you can register, and the less tax you
actually pay. The tax burdon now falls almost entirely on the middle class
and
poorest members of the community because they have no ability to escape it.


Your claim tha the burden falls on the middle class is wrong. 40% of all
federal income taxes are paid by the top 1%, the top 5% pay over 70% of all
federal income taxes, the top 10% pay over 80% of all federal income taxes.

The validity of the claim depends on what you think "the burden"
means. If you consider that the group paying the highest percentage
of all income taxes paid has the burden, then the statement is wrong.
If you consider that the group paying out the highest percentage of
their income has the burden, then the statement is correct.


I seriuosly doubt it is correct in either case, and *certainly* not in
Australia. But I do note he purposely limits the argument *solely* to "federal
income taxes" and not TOTAL tax revenue, federal, state and local, which is
the only meaningful statistic.

My figures are correct, check them out for yourself rather than just dismissing
them. And about my "limiting" the argument solely to federal income taxes - the
myriad of statem, city, and local taxes across the country make it almost
impossible to gather that type of data for a usenet discussion. You're welcome
to do it if you'd like. Still, the statistics I noted are correct, why do you
have a problem with that?