Eating the Rich

The most recent report from the Congressional Budget Office on Effective Federal Tax Rates is based on statistics from 2005. I found the report very enlightening.

  • Of the total individual income taxes collected that year, 99.4% were paid by the highest earning 40% of American households. That means 60% of the population paid less than 1% of the total taxes.
  • The lower 40% of households, on average, got more money back (through tax credits, EIC, etc.) than they paid in. This segment included people earning up to $48,000 per year. 
  • The top 20% of earners paid 86.7% of the total taxes collected, with the top 10% shouldering 72.7% of the total tax burden for the entire country.

Given this objective historical data, would somebody please explain to me the theory that the rich are undertaxed?

Bookmark/Rate this post: Digg it Stumble It! add to
Published in: on February 21, 2008 at 11:37 pm  Comments (15)  
Tags: ,

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

15 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. Sheeit, Nacho, we almost agree again. I’m going to have to get some antibiotics, or something…..

    Here’s MY idea, that I stole from someplace….

    National sales tax on basically everything but food clothing, and medicine.

    Xtra tax on luxuries and triple for anything that burns oil.

    End income/estate taxes, EXCEPT in the case of someone making over a million a year. Flat tax after that based on multiples of millions……No estate tax, no time, no where. At least until my mother in law dies and I find out if we’re rich.

    Tax golden parachutes for executives of failed companies who lost their employees retirement $$ at about 200%. OR: Take everything they have and genpop them into the sexual offender block in San Quentin.

  2. They are still better off than people who don’t work. That’s not fair. We’re the richest country in the world, but we refuse to take care of our poor. That makes us evil.

    Fairness. Evil.

    They can afford to buy expensive stuff. I have to buy cheap stuff. Their consumption patterns are ruining the earth. It’s environmental.

    Fairness. Evil. The planet.

    How can we not spend money to educate our kids when the rich can afford to send their children to private schools.

    Fairness. Evil. The planet. It’s for the kids.


    Enough ‘splainin’?

  3. Thank you, OregonGuy. I get it now. I will repent of my evil and unfair ways. I’ll do it for the kids. I’ll do it for the planet. I’ll do it for Obama, and our soon-to-be Obamanation.

    I’m a convert. It all makes sense. And up is down. And down is up. I’ve been so confused all my life. It must be because I was a breach baby. (It’s the only excuse I’ve got, and everybody deserves an excuse, don’t they?)

  4. We don’t need more sales taxes…national or otherwise…IMO. They are too regressive.

    I do think we should reduce taxes on certain types of savings in order to encourage more saving by Americans. Romney actually had some interesting ideas on that subject I think.

  5. Five years ago Bush paid for cut taxes by closing down 5600 offices of the Department of Agriculture…and now we have downer cows in the school lunch programs. Since school budgets were gutted about the same time, I would guess that those undereducated children won’t need food any better than that.

    There are a myriad of other examples:
    This war on terror we have going on? You know, the one that requires the gutting of the fourth amendment?

    “Despite proposing a big increase in spending on domestic security, the administration is also proposing cuts in federal grants to local police, fire and emergency rescue departments. Money for so-called first responders would be cut from $4.4 billion this year to $3.5 billion next year.”
    NY Times, Just today.

    I know, I know, just a Liberal rag…..The failure of the “tax cuts are good for everyone including the top 100 major corporations, including the ones that shipped your jobs overseas” is the most destructive policy I have ever seen, we will be paying for this garbage for decades if not centuries….thanks to the retarded “conservative” in the white house and the rubber stamp idiots WE sent to Congress.

    I said I agreed with you – I do, about the tax code being needing to be revamped, your politics, not so much.

  6. Scumby, I think you’re disagreeing with yourself. That’s OK. I understand. (I used to smoke that stuff myself.)

    So, if the top 40% are paying 99.4% of all federal income taxes today, and most of the bottom 40% are paying nothing (or less), and the top 20% are paying 86.7% of all taxes, leaving the other 80% to only kick in a measly 13.3% of the cost of running our federal government, what exactly do you think would be fair?

    Should the top 20% of earners pay all of the taxes and give the other 80% a free ride? After all, they’re rich. As long as somebody’s rich, why should the rest of us have to pay for anything?

  7. **Should the top 20% of earners pay all of the taxes and give the other 80% a free ride? After all, they’re rich. As long as somebody’s rich, why should the rest of us have to pay for anything?**

    Please read what I wrote above…..Tax cuts without revenue to protect the public interest is a false economy. I merely illustrated a counter argument to your facetious comments to Oegonguy…I don’t agree with his “evil” comment at all but I’d say tax cuts without revenue is a GREAT way to get a rotten food supply and a half trillion(?) dollar deficit.

  8. OOOPS. You’re right I have to stop inhaling.

    **GREAT way to get a rotten food supply and a half trillion(?) dollar deficit.**

    I’m sorry: that’s a $412 billion, dollar deficit.

    and a $9.2 trillion dollar debt….

    But, you’re going to get a tax rebate, and the malfeasance in the subprime mortgage racket are going to get some bux, too.

    Downer cows, however, are not as happy.

  9. The rich have more money than anybody else. Who else are you going to tax?

    The poor have more unsatisfied needs than the rich.

    For the sake of the planet, fairness, and the kids we need a new American way. Take from each according to his ability to pay, and give to each according to his needs.

    Not really a new idea. Just making it the American way would be novel.

  10. I pay way too much in taxes to subsidize the poor, I want a lot more out of them if they get any money from me. Like compulsory trash collecting on the weekends for anyone who does not pay taxes. Screw the poor, in any other country they’d be eating grass, here at least they have a chance to have food. They have a lot of nerve to expect someone else, who just happens to make more, pay for any of their needs. I want something in return for my tax money that they are taking, like clean roads. I don’t care what they need, their needs are their problem, they don’t have a right to take my stuff.

  11. A sales tax is one of the best ways to increase the distance between the rich and poor. The lowest income earners now pay no tax on income, and in fact are sometimes subsidized. (EIC) You start taxing them with 25%+ on everything they purchase, you’ll have to have another huge bureaucracy just to partially compensate them. Shifts the tax burden off the wealthy almost completely. It sure would make politicians look good to these low income recipients though, and daddy govt. would flourish.

    No tax system I know of can be considered fair to everyone/anyone.

  12. Could you please provide the exact source of your statiscal analysis? I would like to see how the top 2% are paying for everyone else.

  13. Juan, I don’t see where you’re getting the 2% figure from. I just did a quick search of the page, and nobody mentioned the figure 2% prior to your comment.

  14. […] go over well with Obamamaniacs and other liberals who hate successful people. NotYourDaddy presents Eating the Rich « Government is Not Your Daddy posted at Government is not your Daddy., saying, “The top 20% of earners paid 86.7% of the […]

  15. To Jackson above: buddy, you are a total Marxist/Communist, but then you know that by your ‘each according to their needs’ line. The only problem is, that broken approach was used in the Soviet Union. Have you noticed how it worked out for them?

    In general, our tax distribution is already a sham and a Democrat’s dream. The only problem is that such an increasingly small number of the successful and productive are pulling the cart for everyone. Put further unfair taxation on them and it will dry up growth and opportunity for EVERYONE. Who will suffer the most? The poor at the bottom that Dems so emotionally want to help.

    More discussion on Taxing the Productive and Successful…er, I mean the ‘Rich’:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: