Before our Constitution was put into effect in 1789, the taxation power of the United States had been restricted to a Direct tax upon the state, in proportion to the amount of land & improvements that were assessed. This method of taxation was difficult to collect from, due to the lack of urgency to pay by the states themselves. The new Constitution provides for indirect taxation (on consumption) and the same Direct Taxation upon states, but apportioned according to the states only true asset, the people. By the amount of money collected in 2004 after refunds were distributed the average per person contribution is rather low.
$1.7 Trillion ÷ 300 Million = $5666.67/Person in America in 2004
$1.7 Trillion ÷ 220 Million = $7727.27/Person 18+ in America
At a 25% taxation rate (1/4th of annual wages) the average adult population making $24,000 /year (or $11.5/hr) would cover $1.3 Trillion in taxes to the Federal Government before any refunds. $31,000/year (or approx. $14.90/hr) to reach the full $1.7 Trillion in taxes by the adult population. Read More »
1.The American Manufacturing Credit
2.Global Warming Reduction Act.
3.Home Purchase Credit
4.Savings and Investment Provision
5.Capital Gains and Losses Equity Provision
6.Alternative Energy Development Provision
7.Global Warming Reduction Act.
8.Oil and Gas Exploration provision
9.$5.00 barrel tariff on imported OPEC oil
10.Iraq War Debt Reduction Act Read More »
Apportioning something according to a unit does not collect from the unit itself. How often does that happen? When you put a tax upon something, it is usually paid by the buyer, or the entity existing that is being governed by the taxer. In this case, when a state is to be charged a tax to buy a space shuttle, or other object, The cost is divided by population, or by representatives elected to congress in each state.
To tax citizens directly was never part of the deal. Only direct tax that was granted was unto the object in which the Government is formed to govern, which are the states. The money received by taxpayers are used to refund back to corporations. Out of $17 Trillion/Year Nation,
If you read more, (assuming tables and such will be preserved.) I have provided a table that shows corporate taxes and individual taxes.
You'll notice that many states have paid more than their share, most corporate taxes are refunded, sometimes in greater amounts than what was paid. Oh, and Washington D.C. has an exclusionary to Capital Gains Taxes. Read More »
Dear Ken, Kevin, Michael, John and Patty,
Over the years I have watched, and argued with each of you as your political philosophies vacillated from left to right and vice versa. However, none of you have ever known me to support a Democrat. I have always been proud to be a fiscally conservative, socially liberal member, in good standing of the Republican Party. We have joked about the many Christmas cards, photographs and invitations to inaugurations that I have received from George Bush and the Republican Party. However, on the eve of this election I wanted to write to explain why I am supporting Barack Obama for President of the United States.
Put starkly, I am very concerned about the mess that my generation is leaving to you and particularly about the future facing my grandchildren. In foreign affairs, John McCain’s views are more hawkish than Bush’s and his principal advisors are Neo-Cons, or lobbyists who have represented foreign countries. Your children, like it or not, will live and work in a globalized world. We must regain the prestige and leadership that Bush has squandered.
On the economy, we risk another great depression. Yet John McCain says “the fundamentals of our economy are strong” then “suspends” his campaign to fly to Washington to showboat. He demonstrated that he was ineffective. The only “solutions” for our economic problems that John McCain promotes are to maintain and even increase the Bush tax cuts. This approach has led to some of you having trouble getting credit or a mortgage, employment insecurity and the plunging stock market that is cutting into retirement savings. Under Bush we have borrowed billions from Japan and China that, unless we change the policies that Bush and McCain support, your children will have to repay with a substantially reduced standard of living.
John McCain, espouses the “trickle down theory” of economics that has led to the current mess. He proposes more tax cuts for the rich and seeks to scare you that Barack Obama will increase your taxes. The truth is that it is John McCain who is proposing to tax the value of the medical benefits you get from your employer in exchange for a $5,000 tax credit to buy your insurance. I seriously doubt that any of you can replace the insurance you are getting from your employers with a $5,000 credit"it will cost you substantially more and I have a seriously doubt if you could get insurance covering preexisting conditions for you or your children if your employers cut back their medical plan since they would no longer be getting a deduction. John McCain has suggested deregulating the medical insurance industry just as was done for the banking industry. No thank you Senator McCain.
Since none of you are currently making over $250,000 the Obama tax plan will give you a tax decrease as opposed to an increase. What Senator Obama has proposed is to increase the top tax bracket from 35% to 39.6%"what it was under Clinton. Such a tax increase is neither socialism nor a redistribution of wealth. While you were growing up, I remember a top tax bracket of 90% and 70%. In those days we paid for wars and government rather than borrowing the money. As your grandfather used to say “the country has been good to us and we have an obligation to contribute to the common good by willingly paying taxes, government service and/or charitable activities.” John McCain’s belief that if we just give tax breaks to the rich and to large corporations the wealth will “trickle down” to the middle class just hasn’t worked.. In the past eight years the income and wealth disparity in the country has spiraled out of control. 20 to 40 million dollar salaries to CEO’s, entertainers and athletes are becoming commonplace while the middle class is struggling to stay above water"a loss of job or an illness away from foreclosure. We are approaching the level of disparity between the top and the bottom that foments revolutions. Even if Barack Obama were to raise your taxes"which he will not"it would be far better than the McCain alternative where the rich would get richer while the middle class suffers.
As you know, on his birthday I wrote a letter to John McCain questioning whether, at age 72, we were both too old to be President. That letter was sent the night before John McCain put temporary electoral advantage ahead of country and brought us Sarah Palin. Since then, I have closely observed John McCain’s demeanor, temperament and judgment. The conclusion is inescapable that he is too old to be President for the reasons stated in my previous letter. However, apart from questions of age, the nature of the campaign that he has presided over disqualifies him for the job. Simply put, John McCain and his “sidekick” have conducted a totally negative campaign based upon character assassination and lies. Listen to a McCain and Palin speech"it is all about tearing down Obama. You never here the details of a positive program. Just pandering and spite.
In order to move forward we have to end the mindless partisanship that has infected Washington and eliminate the politics of negativism and character assassination. While the McCain camp says that both sides are negative, a review of both sides advertisements, speeches and positions refutes their claim. We have had eight years of lies and spin from the Bush administration. The lies and spin will continue if McCain-Palin are elected.
For all of the forgoing reasons I am supporting Barack Obama for President. This year move than ever, I also believe that it is important in voting for your Senator and Representative to consider their record. Have they voted as a mindless partisan? In particular, do they have a voting record like John McCain of 90% support of Bush policies? If so, you should consider also voting for change in your Senate or House race. Arguments that the Democrats are responsible for the mess in Washington because they controlled the House and Senate for the last two years ignore that progress has been hamstrung by vetoes by George Bush and a record use of filibusters by Senate Republicans. I hope that my Republican Party will see the light, purge the extremist elements and regain the traditions of Eisenhower, Goldwater and Regan. Then I can go back to the party, but for now we need to eliminate the “know nothings” that have infiltrated it.
I am certain that all of you will be voting on Tuesday and I hope this letter convinces you to vote for Barack Obama. Please share it with your spouses and feel free to also share it with your friends if you agree with me that it is vital to future generations that we give Barack Obama the chance to bring real change to our country.
With Love and Hope for the
Future, Your Dad.
The now infamous Republican icon Ronald Reagan ushered in an era of deregulation and tax cuts with unrestrained government spending particularly on favored conservative welfare recipients in the defense industry and commercial agriculture. The idea often muted was to load up the government with so much debt and such limited revenues that there would simply be no money left over to spend on society in general. Individuals with means would somehow take care of themselves and we could ignore everyone else in good conscience as deadbeats. This idea has now been utterly discredited by 8 years of the failed policies of the Bush administration. But I think it would be easy to take away the wrong lessons from the experience.
The real issue is that Republicans either don't understand or don't care to engage the complexities in the balance of incentives and disincentives in the proper functioning of capitalism. Businesses may say that they don't like taxes or government regulations but what they really find hard to cope with is uncertainty. It is arguable that cutting taxes aids the individual shareholder. But if that leaves government unable to fund public education or health care in the end the same businesses and shareholders will have a hard time finding and retaining competent workers in order to grow and prosper. Similarly deregulation is appealing up until it stimulates underpriced environmental degradation and unrestrained risk taking that not only threatens long-term earnings but even the on going viability of businesses and whole sectors as presently seen on Wall Street.
While the profit motive is an important incentive to business, the fact is that taxes and regulations are also necessary components of the societal framework for capitalism to grow and flourish. American capital, hard work and ingenuity have proven time and time again to respond to this framework for the benefit of investors, competitors, workers and the environment alike.
The Republican Party lost its way when it decided for short-term political advantage under the chimera of small government to take a sledge hammer to this proven framework by attempting to remove the disincentives of taxes and regulations. We were told that by focusing purely on the needs of individual investors that somehow the markets and society would take care of themselves. Again American capital, hard work and ingenuity responded to this policy redirection but with a plethora of unintended consequences. The immediate result was moral hazard and an orgy of risk taking unrestrained by even the slightest fear of regulatory accountability. In some sense the $700B bailout has even validated this belief by ultimately rescuing many of the American and global investors who were invited to the party. And now as the Federal Reserve wrecklessly ramps up the printing presses; society, investors, workers, taxpayers and the environment alike will all suffer grievously as a direct result.
Capitalism isn't threatened by sensible regulatory, tax and social spending policies that reflect the common stake that we all have in markets and society as a whole. On the contrary, it is precisely the absence of these considerations in a misguided indulgence of individual self interest that has proven disastrous for all concerned.
In swing states, McCain and Obama spar over taxes
By DAVID ESPO
AP Special Correspondent
Oct 18th, 2008 at 5:07 pm EDT
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081018/ap_on_el_pr/candidates_taxes
ST. LOUIS - In an outbreak of class warfare, John McCain and Barack Obama swapped sharply worded charges over tax cuts on Saturday, each accusing the other of shortchanging middle-income Americans at a time of economic hardship for millions.
McCain, trailing in the polls, fired the first volley, likening his rival to the socialist leaders of Europe and saying he wanted to "convert the IRS into a giant welfare agency, redistributing massive amounts of wealth at the direction of politicians in Washington."
McCain added, "Raising taxes on some in order to give checks to others is not a tax cut; it's just another government giveaway."
Obama responded a few hours later in appearance before an enormous crowd, saying his Republican rival "wants to cut taxes for the same people who have already been making out like bandits, in some cases literally."
---
complete copyrighted story at link above
http://www.leon-antoine.net/cc_economics.htm
Clinton was able to change its direction and now I have hope the new administration will also.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. NATIONAL DEBT CLOCK
The Outstanding Public Debt as of 05 Oct 2008 at 12:45:21 PM GMT is: Read More »
The conservatives would have us believe that now we have such a huge tax burden thanks to George Bush mismanagement that it will take us years to pay it off.
Don't believe that. It is just more of their conservative claptrap and lies. Haven't we ordinary Americans had enough of it? I know that I sure the H have.
With proper and fair tax legislation, our entire national debt could likely be paid off by April 15, 2009. It is not that complicated and it is not unfair. What IS unfair is for ordinary Americans to have to continue to bear the tax burdens for the rich and for corporations.
Here is the tax adjustment that I recommend:
All Americans AND corporate entities are required by April 15, 2009 to pay a tax of 25% on all income NO DEDUCTIONS ALLOWED they earned from 2001 through 2008.
Now some of us, like me and Warren Buffet's receptionist, would be getting refunds for those 8 years because our income tax percentage was at 30% of our income of which we paid all.
However others would be forking over the price for their free ride.
I daresay our budget could be balanced in one day.
BUT DON'T LET ANYONE, EVEN A DEMOCRAT TELL YOU THAT WE HAVE TO SUFFER UNDER THE BURDEN OF DEBT THAT THE RICH HAVE CREATED BY NOT PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE.
NOT THIS TIME. NOT THIS YEAR.
I recently read somewhere that the $700 billion bailout of Wall Street is going to cost each man woman and child in the USA $2,000. Thus a family of four can expect to pay $8,000 of their hard-earned tax dollar to bail out Wall Street.
It is still not even clear to most of us how this benefits us–exactly, except that it means that our savings and money market accounts that we entrusted to you will not evaporate. Perhaps for many Americans, however, this bailout is more like a fine as many of us have no savings and do not own shares of anything on Wall Street and don’t have a money market account.
This Bush Administration has bullied the Democratic Congress for the past two years. Everytime it has asked for more money (which always means more taxes for the middle class and the poor) and Congress has tried to stand up to them, the Bush Administration has denounced such rebellion as “partisan” and shamed Congress down.
ENOUGH OF THEIR CONSERVATIVE CLAPTRAP! IT IS PAST TIME FOR OUR CONGRESS TO REPRESENT THE PEOPLE.
CALL YOUR CONGRESS MEN AND WOMEN TODAY AND TELL THEM TO NOT DARE BACK DOWN. PAULSON AND THIS BUSH ADMINISTRATION ARE NOT TO BE IN CHARGE OF THE ALLOCATION OF THIS $700 BILLION.
ENOUGH!
Graphic: from the Queen's Art
http://iflizwerequeen.com
Queen's Comments
[from: http://iflizwerequeen.com ]
This morning I read headllines in Colombia Reports that the Bankers of Colombia were demanding that the government cut taxes in order to halt inflation. I smiled, albeit a rueful smile, as cutting taxes and cutting government seem to be the only cures that conservatives ever offer up as remedies for correcting economic woes. Both of these are faux solutions and here is why:
ON CUTTING TAXES AS A FAUX SOLUTION
First of all cutting taxes will benefit the wealthy by thousands of dollars and help the middle class and the poor by pennies. Cutting taxes is a faux solution because it implies that the wealthy are already paying a high percentage of their income in taxes. They are not. On average, those who make over $250,000 in the USA pay between 17 and 20% of their income in taxes while those who earn under $100,000 pay between 25 and 32% of their income in taxes. This is what needs to change in regard to taxes--close the tax loopholes for the wealthy and for corporations.
IT'S NOT ABOUT RAISING TAXES, BUT ABOUT CORRECTING THE INEQUITIES THAT FAVOR THE RICH AND CORPORATIONS
WE SHOULD STAND NOT FOR RAISING TAXES ON ANYONE--NOT THE RICH AND NOT THE POOR! We should stand for correcting inequitable tax breaks for the wealthy and for American Corporations.
We need to correct an inequitable tax situation in the USA that favors the wealthy and burdens the middle class. We have a situation in our country where people such as Warren Buffett (the richest man in the world) pay 17% of their annual income in taxes and people like Warren Buffett's receptionist who earn $60,000 a year pay 30% of their annual income in taxes. This is undemocratic and it needs to be changed. Is there really any American anywhere who believes that this it fair and just?
If you think that the rich are generous, then that is a myth that you can let go. The truth is that Billionaires are actually stingy.
http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2007/0318useconomics_easterbrook.aspx
Read More »ABOUT TAXES:
STOP BELIEVING THE REPUBLICAN CLAPTRAP ABOUT DEMOCRATS WANTING TO RAISE TAXES. That is nonsense.
The Democrats don't want to raise taxes, we want to remove tax loopholes for the rich--the upper 5% and corporations.
Aren't you more than just a little tired of paying their way? I sure am.
For the past 8 years oil companies have been exempt from BILLIONS OF TAX DOLLARS THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN PAYING.
Tax inequity between the rich and the poor in America is so ridiculous that we have the richest man in the world, Warren Buffet paying 17 % of his income while his receptionist who earns $60,000 paying 30% of her income in taxes.
THIS MUST CHANGE--BUT IT WON'T IF YOU VOTE FOR MCCAIN AND PALIN. IT WILL ONLY GET WORSE.
I received the following email from aBarbara Davis this morning. She is apparently also a member of the 2008 Presidential Blog group. Barbara wrote:
"The fact that the taxes are too high on American Companies is why they are leaving the US. The US will become a service nation soon if we raise their taxes more. This will cause even more crime and poverty. We have to lower their taxes in order to bring the companies back to the US and put people back to work.
You need to get your facts right before you place the blame."
Someone please explain to me how an "American Company" can relocate to a communist nation - like China - and make a profit? The tax rate there is suppose to be 100%.
If a democrat can believe the real problem is that companies are taxed too much then we certainly should not take victory in November for granted. No matter how silly the republican policies may seem to us.