Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: RW friend says "Top 10% pay 70% of all taxes, taking care of that 47%." True? [View all]stevenleser
(32,886 posts)29. If I was paid 100% of the income, I'd pay 100% of the taxes. Start from there with your response.
Explain that if the country were reoriented so that the middle class received a higher share of the income, like we should, then the middle class would pay a higher share of the taxes. If the top 1% receives nearly half the share of income, then you are going to see that they pay close to half the taxes.
Your rightwing friend is actually illustrating a problem with income distribution in this country and trying to assert it means something about taxes. It doesnt mean anything about taxes.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
76 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
RW friend says "Top 10% pay 70% of all taxes, taking care of that 47%." True? [View all]
Shanti Mama
Oct 2012
OP
Historically, higher taxes on the rich have correlated to higher growth.
Ichingcarpenter
Oct 2012
#2
I have tried to track this but if you go back a few years it was "95% of taxes"
underpants
Oct 2012
#13
Yes and no. It's only true if we're talking exclusively the federal income tax rates.
Selatius
Oct 2012
#14
People on Social Security paid into the system, aren't "taken care of" by the Top 10% at all.
reformist2
Oct 2012
#16
But that's to be expected, given typical returns on investments along with inflation.
reformist2
Oct 2012
#22
if you look at their figures, it's low-earners who get more than they pay in.
HiPointDem
Oct 2012
#62
"If you look at" the system, you'll see that low-earners get taxed on all their income, whereas THE
WinkyDink
Oct 2012
#65
I understand the system just fine, thanks. The fact of the cap has nothing to do with how much
HiPointDem
Oct 2012
#67
it clearly says that for those who retire starting in 2010, median or higher earners will
HiPointDem
Oct 2012
#61
The 47% pay taxes. Many are retirees who paid into SS and are now receiving
Warren Stupidity
Oct 2012
#19
You know, WTH would it matter? All it would show is that IT STILL ISN'T ENOUGH. The gap is HISTORIC.
WinkyDink
Oct 2012
#25
If I was paid 100% of the income, I'd pay 100% of the taxes. Start from there with your response.
stevenleser
Oct 2012
#29
Tell her that the 47% include older people on SS, the military, the disabled, and poor children.
Dawgs
Oct 2012
#36
Yeah, well, 93 percent of all financial wealth is controlled by the top 10 percent of the country.
Lex
Oct 2012
#47
IF THEY PAID SOME FUCKING DECENT ASS WAGES THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF ANYONE !!!!!
SmileyRose
Oct 2012
#53
Your friend is RW? And you think she knows "facts"? There's your difficulty, right there.
WinkyDink
Oct 2012
#66