Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] taxes (was SOLAR , NUCLEAR ENERGY etc.)



On Apr 14, 2009, at 4:56 PM, David T. Marx wrote:

I was referring to the federal proceeds from income tax data from 2005:

top 1 % of wage earners paid 39.4 %
then 2-5 % paid 20.3 %
then 6 - 10% paid 10.6 %
then 11-25 % paid 15.7 %
then 26-50 % paid 10.9 %
and the bottom 50 % of wage earners paid the remaining 3.1 %

Sigh. I wonder, did you even read my post from yesterday? How on Earth does this data do anything but amplify the point I was making in that post and my post from a little earlier today?

As far payroll taxes, it is a flat rate across the incomes

That is simple, mind-numbingly spectacular nonsense. Do I really have to explain why?

, but the benefits received decline rapidly as a percent of income with increasing income.

Everyone also pays sales tax, but people that spend more pay more sales tax.

Which is entirely irrelevant. The effective tax rate due to sales tax drops as income rises. That is to say, it is a regressive tax. Capiche?

Then, there's property tax, people that have more expensive homes in wealthy pay more in property taxes than those that live in poor areas in inexpensive homes.

Oh my. "Those that live in poor areas in inexpensive homes" commonly don't even own them so they pay NO property tax. On the other hand they far more rent than wealthy people. Moreover, as a direct result of not owning their homes, they haven't benefitted from the astonishing capital gains of the last thirty years. I know that, in my own case, the equity increase has paid my property taxes (which are insanely low due to the effects of Prop 13 here in California) many times over. So once again, sorry, no cigar.

If you add up all of the taxes you pay, you'll find that it is a very
significant amount compared to your income.

A "very significant amount." Thanks for giving me such solid comparison data.

I do fail to see proof of your points #1 and #2 below. Perhaps, I missed
that in an earlier message.

Perhaps. Fortunately, Phys-L has an archive.

John Mallinckrodt
Cal Poly Pomona


On Apr 14, 2009, at 12:53 PM, marx@phy.ilstu.edu wrote:

The progressive tax system has been in place from a long time, but
it's gotten to be where the bottom 50% of income earners pay little
or zero tax.

I'd like to see your evidence for this (and, of course, it would
necessarily take into account the effects of payroll and sales
taxes.) But let's go ahead and suppose that it is so. There are
only two possible ways that this could have happened:

1. Taxes in general have become much more progressive.

2. Wealth has been massively "redistributed" (I'm warming to that
word) FROM low income people TO high income people.

It is a simple demonstrable fact that #1 is false and #2 is true.
Indeed, I provided the evidence just yesterday.

So what, precisely, was your point? Really.

John Mallinckrodt
Cal Poly Pomona