quote:

ORIGINAL: Moloch

Tax Burden of Top 1% Now Exceeds That of Bottom 95%

http://www.taxfoundation.org/UserFiles/Image/Blog/blog20090729-chart2.jpg

quote:

Actually...there is ANOTHER explanation, Spinner and that is this...there are more white families in which the man and the woman both work at higher level jobs than there are black people. Now then, I suppose you could state that even with all those programs in place, it is because blacks are still somehow held down in society but then, in comparison to someone like Thomas Sowell or Colin Powell or Condaleeza Rice and even the annointed one...Barack Obama...that would make a fairly hollow argument unless you choose to see it from the liberal perspective. The opportunities are there for people to achieve what they wish to achieve. Hell, in some cases, there are MORE opportunities...in this state, a minority construction firm must be considered before a white-owned construction firm for any sort of government contract through things such as a sliding scale applied to contract bids.

quote:


Actually, I believe you would favor the second alternative. Of the two, you are right, I would favor the first...but there again, I don't happen to take your perspective as gospel. There are plenty of other reasons for the gap becoming wider...wildly increasing interest rates which have favored the investments of those in that top 5%, enabling them to invest even further while at the same time, more readily available credit to those below that top 5% and them choosing to access that, putting themselves in debt to live a lifestyle that few could afford. Just because credit is available does not mean you have to avail yourself of it and yet records show that many did just that and then when they could not afford what they KNEW they could not afford, they let it go to repossession, thus skewing statistics further.

quote:

There are always going to be the wealthy among us. And whether you like it or not, some of them got there by hard work and smarts...Sam Walton and Bill Gates being two good examples from two differing sides of the ideologic spectrum. Ironic though that both got there through a capitalistic manner.
If you want to clamp down on rules restricting how wealth is made, then start with rules that close loopholes that should not exist. But to beggar thy neighbor in the interest of making things more equal? That's not equal opportunity and it is not a level playing field, that's equal outcome without equal effort and while that sounds soooooooooooo good to so many who believe in a utopia, for those of us who believe our efforts should be rewarded while those who do not work as hard do not deserve the same results as we do, it sounds like socialism.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Maybe its because half of the bottom half that had jobs and could pay taxes LOST their jobs???

Some people just dont think.

New data released by the IRS today offers interesting insights into the distributional spread of the federal income tax burden, new analysis by the Tax Foundation shows. The new data shows that the top-earning 25% of taxpayers (AGI over $62,068) earned 67.5% of the nation's income, but they paid more than four out of every five dollars collected by the federal income tax (86%). The top 1% of taxpayers (AGI over $364,657) earned approximately 21.2% of the nation's income (as defined by AGI), yet paid 39.4% of all federal income taxes. That means the top 1% of tax returns paid about the same amount of federal individual income taxes as the bottom 95% of tax returns.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Do you really want to point out that 1% of the population is richer than 99% of the population?

October 6, 2007
Top 1% Pay More Income Tax Than Bottom 90%
The Tax Foundation has published Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data:

New data released by the IRS today offers interesting insights into the distributional spread of the federal income tax burden, new analysis by the Tax Foundation shows. The new data shows that the top-earning 25% of taxpayers (AGI over $62,068) earned 67.5% of the nation's income, but they paid more than four out of every five dollars collected by the federal income tax (86%). The top 1% of taxpayers (AGI over $364,657) earned approximately 21.2% of the nation's income (as defined by AGI), yet paid 39.4% of all federal income taxes. That means the top 1% of tax returns paid about the same amount of federal individual income taxes as the bottom 95% of tax returns.

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2007/10/top-1-pay-more-.html

LOL... do you really want me to respond?

quote:

CNN Drops to Last Place Among Cable News Networks

CNN, which invented the cable news network more than two decades ago, will hit a new competitive low with its prime-time programs in October, finishing fourth – and last – among the cable news networks with the audience that all the networks rely on for their advertising.

...

For the month, CNN averaged 202,000 viewers between the ages of 25 and 54 – the group that television news organizations use as their basis of success because of their advertising sales. That was far behind the dominant leader, Fox News, which averaged 689,000. But it also trailed MSNBC, which had 250,000 viewers in that group and HLN, which had 221,000.

(Full article here).

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: blacksword404

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales


The model of the "lazy bums who won't help themselves" is a myth used very well to the advantage of those who want to protect their inherited wealth.

Hmm. Well I know one of those myths. She has been on welfare longer than I been alive. She is capable of working but just chooses not to. Why? Laziness. It is easier for her to get her government money than to get a job and make her own. And that was her thinking.

I thought most states went to workfare states.  Some people do fall through the cracks.  Have you tried reporting her?  Could be other reasons she cant work and is too ashamed to tell you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Time for all the White House czars to get out and push!

quote:

CNN Drops to Last Place Among Cable News Networks

CNN, which invented the cable news network more than two decades ago, will hit a new competitive low with its prime-time programs in October, finishing fourth – and last – among the cable news networks with the audience that all the networks rely on for their advertising.

...

For the month, CNN averaged 202,000 viewers between the ages of 25 and 54 – the group that television news organizations use as their basis of success because of their advertising sales. That was far behind the dominant leader, Fox News, which averaged 689,000. But it also trailed MSNBC, which had 250,000 viewers in that group and HLN, which had 221,000.

(Full article here).

quote:

Well, a little misleading since CNN and HLN are the same thing.

quote:


SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Circulation at newspapers shrank at an accelerated pace in the past six months, driven in part by stiff price increases imposed by publishers scrambling to offset rapidly eroding advertising sales.

...

As both publications indicated earlier in the month, The Wall Street Journal surpassed USA Today as the top-selling newspaper in the United States. The Journal's average Monday-Friday circulation edged up 0.6 percent to 2.02 million -- making it the only daily newspaper in the top 25 to see an increase.

USA Today suffered the worst erosion in its 27-year history, dropping more than 17 percent to 1.90 million. The newspaper, owned by Gannett Co., has blamed reductions in travel for much of the circulation shortfall, because many of its single-copy sales come in airports and hotels.

The New York Times stayed in third place at 927,851, down 7.3 percent from the same period of 2008. Its Sunday edition remained the top weekend seller at 1.4 million, a decrease of 2.6 percent.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Newspaper-circulation-drop-apf-3182126693.html?x=0

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales

Quotes from CreativeDominant

quote:

Actually...there is ANOTHER explanation, Spinner and that is this...there are more white families in which the man and the woman both work at higher level jobs than there are black people. Now then, I suppose you could state that even with all those programs in place, it is because blacks are still somehow held down in society but then, in comparison to someone like Thomas Sowell or Colin Powell or Condaleeza Rice and even the annointed one...Barack Obama...that would make a fairly hollow argument unless you choose to see it from the liberal perspective. The opportunities are there for people to achieve what they wish to achieve. Hell, in some cases, there are MORE opportunities...in this state, a minority construction firm must be considered before a white-owned construction firm for any sort of government contract through things such as a sliding scale applied to contract bids.

Putting aside your snide comment about the "chosen one",  you again use the exceptions and call them the rules. Not every black person is a Condaleeza Rice, Colin Powell or Thomas Sowell. Just as not every white person is Bill Gates or Steve Jobs. There are always people who can overcome any optical. This doesn't mean the obstacles are not enough to block the average person of any race, creed or gender. It is a pleasant fiction to pretend that such obsticals do not exist but reality is far different. I do not expect you to see that. It is not in your interest to do so.

quote:

quote:


Actually, I believe you would favor the second alternative. Of the two, you are right, I would favor the first...but there again, I don't happen to take your perspective as gospel. There are plenty of other reasons for the gap becoming wider...wildly increasing interest rates which have favored the investments of those in that top 5%, enabling them to invest even further while at the same time, more readily available credit to those below that top 5% and them choosing to access that, putting themselves in debt to live a lifestyle that few could afford. Just because credit is available does not mean you have to avail yourself of it and yet records show that many did just that and then when they could not afford what they KNEW they could not afford, they let it go to repossession, thus skewing statistics further.

It was not the top 5% who were destroyed by overextending themselves. It was the middle class who was decimated by the preditory lending practices and stagnating wages of the past decades. Of course wisdom should have been exercised. But a good part of the gap widening was the top 5% making money by keeping wages stagnent while providing credit in the stead of living wages. The company store mentality hit the modern age and the result is unchanged from the nineteenth century.

quote:

quote:

There are always going to be the wealthy among us. And whether you like it or not, some of them got there by hard work and smarts...Sam Walton and Bill Gates being two good examples from two differing sides of the ideologic spectrum. Ironic though that both got there through a capitalistic manner.
If you want to clamp down on rules restricting how wealth is made, then start with rules that close loopholes that should not exist. But to beggar thy neighbor in the interest of making things more equal? That's not equal opportunity and it is not a level playing field, that's equal outcome without equal effort and while that sounds soooooooooooo good to so many who believe in a utopia, for those of us who believe our efforts should be rewarded while those who do not work as hard do not deserve the same results as we do, it sounds like socialism.

I agree with the idea of closing loopholes. I also respect those who gained wealth through their hard work and their initiative. I do not, however, see the idea of raising the taxes the 5% pay by a few percentage points as beggaring them. As is a common tactic in your post, you posit an all or nothing scenario where reasonable change is impossible. What you overlook is that historically the death of the middle class is the death of a society. We are growing closer and closer to that occurance while those in the middle class shout stridently for the privilidges of the upper 5% who's rank they are unlikely to ever join.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

God, right-wing humour sucks. It's so puerile  .