Musicmystery -> RE: Republicans selling your private browser history to all comers (4/18/2017 7:07:41 AM)
|
If those numbers were accurate, then someone making $57,806 would be in the top 20%, paying 86.8%, a bill of $50,176 ($50,176/.868). I make well over this, and don't pay anything close to that. Even if you say "well, it's all the little taxes," I STILL have disposable income of well over the $7,630 (I put more than twice that in savings each year) left from $57,806 - $50,176. In fact, according to taxpolicycenter.org, $57,806 is roughly the mean of the middle quintile (middle 20%). The mean of the top quintile (top 20%) is roughly $195,000. [In both cases, "roughly" because their data is on 2014.] Point is -- the data you've listed is clearly inaccurate. I could totally see someone making $195,000 paying taxes of $50,176. But here's what the table you posted ACTUALLY looks like in your MarketWatch link: [image]http://i68.tinypic.com/dp8dw4.png[/image] So, that makes more sense. Clearly, people with less income paying lower tax rates are going to pay less tax than people with more income paying higher rates. But that hardly makes the case for the claim that "the poor, and the elderly, women, children and minorities" are "hit hardest." In fact, based on this table anyway, it seems an equitable distribution for a progressive tax system, whereas flat rates would indeed be regressive, hitting lower income people the hardest, while giving a break to the highest income earners. And, this table clarifies that the second column isn't the tax rate, but the total of all earners in that quintile. So mystery solved. But also not a problem, unless you feel poor and rich should carry the same burden. I'm in the second quintile actually (which is a very large income range, incidentally). Frankly, my taxes aren't a burden. It's just a number in my budget. P.S. Stop being a child and changing thread titles. It's also a violation of forum guidelines.
|
|
|
|