josebach wrote:As far as taxes. Here's an interesting article on how taxes work. It's extremely simplified and generalized, but the basic jist of it is pretty accurate.
yup. and there's a big difference betweeen "interesting" and "accurate." and that article is an "interesting" piece of political polemic, but not an accurate view of how the taxes are borne. but that... i think.... is for a completely different message board, slate, perhaps?
To assert that the effective tax rate is greater on a minimum wage owner than the wealthy is absurd. In some specfic instances this may the case due to tax laws, but buy and large the rich get bilked far worse. I am too lazy to look up the actual stat right now, but the top 5% of earners pay some hugely preponderent percentage of all tax revenue in the US.
Plus any arguement involving "minimum wage earners" is a chimera to begin with. Less than 20% of people earning minimum wage are primary income earners, and these are mostly people who just started a job and will quickly graduate to a wage that is above minimum. It is far more likely that a minimum wage earner is some snot-nosed kid working at the mall rather than some poor bastard breaking his back to make ends meet.
as noted above, this is not a public policy / political interest website. to correct your misconception, however, the extremely wealthy in america... their income does not come from wages, but from investments, which is an entirely different animal altogether. and that doesn't even touch the question of other taxes such as social security, sales tax, etc., as a percentage of annual total income. anyone who wants to discuss this, i'll be more than happy to do it via email or private messages but won't start any further public discourse on this (although i will refute incorrect assertions).
Matthias wrote:as noted above, this is not a public policy / political interest website. to correct your misconception, however, the extremely wealthy in america... their income does not come from wages, but from investments, which is an entirely different animal altogether. and that doesn't even touch the question of other taxes such as social security, sales tax, etc., as a percentage of annual total income. anyone who wants to discuss this, i'll be more than happy to do it via email or private messages but won't start any further public discourse on this (although i will refute incorrect assertions).
Where did they get the money to invest in the first place?
What's your point, anyway? Are you saying the rich don't pay an incredibly disproportionate percentage of taxes?
So is it fair that Bill Gates pays 1% income tax and I pay 100% income tax? I mean, after all, Bill Gates is still paying more tax than me so it he is shouldering so much burden, right?
Some people are talking percentages and others are talking aggregate sums. Please note the difference.
bleach168 wrote:So is it fair that Bill Gates pays 1% income tax and I pay 100% income tax? I mean, after all, Bill Gates is still paying more tax than me so it he is shouldering so much burden, right?
Some people are talking percentages and others are talking aggregate sums. Please note the difference.
Note what difference? The rich pay a higher percentage and a higher aggregate sum. You know what a tax bracket is, don't you?
BTW, this Bill Gates fellow you mentioned... is one of the greatest philanthropists the world has ever seen monetarily speaking.
On the other hand, if I paid 100% income tax like you, I would probably be pretty pissed too.
bleach168 wrote:So is it fair that Bill Gates pays 1% income tax and I pay 100% income tax? I mean, after all, Bill Gates is still paying more tax than me so it he is shouldering so much burden, right?
Some people are talking percentages and others are talking aggregate sums. Please note the difference.
Note what difference? The rich pay a higher percentage and a higher aggregate sum. You know what a tax bracket is, don't you?
BTW, this Bill Gates fellow you mentioned... is one of the greatest philanthropists the world has ever seen monetarily speaking.
On the other hand, if I paid 100% income tax like you, I would probably be pretty pissed too.
Answer this. If I make $5 million in the stock market but otherwise unemployed, what tax bracket am I in?
bleach168 wrote:So is it fair that Bill Gates pays 1% income tax and I pay 100% income tax? I mean, after all, Bill Gates is still paying more tax than me so it he is shouldering so much burden, right?
Some people are talking percentages and others are talking aggregate sums. Please note the difference.
Note what difference? The rich pay a higher percentage and a higher aggregate sum. You know what a tax bracket is, don't you?
BTW, this Bill Gates fellow you mentioned... is one of the greatest philanthropists the world has ever seen monetarily speaking.
On the other hand, if I paid 100% income tax like you, I would probably be pretty pissed too.
Answer this. If I make $5 million in the stock market but otherwise unemployed, what tax bracket am I in?
I can only assume by your last couple posts that you're young so I won't be a jerk. Money earned in the stock market is taxable income and is subjected to federal income tax.
The lowest tax bracket pays roughly 10% federal income tax. If you're in this tax bracket most of the federal income tax you pay (if not all) will be returned to you after filing your tax return at the end of the year. (There are other taxes and deductions such as social security that are not refunded) Some states also charge a state income tax in addition to the federal income tax. Florida, fortunately does not.
Without any deductions and having a filing status of single, federal income tax on $5,000,000 would be roughly: $1,730,470.
Fantasy baseball is a lot more fun to discuss than this crap. I think I'll stop now.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by Matthias » Fri Jul 15, 2005 9:14 am 
