This is getting Ridiculous: The 2012 Index of Dependence on Government

[Maxiest]

2012 Index of Dependence on Government

There is a lot of information in this article, but what really stuck out to me and what I want to comment on is below.

The very first graph in the article:



This one is near the bottom:



My question to the DUmbies is the following; what do you expect us to do as a country when the number of producers are less than the number of takers?

We are nearly at 50% of population who don't pay taxes, that number grows and has since I have been following politics.  Luckily, according to this article, only 20% of the population is dependent on the government... although that number keeps going up too.

What are we going to do DUmmies?    What are we going to do when 80% of the population isn't paying taxes and 50% is dependent on the government?  Do you guys not know how to do math at all?  Of course we would never reach that because we would be working in camps for the Chinese by then.  At the rate we are going the people who work and earn and create jobs just won't anymore.  There will be no desire to produce because taxes will be 70%. 

These services you want require money, money comes from the producers.  The way you guys are running things and have run things it encourages no production.  Eventually you end up with no producers thus no money to pay for your programs.  I don't understand why you guys can't see the simple error in your logic.  I mean can you guys even do math?

As we have tried to explain to you for years...  nothing is free.  This is why conservatives preach personal responsibility, work, etc...  The numbers in this article are astounding.  Not to mention all the personal freedom that is given up in dependency.

You want to call us non-compassionate, none caring, and cold hearts.  Yet the data shows different, google charitable giving red states.  We are none of these.  We do however realize that it will get to a point where the government is spending more on dependency programs than it's producers pay in taxes.  When this happens nobody will get any charity... we will all be in bread lines.  The writing is on the wall.

I know I am not very articulate but I wanted to post this anyway.  I rant and rave and have horrible grammar and may make the point several times but I hope it sheds some light on what is going on and what our future will look like.

[obumazombie]

I used to think the libs were bad at math. They might be, but that would be an overlooked bonus to the more central goal. The one that Cloward, and Piven talk about.

[Akubra]

I am in New Zealand and dont know anything about the US taxation system but if you are worried that one segment, or another, of the population is not paying their share then do what my country did years ago and that was switch more towards consumption tax.

Yes, there are plenty who would scream but ignore them, consumption taxes are easy to implement if you dont go stupid and try to make it complicated.  Choose some percentage figure and add that to all sales.  Everyone who spends then pays taxes, those who save do not.

[obumazombie]

That doesn't account for the barter community which is large here, and getting larger. Also the idea would be more palatable if it REPLACED income tax, but it won't. The rule in this country that has never been broken is, once a tax has been implemented, it will never be repealed. Modified, maybe, repealed no. So then we would have two onerous taxes.

[MrsSmith]

What this article misses is that Federal income tax is not ALL tax.  Lower income individuals carry the bulk of state and local taxes, especially as they are generally tied down by jobs and can't just move to a place with lower state and local taxes.  Also, lower income people carry a larger share of sales tax, especially luxury taxes.  The lower the income, the more tied people are to local taxation. 

I've brought this up again and again on this site.  It is unworthy of conservatives to continue to ignore the whole picture.

[franksolich]

What this article misses is that Federal income tax is not ALL tax.  Lower income individuals carry the bulk of state and local taxes, especially as they are generally tied down by jobs and can't just move to a place with lower state and local taxes.  Also, lower income people carry a larger share of sales tax, especially luxury taxes.  The lower the income, the more tied people are to local taxation. 

I've brought this up again and again on this site.  It is unworthy of conservatives to continue to ignore the whole picture.

That's very true, madam.

That's why I never bother arguing about taxing A more and taxing B less; it's just better overall to just tax both A and B as little as possible.

[Maxiest]

What this article misses is that Federal income tax is not ALL tax.  Lower income individuals carry the bulk of state and local taxes, especially as they are generally tied down by jobs and can't just move to a place with lower state and local taxes.  Also, lower income people carry a larger share of sales tax, especially luxury taxes.  The lower the income, the more tied people are to local taxation. 

I've brought this up again and again on this site.  It is unworthy of conservatives to continue to ignore the whole picture.

Well this article was only about 1/5 focused on actually taxes, it's primary focus was on the the dependency issue.  And thus is related to federal income taxes.  Not state consumption taxes.

[MrsSmith]

Well this article was only about 1/5 focused on actually taxes, it's primary focus was on the the dependency issue.  And thus is related to federal income taxes.  Not state consumption taxes.

True, but over and over we have articles posted that make some very valid point about the problems with our current tax system, and we jump all over the fact that so many people don't pay Federal income taxes.  I agree that this is an issue, and the rate of government dependence is just crazy, but we just cannot lose sight of the fact that everyone pays taxes!  A young family with one worker making $9 an hour probably pays a higher overall tax rate than most of us when all taxes are considered ...especially if they do anything like buy an occasional 6-pack, or smoke!

[obumazombie]

I disagree with Ms Smith. The people who pay no federal income tax are then eligible to collect EIC. That's a tax rebate on taxes they never paid in. You don't seem to be accounting for this at all.

[NHSparky]

What this article misses is that Federal income tax is not ALL tax.  Lower income individuals carry the bulk of state and local taxes, especially as they are generally tied down by jobs and can't just move to a place with lower state and local taxes.  Also, lower income people carry a larger share of sales tax, especially luxury taxes.  The lower the income, the more tied people are to local taxation. 

I've brought this up again and again on this site.  It is unworthy of conservatives to continue to ignore the whole picture.

How do you figure that lower income individuals carry the bulk of state and local taxes?  Sales taxes?  They might pay a higher PORTION of their income in sales taxes, but then again, they're not paying sales taxes on big-ticket items, so the "luxury tax" isn't relevant here.

Property taxes?  The poor don't own property, remember?

Business taxes?  See above.

Take, for example, my state.  No general sales tax, no income tax.  The bulk of the state's money comes from property owners and businesses.  So how are the poor affected there, aside from the fact that costs from business taxes are passed onto the end consumer?

But to be fair, even when I lived in CA, state taxes were only a small portion of my overall tax burden, and I am nowhere near rich.  To say that a "poor" person can't afford 10 percent of their income going to state/local taxes is a crock of shit, especially when they have no (or more likely a NEGATIVE) tax burden on the federal level--to the point where a persons OVERALL tax burden can be near zero.

[NHSparky]

True, but over and over we have articles posted that make some very valid point about the problems with our current tax system, and we jump all over the fact that so many people don't pay Federal income taxes.  I agree that this is an issue, and the rate of government dependence is just crazy, but we just cannot lose sight of the fact that everyone pays taxes!  A young family with one worker making $9 an hour probably pays a higher overall tax rate than most of us when all taxes are considered ...especially if they do anything like buy an occasional 6-pack, or smoke!

Not even close.  Let me know when the poor or working poor pay 40-plus percent of their income in taxes.

[Maxiest]

I disagree with Ms Smith. The people who pay no federal income tax are then eligible to collect EIC. That's a tax rebate on taxes they never paid in. You don't seem to be accounting for this at all.

I was going to make the same point.  I know some people who received nearly $8,000 this year.  I don't know their exact income but I am gonna guess, due to their careers, between $35,000-$40,000.  So that is at the least -20% in federal taxes.

Just a little example.  In this example I am going to say they spend $1000 a month on food and cloths.  Which would be a little high for someone making a salary in that range.  This example is for my state, TN.

If they spend $1000 a month in the above they would pay $92.5
In twelve months they would pay $1,110 in sales tax.  With an $8,000 federal tax refund that is still a net gain of $6,890.
Now lets go a step further.  Lets say their whole income was spent and they paid sales tax on ever single bit.
On the whole amount of $40,000 they sales tax would only equal $3,700.  Still a net gain of $4,300.

I know MrsSmith was referring to some other taxes like gas tax and Sin tax.  But hell, most poor/middle class people still come out with a gain from Child credits and EIC.  As I illustrated above if they paid sales tax on every dollar they earned.

[JohnnyReb]

I disagree with Ms Smith. The people who pay no federal income tax are then eligible to collect EIC. That's a tax rebate on taxes they never paid in. You don't seem to be accounting for this at all.

Fellow was fusing this morning about he didn't get but $5,000 back on taxes....

BACK MY ASS...he hasn't had a job in over 3 years, his wife just got on disability and he just adopted his sorry daughters son. That was not a tax refund, that was payment for all those times he has said, "Well, Obama's been pretty good to me."

[docstew]

I am in New Zealand and dont know anything about the US taxation system but if you are worried that one segment, or another, of the population is not paying their share then do what my country did years ago and that was switch more towards consumption tax.

Yes, there are plenty who would scream but ignore them, consumption taxes are easy to implement if you dont go stupid and try to make it complicated.  Choose some percentage figure and add that to all sales.  Everyone who spends then pays taxes, those who save do not.

It's been proposed. The FairTax

[obumazombie]

A tax on consumption would not account for the barter economy. Furthermore adding a VAT or a fair tax would be in addition to an income tax. Once a tax is enacted, it'e never repealed.

[docstew]

A tax on consumption would not account for the barter economy. Furthermore adding a VAT or a fair tax would be in addition to an income tax. Once a tax is enacted, it'e never repealed.

One of the preconditions for full implementation of the FairTax is the repeal of the income tax, including a Constitutional Amendment.

[Rebel]

A tax on consumption would not account for the barter economy. Furthermore adding a VAT or a fair tax would be in addition to an income tax. Once a tax is enacted, it'e never repealed.

Once the Fairtax is passed, it won't go in effect until one day after the repealing of the 16th Amendment. That's in the bill.

[obumazombie]

Once the Fairtax is passed, it won't go in effect until one day after the repealing of the 16th Amendment. That's in the bill.

That's another reason the fair tax is a non starter.

[Toastedturningtidelegs]

I was going to make the same point.  I know some people who received nearly $8,000 this year.  I don't know their exact income but I am gonna guess, due to their careers, between $35,000-$40,000.  So that is at the least -20% in federal taxes.

Just a little example.  In this example I am going to say they spend $1000 a month on food and cloths.  Which would be a little high for someone making a salary in that range.  This example is for my state, TN.

If they spend $1000 a month in the above they would pay $92.5
In twelve months they would pay $1,110 in sales tax.  With an $8,000 federal tax refund that is still a net gain of $6,890.
Now lets go a step further.  Lets say their whole income was spent and they paid sales tax on ever single bit.
On the whole amount of $40,000 they sales tax would only equal $3,700.  Still a net gain of $4,300.

I know MrsSmith was referring to some other taxes like gas tax and Sin tax.  But hell, most poor/middle class people still come out with a gain from Child credits and EIC.  As I illustrated above if they paid sales tax on every dollar they earned.

Here are the brackets for the Eitc....Too early to do any ciphering

2011 Tax Year
Earned Income and adjusted gross income (AGI) must each be less than:

$43,998 ($49,078 married filing jointly) with three or more qualifying children
$40,964 ($46,044 married filing jointly) with two qualifying children
$36,052 ($41,132 married filing jointly) with one qualifying child
$13,660 ($18,740 married filing jointly) with no qualifying children
Tax Year 2011 maximum credit:

$5,751 with three or more qualifying children
$5,112 with two qualifying children
$3,094 with one qualifying child
$464 with no qualifying children