jump to last post 1-36 of 36 discussions (311 posts)

Are you a freeloader or a taxpayer?

  1. Cassie Smith profile image75
    Cassie Smithposted 4 years ago

    Only half of all Americans are paying their taxes because they are still employed.  The unemployment rate isn't going down any time soon as much as the media wants to spin it so it looks like the taxpayer half will slowly reduce their numbers as Obama proposes more ways to spend money in the hopes of reducing the deficit. Huh? Yeah, I know, but that's how he looks at it.

    1. John Holden profile image61
      John Holdenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I don't know what it's like in the US, but in the UK the only way of getting out of paying any taxes is not to spend any money.

      1. Cassie Smith profile image75
        Cassie Smithposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Apparently in the UK if you're an immigrant they give you stuff.  All you have to do in the US is not get a job and if you're a woman, have illegitimate children, then you get a check and don't pay taxes.

    2. psycheskinner profile image80
      psycheskinnerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      The unemployment rate is not "half".

      Those not paying have no money to pay for whatever reason. 

      But I don't see how half can be paying "no" tax as you pay tax every time you buy something.

      What is that figure based on? Income tax alone?  There are lots of other kinds of tax. Sales, saving, inheritance, dividend etc.

      1. Repairguy47 profile image61
        Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Yes its figured on income tax. But don't pull the sales tax ploy, these people are getting money back that they never earned and certainly didn't pay in sales tax throughout the year. Half of America is supporting the other half.

        1. kerryg profile image87
          kerrygposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          If you include all taxes, even the bottom 20% pays an average of 18.7% of their income in taxes:

          http://i39.tinypic.com/2090o6t.jpgp

          1. Jeff Berndt profile image89
            Jeff Berndtposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Thank you for saving me time and typing, kerryg.

            1. 0
              JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              That can't possibly be right.

              Looking only at federal income tax rates, the top 1% pay 22% more than the bottom 50%. That only shows a 12% spread between to bottom and top.

    3. The Frog Prince profile image78
      The Frog Princeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Cassie - I'm in the upper half and come April 15th I'll probably be forking over more.  I reckon I've paid my "fair share" since 50% pay not a skinny penny.

      The Frog

      1. psycheskinner profile image80
        psycheskinnerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Not sure how they manage that.  Never buying anything?

        1. Jeff Berndt profile image89
          Jeff Berndtposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Frog knows not of which he speaks, psyche. He imagines that tax on earned income is the only federal tax, and if you end up getting all of your withholdings back at tax time, you pay no taxes at all.

        2. 0
          Deborah Sextonposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          ******

          They're speaking of income tax (Money you earn) not tax for buying things

    4. Dave Mathews profile image59
      Dave Mathewsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Wake up and smell the coffee. You can receive "Welfare" but you are taxed.

      1. Eaglekiwi profile image76
        Eaglekiwiposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        That means its double taxation ,first from the worker ,then secondly from the welfare receipent, (who gets an income refund come Feb) Go figure??

    5. AEvans profile image71
      AEvansposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Cassie, The reason the other half are not paying taxes is because there isn't any jobs for many Americans. Be thankful you have a job, many Americans still do not and it will be a long-time for many Americans to bounce back. I wouldn't call them freeloaders they are Americans who gave there blood and sweat for our Country and its about time they get something back. I don't care if those who are unemployed get Food Stamps or Public Assistance our Country owes millions of people something since they chose to take it all away.

      1. lovemychris profile image79
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        "our Country owes millions of people something since they chose to take it all away."

        Yes! And I'll go further: those who got all the breaks can give it back!

        1. AEvans profile image71
          AEvansposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          The breaks are always going to the wealthy not the middle class or the poor. I live in a middle class neighbor and see my neighbors still beating the streets for work. I see them with a Food Stamp card in there hand and I do not care. These were the same people who were thriving citizens and were taxpayers that are still getting food from the Food Banks. Our Country is not recovering, but it is election time so the Media will tell all of us anything to gain a vote. I agree they who receive tax breaks need to give it all back!

          1. 0
            JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            In 2009, the top 1% had an average <b>effective</b> tax rate of 24.01%.

            The bottom 50% had an average effective tax rate of 1.85%.

            The rich are paying much more than their fair share in taxes. If this report went into the bottom 25%, you would see taxpayers paying a negative percentage. The poor have a much more favorable tax situation than the rich.

            http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html

            1. Jeff Berndt profile image89
              Jeff Berndtposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Nonsense. You're ignoring excise taxes, which hit the low-income folks a lot harder than the wealthy.

              1. 0
                JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Hit harder?

                Do the poor pay a higher percentage?

                Do the poor pay a higher total amount?

                The more you spend, the more you pay in taxes. The rich spend a lot more money than the poor, so they pay more taxes.

                1. secularist10 profile image91
                  secularist10posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Actually, the opposite--the rich generally spend a smaller proportion of their income than the poor. The rich save a greater proportion of their income, and those savings go into investments and whatnot, which are taxed at a much lower rate than income tax. This is one of many ways the system favors the rich.

                  Yes, the poor or middle class often do pay a higher percentage of their income than the rich or super rich.

                  You can't look at absolute figures; the rich will always pay more in absolute terms. You have to look at the percentages.

                  1. 0
                    JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    1 - Capital gains are taxed at a higher rate than anyone in the bottom 90% pays in income tax. So that's just untrue.

                    2 - The point was, as far as sales tax goes, everyone pays the same percentage.

                    Only if they spend a higher percentage. Are you calling for a progressive sales tax system?

                    And the rich pay higher percentages in all income taxes, up to 22% higher.

      2. 0
        JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        A lot of people do have jobs but still don't pay income taxes. Exemptions, deductions, EIC and child tax credits can give more money to a family in a year as a refund than they made(gross) for the entire year.

        People complain that the rich don't pay enough taxes, even though they pay much higher percentage rates. People complain the rich use 'tax loopholes', but it's ok for the poor to use 'tax loopholes'(all deductions/credits/exemptions are 'tax loopholes').

        1. lovemychris profile image79
          lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          You heard Buffet....his secretary pays a higher percentage rate than him. Leona Helmsley said only little people pay taxes.
          Our infrastructure is in shambles, but places with a concentration of wealth are doing mahvelously.

          The tax policies from 2000-2008 were put in place to make it so.

          They need to be reversed, and we can have a country again.

          1. 0
            MP50posted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Tax Payer.

          2. 0
            JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            No, his secretary pays a higher income tax rate than his capital gains tax rate. His secretary also pays a higher income tax rate than EVERYONE's capital gains tax rate. It's comparing apples to oranges. Everyone pays the same capital gains rate, and the rich pay higher income tax rates.

            We don't need to increase taxes to fix the country, we need to reduce spending. We're over budget by over a trillion dollars every year, there is no taxing your way out of that. If the economy grows by 1-3% every year, and the federal budget grows by 3-5% every year, there is a problem with the budget.

            1. lovemychris profile image79
              lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              When were the cap gains taxes lowered? That was done as a favor to the wealthy, so they could keep more of their money.

              Same as the Bush breaks...favor to the wealthy.

              When that money was taken out, our economic downfall began.

              Not to mention the outright theft that occurred by Wall Street, who pay at 15%...isn't that right? As it's investment $$,and not actually earned by hard work.

              I have plenty of places I would cut, and dmop has a great idea...we should vote!

              But, if we want a decent, high-grade society, well--you get what you pay for!

              1. 0
                JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Lower capital gains tax rates stimulate investment, which helps stimulate the economy.

                Look at this chart:

                http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6240061_f248.jpg
                Source: http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Capi … Taxes.html

                When the rates were lowered in the 80's, what happened to the total tax receipts? They went up. When they were raised in the late 80's/early 90's, receipts went down. When rates were lowered again, receipts went up.

                When tax rates are lower, it's easier to invest and make a profit. More people invest. More companies have capital to work with. More expansion is possible.

                Raising taxes wouldn't solve our problems, and would only make them worse. The average effective corporate tax rate is at 22% right now, and in 2009 the IRS collected $225 billion from corporate taxes. We also had a deficit of $1,412 billion in 2009. So, let's raise tax rates on corporations to 50% effective. That would give us an additional $286 billion in tax receipts!(It would also bankrupt most companies in the country). Ok, now the deficit would have only been $1,126 billion. Individuals paid an average effective tax rate of 11%, and receipts were $1,175 billion. So all we have to do is double everyone's effective tax rates, and we would have a balanced budget! Of course, the bottom 50% of American's wouldn't care too much about doubling their ENORMOUS tax rate of 1.85%(because that's fair, right? Half of Americans pay under 2% and the other half pay over 20%)

                But... then you have the slight problem of businesses going bankrupt, jobs being lost, incomes lost, less spending, recession, even less spending, less jobs because of less spending, depression...

                1. Jeff Berndt profile image89
                  Jeff Berndtposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  "When tax rates are lower, it's easier to invest and make a profit."
                  If this were actually the case, the economy woudn't have been in the toilet for the past ten years or so, since tax rates are at historic lows.

                  "Raising taxes wouldn't solve our problems, and would only make them worse. "
                  If there were any truth to that at all, the postwar economic boom could never have happened, since taxes were much, much higher in the 40s, 50s and 60s.

                  There is no causal relationship between tax rates and economic growth. Your post is full of fail.

                  1. 0
                    JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    If you read what I wrote, I was talking about the relationship between capital gains tax rates and capital gains tax receipts. Just because there are more capital gains tax receipts doesn't mean the economy does better, but it means there is more activity in the markets.

                    Capital gains are less than 3% of the total tax revenue for the government. So even if it does extremely well, it won't offset general problems in the economy.

                    They weren't as high as most people think, and tax rates weren't the reason for the economic growth in that time period. The amazing thing is that there was as much growth as there was, in spite of the higher tax rates.

                    The interesting thing is, if the government lowers tax rates, it generally ends up pulling in as much, or more, total tax revenue. More money in taxpayers' pockets = more spending = more growth = more taxes. It's amazing how it works.

                    Let me ask you a question. How many goods would you buy if the government took 100% of your money? How many goods would you buy if the government took 0% of your money?

                    There is a correlation, I just proved it.

    6. dmop profile image86
      dmopposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I'm not sure who gets a free ride, but I've taken the liberty to do some research and share it for those who are interested. A person who makes 30,000 a year on average pays 3,900 out of their check before they even see it. If they spend that money they will pay an average of 2,250 in sales tax. The average property tax is 1,132. Those combined equal 7,282, while the average return for a 30,000 a year income is 2,290, which is an increase of 5% from last year. That leaves that person paying 4,992. That's about 17% of that persons income, which hardly seems like a free ride to me.

    7. 0
      Sooner28posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Gasoline tax, sales tax....Yeah like John Holdren said, only if the person spends no money at all is that even possible.

    8. 0
      theking2020posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I don't see how we can be in such a huge debt when about everyone pays taxes in one form or another makes no sense.

      1. Cassie Smith profile image75
        Cassie Smithposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Yeah, that's our government (federal, state, and local) for you.

        1. 0
          theking2020posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          We shouldn't have a government all it does is create problems more than anything else.

          1. dmop profile image86
            dmopposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Where would we be with out government. I think we need government as people we all need rules to govern our lives and to unify us. What we don't need is a government body, no people, just documents that spell out the laws of the land. Perhaps there could be a committee to address issues as they arise, but otherwise just documents. In this day and age with all of the technology we could have votes from all citizens before any changes or amendments could be made.

  2. habee profile image90
    habeeposted 4 years ago

    I think Cassie means income tax, which now only half of Americans are paying. I'm a tax payer. 49.5% of Americans pay no income tax. I'm not talking about SS/Medicare/property taxes/sales tax.

    1. cost-segregation profile image61
      cost-segregationposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      In America, Everybody pay tax otherwise infrastructure of USA is not being develop.

      1. 0
        JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Not everybody pays income tax.

  3. Evan G Rogers profile image83
    Evan G Rogersposted 4 years ago

    I'm the latter, redefined as "a sucker".

  4. ib radmasters profile image59
    ib radmastersposted 4 years ago

    The question is vague
    Freeloader could mean government employer or politician.

  5. Uninvited Writer profile image84
    Uninvited Writerposted 4 years ago

    So, those unemployed by no choice of their own are now all freeloaders?

    1. oceansnsunsets profile image88
      oceansnsunsetsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Fair point, as I know of many people that aren't working by no fault of their own, and they are not freeloaders.  They are really careful with their money, and try to make more however they can.

  6. Disturbia profile image60
    Disturbiaposted 4 years ago

    When you signup for unemployment benefits you are asked right on the form if you want your taxes deducted weekly or not. Unemployment benefits are subject to income tax.  Unless that's changed from the last time my ex-husband filed for unemployment.

  7. mrshadyside1 profile image77
    mrshadyside1posted 4 years ago

    Wow,now there's a really inverted uninformed title and subject.I wonder why it is our economy is in the situation it is in now?Hmmmmm.........yes,it's because of the common man putting in an honest days work.I would bet my freeloading inheritance that those who fall in the bottom half would gladly exchange places with you,and never piss and moan at all.The percentage of illegals and actual freeloaders are matched by fraudulent misrepresentations of income of wealthy Americans.There are tons of issues weighing in on this and to say that everyone that gets earned income credit or owes no taxes are freeloaders is just ridiculous and juvenile.

  8. habee profile image90
    habeeposted 4 years ago

    Some of you are confusing the different types of taxes. Please re-read my above post. In 2009, 46.9% paid no income tax:

    http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/Uploaded … o_pays.pdf

    Also, if you work, you can get Earned Income Tax Credit and get back more from the IRS than what you paid in.

    1. John Holden profile image61
      John Holdenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Understood Habee, but there is no mention of income tax in the title, just taxpayers.

      And nobody escapes taxes.

      1. habee profile image90
        habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Oh, okay. My bad! lol

      2. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Really?  Rent an apartment (no real property taxes) in Oregon (no sales tax) and do without a car (no gas tax).  If you also go without a phone, no tax there, either.  Utilities included in rent - no taxes on electricity.  Welfare as only income - no income tax, no FICA. 

        It could probably be done.  It is done, and frequently, if you ignore the small things like phone tax.  Even states with sales tax can collect only monies given by Uncle Sam if you have no income.

        1. Jeff Berndt profile image89
          Jeff Berndtposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          "Rent an apartment (no real property taxes)"
          Do you seriously think that the landlord doesn't figure in his property tax expenses into your rent?
          "do without a car (no gas tax)"
          You can do that in big cities with decent public transit, but good luck keeping a job anywhere else with no car (no dependable way to get to and from work).
          "Utilities included in rent - no taxes on electricity."
          Again with the assumption that the landlord doesn't pass on his tax expense.

          "It could probably be done.  It is done, "
          It can, but doesn't get done nearly as often as you imagine.

        2. Ralph Deeds profile image69
          Ralph Deedsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Renters are paying property taxes indirectly with their rent payments.

  9. mythbuster profile image85
    mythbusterposted 4 years ago

    Where do these stats come from? (working versus unemployed)?

  10. MelissaBarrett profile image60
    MelissaBarrettposted 4 years ago

    You can't get earned income credit without earned income... just saying.  Technically, only those families that are working are eligible... which kinda blows the freeloader definition to hell.

    1. Repairguy47 profile image61
      Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Only in your world, if you make 11,000 for the year and get back 8000, something is way wrong. I know, I know you disagree. You're probably the other half.

      1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
        MelissaBarrettposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Wow I'd like to know where that happens...

        Especially since the highest EIC for 11000 with three children (the most that can be claimed) is 4961. (The max is 5751 btw, so NO ONE is getting back 8k in EIC alone)

        And damn skippy I claim it.  It ALMOST made up for the amount that I had to pay in "business" taxes for being an independent contractor.

        1. Repairguy47 profile image61
          Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Uhhuh

          1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
            MelissaBarrettposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            LMAO!

            Are you uhhuhing about your apparent ignorance of the tax system in general or about you lack of knowledge of how many taxes are charged on 25000 dollars a year in freelance writing?

            Or should I feel guilty about taking advantage of a tax credit?

            Jealous much?

            1. Repairguy47 profile image61
              Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

              I am completely jealous of you, I wish I could earn as you do. You're my new hero.

              Jealous? Hold on, here it comes lollollollol

              1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
                MelissaBarrettposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Jealous that you don't get the credit. If you got it, you wouldn't be whining about it.

                1. Repairguy47 profile image61
                  Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Whining? I have never whined about paying a tax that you somehow seem to escape. Look, I don't believe you come close to making the money you claim with your writing prowess, I don't care that you want to make that kind of stuff up. It takes all kinds to make this world go round, it just takes a few of us to fund it, thats sad.

                  1. Uninvited Writer profile image84
                    Uninvited Writerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    You are accusing her of lying?

                  2. MelissaBarrett profile image60
                    MelissaBarrettposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Wow.  You have no idea about the actual business side of freelance writing do you? 25k is a low number for freelance writers and I could be making twice that easily if I wasn't doing it part-time.

                    Here's a clue: It's not poetry and revenue share sites.

                  3. wilderness profile image96
                    wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Don't be too sure about making that much freelance writing. 

                    I've seen an adsense report showing $3000 for about 20 hubs for one month. That was completely residual income, and the owner had far more going than just HubPages.  Worked at as a full time job (or more) $25,000 is definitely possible.

          2. 0
            Deborah Sextonposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            ****

            I might add too that anyone with children pays out so much in daycare that it's almost not worth working.

            Who can live off $11,000. You don't care about the children?

            Only a bigot would fight this.

        2. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I don't know how it's done, but I personally know a family earning around $25,000 per year, paying 0 income tax all year, and getting "back" $9,000 from federal.

          1. Jeff Berndt profile image89
            Jeff Berndtposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Then they must be getting paid under the table. Nobody who gets a paycheck pays 0 income taxes all year. Even if you make little enough to get everything back at tax time, it still gets withheld.

            1. 0
              JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              That's blatantly untrue. I had $7 withheld in a year I made $18,000, and that was only from one paycheck with a lot of overtime. It all has to do with your withholding that you claim at work. You can claim exempt and no money will be taken out.

              Here's a fun tidbit of information. Mother/Father with 3 kids that makes 25,000.

              5 people, $3,700 per exemption = $18,500 off of your taxable income. Married filing jointly standard deduction is $11,600, so that's $30,100 off of your taxable income. So, you can make, with three kids, at least $30k and not owe any federal income taxes.

              But, back to the family. $25,000 income with three kids gets you $5,065 in earned income credit. EIC this year maxes out at $5700, but then you can get additional refunds as well, like additional child tax credit. It's possible for a family to make more money from their tax return than from their annual salary.

              1. Jeff Berndt profile image89
                Jeff Berndtposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                "You can claim exempt and no money will be taken out."
                That's true. Very few people do this, however.

              2. lovemychris profile image79
                lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                You are saying a family can get $25,000 in tax refund?

                well, that almost matches up to what all these R's want to give back to Sheldon Adelson....not quite, but almost.


                ps: I don't believe that.

                1. 0
                  JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  I'm saying(and I clearly proved) that a family can get 'free money' from their tax return.

                  The largest I have ever personally seen was a return of approximately $15,000, and only about $1,000 of that was refunding actual tax withheld. I imagine 25k would be possible, but you would need a lot of dependents.

      2. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Melissa is correct - if you make 11,000 a year, then you are contributing 11,000 worth of labor to society.

        You may not be contributing to the government, but you are contributing to society as a whole.

        1. Repairguy47 profile image61
          Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I like you, I have no idea what that means, but ok.

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            You mow lawns for a living, making 11,000 per year.  You are not freeloading as you provide a service society wants.  Uncle Sam may (and does) provide you with more income (including WIC, food stamps, etc.) than you earned, but you did contribute something to society.

            1. Repairguy47 profile image61
              Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

              I'm not going to debate the need for social assistance, some need it, too many take advantage of it. If you can't agree with that then you are no more better that that other person.

              1. wilderness profile image96
                wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Oh I agree with you here 100%.  You said it perfectly - some need it, too many take advantage of it and it has become a way of life for far too many.  The third generation welfare mama spitting out babies on a regular schedule comes to mind.

                1. Jeff Berndt profile image89
                  Jeff Berndtposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  She doesn't exist. She's a chimaera conjured by the right to demonize anyone who accepts public assistance and to justify the destruction of same.

            2. MelissaBarrett profile image60
              MelissaBarrettposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              It doesn't have to be mowing lawns either...  A full time minimum wage earner only earns between 13195 and 15080 dollars a year.  If that is all that can be found by a worker, I fail to see how that can be considered freeloading.

              1. wilderness profile image96
                wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                No, of course it doesn't have to be mowing lawns (there are several successful companies in my area that do nothing but that in the summer).

                Any work that produced income means that a person isn't freeloading.  Although a welfare recipient receiving full support while working "under the table" for illegal and unreported income might be...

              2. Eaglekiwi profile image76
                Eaglekiwiposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Touched a nerve with me there.

                Hubbys is worth more than minimum wage ,purely based on experience etc,but thats all he can find!

                Freeloading,dont know,and dont care. Like he says ,it feels like work to his aching back every night!

                As far as receiving mega tax back, well heres the crazy thing, to me (who is not used to the tax system here in the states) I see it as money you should have been making all along, its just a bit late getting to us- wink

                1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
                  MelissaBarrettposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Damn skippy it's work. A job is a job. I'm not sure where the line is that you have to cross to not be considered a drain on society. 

                  I've ran across the whole "having kids just to collect more EIC" argument too.  Yep, an extra 2k in tax breaks a year is SO worth labor, delivery, and round-the-clock parenting.  Would you adopt a kid for an extra 160 or so bucks a month?

                  If you are having kids for that reason you are doing it wrong.

      3. 0
        JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I have seen returns of families that made around 15k that got more in refunds than they made all year.

        Not trying to be stereotypical, but most of those families lived in trailers and had new Mustangs.

      4. 0
        Deborah Sextonposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        ***

        No one making $11,000 a year gets back $8,000 unless they have a lot of children. If so, they deserve it.

        1. lovemychris profile image79
          lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          +1

          They are our future for gods sakes.

  11. Evan G Rogers profile image83
    Evan G Rogersposted 4 years ago

    Freeloader: politicians and the beneficiaries of bailouts/spending.

    Suckers: everyone else.

    1. Brie Hoffman profile image81
      Brie Hoffmanposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Amen Evan Amen!

  12. Xenonlit profile image61
    Xenonlitposted 4 years ago

    I notice that certain people only have  eyes for certain other people's money. But they are blind to the corporate and republican freeloaders who do even less to earn their keep.


    But the most despicable right wing act so far: Chicken Hawk right wingers attempting to call veteran's benefits "welfare".

  13. 60
    dakiyafranklinposted 4 years ago

    thank you for being my friend from dakiya

  14. Healthy Pursuits profile image88
    Healthy Pursuitsposted 4 years ago

    Wow! I'm amazed to read this and see so little mention of large corporations that get major tax breaks, commit massive fraud and use that money to lobby the government - and now to buy elections. Not to mention the huge industrial-military complex that awards billions to individual companies for weapons that are often shelved before they're ever used.

    I also see no mention at all of the massive medicare fraud that's happening in so-called well respected medical clinics and hospitals.

    Yes, there is abuse and fraud at the bottom. However, I think it would pale considerably if we looked in more detail at the top wage earners. They are freeloading as only the very rich can. Do we not look at that, purely because too many of us secretly aspire to being rich ourselves one day?

    I also consider it freeloading for CEO's to make millions each year while the workers in the same company are losing their benefits and are being made to work twice as hard for the same salary as they take on the workloads of their coworkers who have been laid off. You know, those 'freeloading' people who are now on unemployment?

    As someone who's reaching retirement age, I am particularly offended that I will be considered a freeloader when I accept the social security payments that I have paid into all of my working life.

    Wake up and stop looking down your noses. I think if you looked up, you'd find the real freeloaders.

  15. rebekahELLE profile image92
    rebekahELLEposted 4 years ago

      Your post reminds me of a cartoon.
    http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/p480x480/430279_3184370490827_1312707914_33354886_1183459550_n.jpg

    1. lovemychris profile image79
      lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Yes! Best line of the day!: "Wake up and stop looking down your noses. I think if you looked up, you'd find the real freeloaders."

      So true. And they must be laughing that people scape-goat the poor.

  16. Joy56 profile image60
    Joy56posted 4 years ago

    we pay so much tax, we are almost homeless, it is a struggle to find the rent......    not meaning to be bitter, but we work very hard to keep a lot of people in the life they are used to........

    1. Josak profile image61
      Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Youre not wrong Joy, what most here won't tell you is that the real freeloaders are the CEO's and owners of big companies who make 30 or 40 times the money off your work that they pay you, and who even when fired recieve extraordinary sums of money beyond what the vast majority of people will ever make and they freeload eneough to cover plenty of people on welfare.

  17. gmwilliams profile image85
    gmwilliamsposted 4 years ago

    I am definitely a taxpayer.   Paid my share when I was working-it seems that I am paying even more taxes since I have retired.   Looking for more ways to earn monies!

  18. ib radmasters profile image59
    ib radmastersposted 4 years ago

    Income Tax was not part of the Constitution.
    Like Social Security it was the brilliant scheme of the Democrat Presidents.

    Income Tax invades privacy to collect a tax.
    Income Tax is discriminatory as it is progressive, and progressive is not equality.
    Income Tax has too many loopholes for the very rich so even though the tiered tax bracket would have them pay more than the not so rich, they use the loopholes to pay their CPAs and Atty to minimize their taxes.

    Income Tax should be eliminated and Replaced with a National Sales Tax and it would use the same existing mechanism as State Sales Tax.

    It would eliminate or severely reduce the problems of the Income Tax System.
    The Internal Revenue Code could be shelved, and when people buy something they pay their fair share with a minimal of exposing their privacy.

    A ten percent NST would bring in $10 for a $100 purchase, and $10,000 for a $100,000 purchase. Simple math shows that $10,000 is more than $100.

    1. Repairguy47 profile image61
      Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      No tax system will work if the government spends more than they collect.

    2. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      It can't happen, for if it did Congress would not be able to promote their pet projects and friends via tax deductions.  Any and all social engineering by Congress would have to be up front cash payments instead of subsidies via the tax code. 

      This in turn makes it quite transparent and anyone can see where the money actually goes.  Not acceptable.

    3. Jeff Berndt profile image89
      Jeff Berndtposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      "Income Tax was not part of the Constitution."
      Amendment 16: The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

      Try reading the document before making assertions about what it says.

  19. Dolores Monet profile image91
    Dolores Monetposted 4 years ago

    That so many people pay so little tax is an indication that so many people are working poor, working for very low wages. Many full time jobs offer so little that a person can be working full time and still be living in poverty. Why are people angry at the working poor?

    1. Repairguy47 profile image61
      Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Why are the working poor angry at the rich?

      1. Healthy Pursuits profile image88
        Healthy Pursuitsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Probably because the working poor have an inkling of what the very rich are getting away with. All of those categories and deductions on the complicated tax returns we have to wade through these days were not put there for the working poor. They were added to accommodate the very rich, and to make sure they don't have to pay the taxes that the rest of us do.

        1. Brie Hoffman profile image81
          Brie Hoffmanposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I agree wholeheartedly!

      2. Dolores Monet profile image91
        Dolores Monetposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I am hearing more anger directed at the working poor. They are called freeloaders, even if they work hard at low paying jobs.

  20. Hollie Thomas profile image59
    Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago

    @melissa.

    Its typical passive-aggressiveness caused by a deep dissatisfaction in my life.  I have latent abrasive negativity tendencies caused by a failure to form meaningful relationships with males and thus have never formed appropriate coping mechanisms to deal effectively with men who try to assert themselves in positions of authority.  As such, I use sarcasm to avoid meaningful discourse on topics that I find emotionally threatening.

    Or... I could just be bored and feel like f***ing with someone for amusement.

    Yeah, yeah. LMAO. Unlike some who get paid 50cents per post per forum! But in their other life they are wealthy and employ people! Jeez, Melissa, we're in the wrong job honey. I mean, we scratch around looking for a fight, for less than a dollar, we have to pretend to be someone we're not......

    1. Eaglekiwi profile image76
      Eaglekiwiposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I hear ya both there!!

      P.S How can you tell whose a troll or not ?( I know, I dont get out much) lol

      1. Hollie Thomas profile image59
        Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        They write two hubs, scratch around for an argument with those who have differing political views, never find consensus and support those with radical, unsubstantiated views. Oh yes, and when they are challenged reply with emocions. They are often not the most articulate of posters. big_smile

  21. Onusonus profile image85
    Onusonusposted 4 years ago

    The money has to be distributed equally to everyone so that everything is fair. Then everybody will be happy. Socialism doesn't work.

    “The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.” Jefferson

    1. Hollie Thomas profile image59
      Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      The money has to be distributed equally to everyone so that everything is fair. Then everybody will be happy. Socialism doesn't work.

      Tell that to the trolls, earning 50c per post. They're about to rebel. Viva la revolucion.

      1. Onusonus profile image85
        Onusonusposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        smile

    2. John Holden profile image61
      John Holdenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      There is a difference between fairly and equally.

      1. lovemychris profile image79
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Fuel tax credit

        In February 2006 Time Magazine described a synthetic-fuel tax-credit amendment that Santorum added to a larger bill as "a multibillion-dollar scam" that benefited "a small group of the politically well connected".


        What do you think....free-loaders? Yeah, me too.

      2. Onusonus profile image85
        Onusonusposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Either way it's stealing from one group to give to another.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jK2_trRPRk

        1. John Holden profile image61
          John Holdenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Which is different to stealing from one group to give to another, how?

          And if that's too obscure for you, the capitalists who free-load off the workers are OK in your book?

          1. Repairguy47 profile image61
            Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Freeload off the workers? Did the workers create the job? Did the workers create the company that was hired to do the work? Did the workers supply the money to market the company that was hired to do the work? No, they were hired to do the work and agreed to be paid what they were.

            1. John Holden profile image61
              John Holdenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              So that gives the wealthy the right to free-load off the poor! Hm.

              I tell you what, if as you say the workers play no part then let somebody set up a company with no workers and let's see how far they get!

              1. Repairguy47 profile image61
                Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                The workers do their part just as I described, they work!! They work because the employer by whatever means supplied the capital to create a job for them. They did nothing other than what they were paid to do, and for the sum that they agreed to work for.

                1. John Holden profile image61
                  John Holdenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  I'm amused by the number of people who think a fait accompli is an agreement.

                  1. Repairguy47 profile image61
                    Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    I am amused that someone doesn't understand that agreeing to work for a sum is an agreement.

          2. Onusonus profile image85
            Onusonusposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Capitalism has proven time and again to create an environment that supports the most individual freedom, whereas socialism has proven time and again that it does the exact opposite.

            1. John Holden profile image61
              John Holdenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Really!

              Freedom for the few, slavery for the many.

              1. Repairguy47 profile image61
                Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                The many also have the freedom to start a company and maybe become the few.

                1. John Holden profile image61
                  John Holdenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Really, so I could go to the bank with the ass hanging out of my trousers and get a million dollar loan to set up a business!

                  Sounds good to me.

                  1. Repairguy47 profile image61
                    Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    I started a company with money I earned, no bank, no assistance from anyone. Sorry that you don't have the work ethic it takes.

                  2. Hollie Thomas profile image59
                    Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    That's in his imaginary life.

                  3. Dolores Monet profile image91
                    Dolores Monetposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    John - you get that million dollars, set up the company, and give yourself a huge bonus! Put your bonus money in an off shore account, then trash the business!

              2. Onusonus profile image85
                Onusonusposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Actually you are thinking of socialism.

                1. John Holden profile image61
                  John Holdenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  I wasn't actually.

                  Haven't the capitalists done a good job on you?

                  1. Onusonus profile image85
                    Onusonusposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    They have done a great job for me actually. But unfortunately the government keeps taking money from me and lining their pockets with it. Just for social security they take about $190.00 per check and put it into an anemic fund that won't be around when it comes time for me to collect. if I were to take that money and put it into savings or invest it into a retirement fund I would be a millionaire by the time I retire. But instead the politicians get to be millionaires, and I and the people who I could have been charitable to get the shaft.

        2. Hollie Thomas profile image59
          Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Rubbish.

    3. Jeff Berndt profile image89
      Jeff Berndtposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      "Half of all quotes on the internet are made up."

      --Mark Twain

  22. Editor and Chief profile image59
    Editor and Chiefposted 4 years ago

    If a person is born rich, and never had to worry about where the money to pay his bills comes from, the Republicans admire him, but if a person works their entire life 60 hours a week, and is laid off from their job, Mr. Republican calls him a freeloader if he collects unemployment.

    1. Eaglekiwi profile image76
      Eaglekiwiposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Psycological mumbo jumbo.

      Paid big dollars to brainwash groups of people with words.

      1. Josak profile image61
        Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Actually the truth is he is right.

        1. Eaglekiwi profile image76
          Eaglekiwiposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I was agreeing smile

  23. LoriSoard profile image78
    LoriSoardposted 4 years ago

    We are middle class and have always paid taxes. However, we now can't afford anything extra because we are taxed so high. Taxes are the biggest chunk out of our paycheck. It is hard to work and work and pay all the money in and you see other people getting their children's college and everything paid for while you worry to death about how on earth you're going to afford to send your child to school. The money just is not there to do it.

    I do think the tax system is not fair the way it is currently set up. I am for a flat sales tax, because then everyone would have to pay based on what they spend and people who get paid cash under the table would also be taxed.

    1. John Holden profile image61
      John Holdenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      The problem with that is that it hits the lower paid harder than the higher paid.

      If you are barely scraping by a 10% sales tax is a considerable chunk of your income.

  24. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 4 years ago

    "Kid comes from Nepal, syas he helped his father at home, so he knows how to fix things." It is very clear he has no experience in retail but fix-it only.

    1. Repairguy47 profile image61
      Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      It is? I asked if it was for the same job, maintenance will always pay more than a cashier.

      1. lovemychris profile image79
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        It's not a cashier, it's a manager.
        I had experience as a manager. You know: running a store. And my boss said "Oh that's just a glorified cashier"...which it isn't.
        And this kid got the maintenance job at a higher pay because he helped his dad around ther house?
        No--it's cause he's a guy.
        And had he had kids, I'm sure he would have been offered more.

        It's a mind-set that has to change. Same mind set that thinks it owns my body.

        1. Repairguy47 profile image61
          Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Maintenance is more important than an over glorified cashier, sorry about your luck. You should seek employment elsewhere, what will be your excuse for not doing so?

          1. John Holden profile image61
            John Holdenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Unless of course that over glorified cashier just happens to be a man . . .

            1. Repairguy47 profile image61
              Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

              See previous posts for answer.

              1. John Holden profile image61
                John Holdenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Well those were what I was going by.

          2. lovemychris profile image79
            lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Man, some people are dense.

            Would you call a hardware store manager a glorified cashier?

            Only if it was a woman, eh?

            The job is m a n a g e r.

            You have no clue what this worlds is like outside of your cocoon.

            Racism and sexism still exists. Obama is fighting both. Forward, not back: see ya on the bus.

            1. Repairguy47 profile image61
              Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

              I have seen smarter stop signs than hardware store managers, I will not be seeing you on any bus.

              1. John Holden profile image61
                John Holdenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                OH, repairguy outsmarted by a woman! How will he ever live it down?

              2. lovemychris profile image79
                lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                So--you think running a store is nothing?

                Well, if running it is nothing, owning it must be like a kid in diapers. And these you put on a pedestal!

                I'll wave to you on your magical bus back to 1950. I'll be standing in the future.

                1. Repairguy47 profile image61
                  Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  I absolutely think running a store is something! Something a 12 year old could do with the proper training.

                  1. lovemychris profile image79
                    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Obviously, it's something you've never done.

                    And it's only when the owners were managers first do they have an inkling of what goes on.

  25. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 4 years ago

    The kid doesn't even have experience in maintenance. He helped his father around the house? Sounds pretty bent to me.

    1. Repairguy47 profile image61
      Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      If the kid doesn't work well do you think he will keep his job? There is no conspiracy to keep women down other than the one fabricated in the minds of those who think all things should be equal. Woman will leave the workforce earlier and more often than men, that fact alone is why they are paid less on average.

  26. lovemychris profile image79
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    "The age of women as second class citizens should be passed by now."

    We're getting a crash course, right now. It's not over by a long shot.

  27. MG18 profile image61
    MG18posted 4 years ago via iphone

    Everyone should pay taxes that I agree, but as a tax payer I which I knew where my money was going.

  28. utahdivorce profile image61
    utahdivorceposted 4 years ago

    I am a tax payer because I own my business and have employees, therefore I pay a lot of taxes.

  29. Cassie Smith profile image75
    Cassie Smithposted 4 years ago

    If your adjusted gross income is less than $32,000 you are a freeloader.  If you are unemployed and getting unemployment, you are being taxed, see first sentence to determine whether you are a freeloader or a taxpayer.

  30. lovemychris profile image79
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    "Freedom in capitalist society always remains about the same as it was in ancient Greek republics: Freedom for slave owners." ~Vladimir Lenin

    Warren Buffet says that the rich paying high taxes is a myth. That's not what is stifling growth, they are waiting for a better deal, IMO.

    They truly want to have their cake and eat it too, and now they see an opening. Edit: now they HAVE an opening, thanks to the elections of 2010.

    We are actually BLAMING the corporate/uber-rich heist of wealth on the poor!

    As if poor people are sucking all the money out of the system!

    Unions are being decimated, and wages have been stagnant since the 1970's.

    We actually PAID companies to leave this country and set up shop overseas.

    Rich got a huge bonus under Bush....that is why the income disaprity is so glaring. THAT is what made the "Huge sucking sound" that Texas Tea talked about.

    Loss of jobs: theft of wealth: lessening of money into the pool.

    It has long been a goal of theirs: starve the beast. But what they are doing is starving humanity.

    Let me tell you something...if you want to try and live in this capitalist orgy-land on less than $45,000 a year....go right ahead.

    Do you not make the connection?

    If income tax is levied according to income, then if you are not paying it, it's because YOU HAVE NO INCOME!

    Cost of living is too high...do something about that.
    Raise wages...that would help.
    But to keep demonizing the poor is a losing game: We are on to that one!

    The quarter mil that Bachmann got would help thousands of welfare families!!!!

    Ditto for Rick Perry, who got $80,000. AND who just cut all funding for Planned Parenthood in Texas......yet the corporate tax rate is too high?

    We in America have totally different value systems operating.

    1. 0
      JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      You can look, up tax rates yourself. The top 1% pay around 24% effective. The bottom 50% pay under 2% effective. There is no myth about it.

      We've driven companies away by having one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world.

      Let's say you run a business, and you make $100,000 in sales. You pay all your expenses, and you've got $20,000 left. Good for you! Now you can afford the $15,000 in new equipment/maintenance/etc that you need, and still have money for a rainy day.

      Then the government steps in. Federal taxes take an average effective 22%. When you factor in all taxes, it's 34%.

      So now, you only have $13,200. Sorry, you can only get some of the equipment you need, and you won't have any money for a rainy day.

      The average tax rate of OECD countries is 18%, and you realize you would have kept $3,200 more if you were based in one of those countries. For this company, the higher tax rates are forcing it to operate at a 3.2% higher profit margin than in OECD countries.

      What's 3.2%? Big oil operates at around a 6% profit margin. Most new companies operate(if they manage to succeed, that is) on 1-2%. 3.2% is a big burden on a business.



      I've lived with a wife and child on $18,000 in recent years. That has changed now, but we did it. Let me tell you something... expectations in this country are ridiculous. People complain they can't live off of $45,000, but they drive new cars, have all the new gadgets, eat out, run up credit(and spend a lot of money on interest, which is nothing but wasting money), and still have better living conditions than most any other country.

      $45,000? That's so easy to live off of.

      Cutting corporate rates allows companies to spend their money on themselves. Upgrades/expansion/hiring/benefits/bonuses.

      It allows companies that have stock to issue more dividends to investors. That raises the price of the stock. Stock holders get the bonus money from dividends, and anyone with investments, 401ks, mutual funds, etc prospers because the markets fare better. All of these people end up with more money. They spend that money on other things, which helps other businesses and other people.

      The economy is all about cash flow. If you keep the government out of it and let people spend their money, it makes the economy prosper.

      1. dmop profile image86
        dmopposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I couldn't agree more that the government is killing the small business with taxes, they are also giving incentives for companies to pack up and go to other countries, especially Mexico and China. What I don't agree with is this false idea that the poor don't pay their share, that is a blatant lie propagated by the ultra wealthy to twist the truth about their own agenda, which feeds politicians who back their agenda for political and financial gain. Furthermore, if you think large corporations are in the practice of raising wages and benefits just because they are making more profits you are living in a different world than the rest of us. When it comes to capital gains, of course they use that as their proof of how fair they are, but the poor don't have capital gains and very few middle class have any either. So the primary individuals benefiting from those lower capital gains rates are the ones who already have more than their share.

        1. 0
          JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Those capital gains investments are taxed, at a higher rate than almost anybody pays in income taxes. Your average american is affected by capital gains rates via the overall condition of the stock market via mutual funds and 401ks.

          As far as raising wages, companies do raise wages, but they never raise them if they can't afford to.

          For instance, a lot of call-center jobs in Phoenix start between $10-$15/hr. Why? Because they don't get the kind of employees that they want for $7-8/hr. Since the company can afford it, and it works out better for them to pay more, they pay more. If, however, the company couldn't afford the higher wages, they would be stuck with $7/hr.

          Every job that isn't minimum wage is a reflection of the free market doing its job. Companies pay more to get people they want to work for them, if they can.

          As far as income taxes go, the poor don't pay their fair share. Most of them don't pay anything at all. I'm not saying they are evil, or they should pay 20% effective, but not paying taxes isn't paying your fair share. It's being given a more beneficial tax situation because your financial situation is more difficult.

          1. lovemychris profile image79
            lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            No--it's called "you can't get blood out of a stone"

            1. 0
              JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              No, it's called paying a negative percentage of income tax. In other words, getting free money from the government.

              I'll never forget my first tax return as a married parent. We made about 20k, I didn't have any federal taxes withheld from my paychecks(I paid $0 in income taxes that year), and I got a refund over $5k.

              That is NOT paying your fair share. That's not paying anything, it's getting something for free.

              1. lovemychris profile image79
                lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Where'd the 5k go? To a lavish vacation, or to pay off bills?
                Pay off the gas company
                Electric company
                Heat
                Rent/and or real estate tax
                Mortgage
                Fix your car
                Put money down on a car.....


                You see, if you have no money through-out the year, I would bet that money went right back into the economy.

                I'll bet you could not even think of saving much.

                Because, living on 20k is how much per week?  300-400?

                You tell me how much the feds should take out of that, when you have a wife and kid to support?

                1. 0
                  JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  No, we had enough money without it to pay all the bills and save some.

                  If you are smart about it, you can practically own a car for free. Buy used, do the easy maintenance yourself, and you can drive it for several years, and sell it again after for nearly everything you bought it for.

                  Like I said, we saved half, and we spent the other half on luxury items. Usually more toys for children, I got my wife a used playstation 2, maybe some extra clothes... things like that.

                  I'm not saying the feds should take more of it out. I'm saying that when people in that condition are actually getting money from the government, instead of paying taxes, and the rich are paying 25%, you can't say that they aren't paying their fair share.

                  25% is a whole heck of a lot more than -5%.

          2. Jeff Berndt profile image89
            Jeff Berndtposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            "Those capital gains investments are taxed, at a higher rate than almost anybody pays in income taxes. "
            Nonsense. The capital gains tax is 15%, and you can get that reduced with loopholes and deductions.
            Plus, not everyone has access to the stock market. Try buying one share of stock some time. Heck, try even buying a hundred dollars worth of stock.

            You'll need to pay the broker a fee of about $30 to make the buy. Fair enough, but if you can't make another buy inside a year, you will also get hit with an inactivity fee of anywhere between $25 and $50. So that's most of your initial investment gone before you've even had the chance to earn any return on it. Even if you can make two buys a year, let's say at $100 each, you still have to pay those $30 brokerage fees. So instead of investing $260, you've lost $60. It'll take a long time before your dividends pay the brokerage fee. Plus, you need to make another buy or you'll have to pay that inactivity fee and lose another $60.
            If you're living paycheck-to-paycheck, those fees make investing a stupid idea.

            1. 0
              JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Only the top 10% pay more than 15% income tax. It's not nonsense. The effective capital gains tax for 2008 was 13.8%.

              http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/2089.html

              Also, I love when people spout out about loopholes and deductions. Do you know what loopholes and deductions you are talking about? Everybody gets to and does take advantage of deductions, but it seems to only be called a 'loophole' when the rich do it.

              Fun fact, I bought $100 worth of stock, and made $2,300 off of it in a month. Warning: Penny stocks are not for everyone.

              Seriously though, most everyone does have access to the stock market. People waste so much money on mortgages, cars, eating out, electronics, etc etc etc(I'm not saying everybody, but the average American has, or used to at least have, between $10,000-$20,000 in credit card debt. Average mortgage debt was $200,000). If people managed their money better, they would have more to invest for the future.

              In addition, anyone with access to a 401k has access to the market, and should care about our tax policy in regards to the market.

              Yes, if you're living paycheck to paycheck, you don't have money to invest. That's why you have to get off the paycheck to paycheck grind.

              1. Jeff Berndt profile image89
                Jeff Berndtposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                "Everybody gets to and does take advantage of deductions, but it seems to only be called a 'loophole' when the rich do it."
                One example: someone who works out of his home can deduct mileage travelled to and from any work-related appointment. Someone who works at a job for money can't deduct the mileage travelled to and from work. Loophole. Just one example.

                " if you're living paycheck to paycheck, you don't have money to invest. That's why you have to get off the paycheck to paycheck grind."

                Ah, of course! The obvious solution for anyone who's living paycheck to paycheck: Stop living paycheck to paycheck! It's astonishing that nobody has ever come up with this brilliant idea before... smile

                1. 0
                  JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Anyone can deduct business travel, but not commuting(unless the commute is to a temporary work site). It's not a loophole at all. Commuting just isn't allowed as a deduction.

                  Have you ever gotten involved with money management groups? Like some of the groups that have radio talk shows to help people take control of their finances? I've personally interacted with hundreds of individuals that were 'stuck' living paycheck to paycheck, but when they applied sound principles of financial responsibility, were able to pay off all their debt, put aside savings, and completely transform their lives, all without a pay increase.

                  So many people complain that they don't have enough money, but they have a huge mortgage, new cars, eat expensive food, or otherwise spend money that isn't a necessity(some people consider their manicure a 'need').

                  It really is a brilliant idea, and when people try it, they usually are astonished with the change.

      2. lovemychris profile image79
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        "The interesting thing about the corporate rate is that corporate profits, as a percentage of GDP last year were the highest or just about the highest in the last 50 years. They were ten and a fraction percent of GDP. That’s higher than we’ve seen in 50 years. The corporate taxes as a percentage of GDP were 1.2 percent, $180 billion. That’s just about the lowest we’ve seen. So our corporate tax rate last year, effectively, in terms of taxes paid for the United States, was around 12 percent, which is well below those existing in most of the industrialized countries around the world. So it is a myth that American corporations are paying 35 percent or anything like it…Corporate taxes are not strangling American competitiveness."

        http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/0 … -tax-myth/

        When you lived with your wife and child on $18,000...did you consider yourself a freeloader?

        $45,000.....do you know how much a college education costs these days?
        A car?
        Food?
        Gas?
        Heat?
        Electricity?...all those things the speculators get their hands on?

        yes..you can live on less, but you don't do more than just survive...and that is hardly what one expects from working one, maybe 2 jobs!
        Meanwhile--you have people flying their kids to summer camp in private jets.
        AND--hiding their money, off-shoring it--labeling it differently, and paying at 15%, while the person just getting by pays at 30.

        This is the little secret: people don't HAVE any x-tra money to spend! And it's not gvt doing it!

        1. lovemychris profile image79
          lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this
        2. 0
          JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          You shouldn't be looking at percentage of GDP. GDP is more than just corporate activity, so the percentage can fluctuate even if companies make the same amount and pay the same amount from year to year.

          The ONLY way to look at what taxes a company pays is to look at the percentage they pay AS A PERCENTAGE OF THEIR INCOME. GDP is not the sum total of all corporate activity, so it makes no sense to use it as a measure. It's a way to look at it, that makes no sense, in order to try and lie about what they really pay.

          Answer this. Let's say you pay a 15% effective rate in 2010. In 2010, that works out to you paying 0.000001% of GDP. Next year, the GDP rises, so in order for you to pay 0.000001% of GDP you have to be taxed at 30%. Is that a good way to look at it?

          As an effective total tax rate, corporations pay over 35% in taxes.

          http://www.cato.org/pubs/tbb/tbb_62.pdf

          In a way, yes. We got $4,000-5,000 in free money from the IRS every year. We would take half of that and save it, and the other half to spend on 'luxury' items, such as our 19-inch tv.

          $2,500/year at our local college. I expect my children to earn their way through school, just as I earned mine.
          Just bought a 1999 Volvo for ~$2,000. Engine and transmission were fine, just needed some work. We put just over $1,000 into replacing some parts, and it runs perfectly.
          I've fed my family of 3 off of $150/month.
          Yeah, it's expensive. That's why I used public transport for commuting
          Yeah, we paid all our bills. We didn't have it as cool as we would have liked in the summer, or as warm as we would have liked in the winter, but you can save a lot of money that way.

          That was just working 1 job, and we managed to save from every paycheck except the one we took rent out of. Fiscal responsibility, budgeting, etc... and we didn't just survive, we had very happy years.

          Nobody pays 30%. The person 'just getting by' pays between 0% and 10%. The rich have a right to spend their money, and you know what? That money goes into the economy. He pays a pilot who uses his money to pay bills/buy a house/buy goods. All that money goes to stores that employ people. Those people do the same with their money. There is no such thing as money spent in the economy that doesn't help it.

          In my experience, most people could do with a lot less than they have. Talk to the older generations and ask them what things were like for them. We're getting more and more spoiled as Americans, to the point where everyone expects a new car/new house/new phone/new toys/new everything right out of college.

  31. lovemychris profile image79
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    btw---that seems like an awfully high refund, since you only have one kid...what state was that, and what year?

    1. 0
      JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      We had 2 kids, EIC was almost all of that refund.

      1. lovemychris profile image79
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Well, it must be different state to state...

        Hubby and I always owed taxes even with low income, and since being single, have never had that much in return?

        But---STILL!  That is a PITTANCE.  we are talking here about people who have BILLIONS, getting more of a tax break. It's simply ridiculous!

        1. 0
          JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          EIC is a federal refund, it's the same in every state. If you file head of household, or married filing jointly, you can be eligible for it. It depends on your income and how many kids. The income 'peaks' at around 20k, the further above/below you get the less EIC you can get.

  32. lovemychris profile image79
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    So--on $20,000 with 3 people, you SAVED half??? You must live in the south....you could never do that here. I make more than that and have 3 kids under my wing...and we live frugal as H, and I never can even meet my bills.

    But all Obama is talking about raising taxes on are those who earn $250,000 or more. Or has it gone to 1 million now?
    That is NOT asking a lot to me!

    Sorry---THEY had the party while the rest of us scrounged.....they can have a little less millions so those of us under a mil can have some reprieve.

    OR--stop allowing for such profiteering in the business world...which makes the cost of everything go sky-high.

    OR--vote in a livable wage according to where you live...it was figured at $14.00 an hour where I am years ago.

    People keep wanting to punish the ones on the bottom, and keep rewarding those on top. WHO benefitted from this fiasco!

    it's bassackwards.

    1. 0
      JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      We saved half of the refund.

      They already pay about 25%... The problem isn't taxes being too low. The problem is government spending is much too high.

      What do you want the government to do, take money from the rich and give out more stimulus checks?

      If our taxes weren't so high, companies would be able to lower prices.

      If you can't afford to live somewhere, you can always move... It's a free country. Not every business can afford higher wages.

      Who's talking about punishing the poor? Like I said, the poor get free money from taxes, instead of paying them.

      1. Cassie Smith profile image75
        Cassie Smithposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Bravo for trying to give people a reality check.  At least there's someone who knows what's going on and congratulations on your fiscal discipline. I wish more of the government would do what you do.

        1. dmop profile image86
          dmopposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Its scary to me that the average person seems to be able to quote so much news relayed information, yet has no ability to think for themselves, and actually reason through the facts that are presented and see the real truth behind it all. Yes the government spends way too much, most of it seems wasted to the average person, it is set up that way specifically so we don't know what really goes on. They also tax too much to sponsor all that "wasteful spending". They tell us that the poor pay nothing while the rich are loosing their fortunes to turn us all against each other, meanwhile all that wasted money is distributed amongst the super rich who control the govt through special interest groups and lobbyists, who all share a piece of the pie. The real reality check is that large corporations pay nearly nothing and the entire system is carried on the backs of the common working class especially the small business man. The government "politicians" are all sponsored by very rich powerful people, that's the only way they get where they are, do you really think that they are going to write laws that would adversely affect those sponsors. No of course not, but they are very good at deceiving people and writing laws that look as if they are. That's why they get those positions in the first place.

          1. 0
            JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            The 'working class' doesn't shoulder the majority of the tax burden.


            The bottom 50% earns 13% of the money, but only pays 2.3% of the taxes.

            http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html

            1. lovemychris profile image79
              lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              400 people have more wealth than 50% of the rest of us.

              400 people. In a country of 3 billion...

              This is not Democracy! Or a Republic.

              This is Feudal plutochracy! Oligarchy.
              Of the rich, by the rich and for the rich.

              Not a founding principle, nor in the Constitution.

              In fact, this is what people were getting AWAY from!

              1. 0
                JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Yes, that happens in free markets. You have people who create massively popular products or services, and they make a lot of money. You have people who loan money to other people with good ideas, and they both make a lot of money.

                But you know what? That's EXACTLY what America is about. It's about the freedom.

                CEOs are rich because they run successful companies. Companies that we purchase products and services from. They are filling demand, but for some reason, you think they should be demonized for

                Another reason for that 400/50% figure is the fact that the bottom 50% of Americans have a lot of debt. Car payments, mortgages, credit cards... all of that factors in to the 'net' worth, so it skews the figure tremendously in the favor of the rich, making the poorer look worse than they are.

  33. lovemychris profile image79
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    "If our taxes weren't so high, companies would be able to lower prices."

    This Right Here is the crux of our differences!

    I say those companies that pay their ceo's 45-53 million dollars a year do not have to raise prices on consumers! They can D well lower that ceo's salary!

    THIS is the backwards thinking I am talking about.

    THIS has changed in my lifetime. Used to be a business was there to provide a service,and if profit came about: hallelooya. Now a business sole goal it seems, is to make a profit....and people haggle and haggle about a poor family who gets $5,000 back from their gvt!

    And these people live here, buy things, work, support their communities....and are looked on as free-loaders because they are poor.

    And yes, that's what it is! Demonizing the poor!

    Because you don't care one whit that you pay more for services because the ceo has to make millions....
    Or that your taxes went up so the wealthy could have a bigger tax break.
    You don't mind that. You point fingers at the lower rung, who always end up being blamed for all of societies woes.

    I think the poor deserve MORE from the gvt. And the rich can do with less. So--we are at complete odds here.

    https://twitter.com/#!/BarackObama/stat … 53/photo/1

    1. 0
      JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      See my example at the bottom of this post. No, I do not care one whit about paying 8/1000's of one cent per can of coke to pay the CEO's salary.

      Who's taxes went up?

      I'm not blaming the poor! I'm just saying that they aren't paying their 'fair share'. The top 1% pay 24% of every dollar they earn in taxes. The bottom 50% pay 1.85%. I'm not demonizing, just stating facts.


      Let's take coke. Muhtar Kent makes 11 million a year. Let's take that 11 million and give it back to the consumers, and we'll only give it back to Americans.

      Coke sold 20 billion unit cases(24 8-ounce beverages) in 2005. That's 480 billion beverages. 27% of worldwide sales are in the US, so that's 130 billion beverages.

      Let's save America! Take away his salary and divide it into beverages! That would save Americans $0.00008/beverage. In other words, you would save $1 after 11,818 cans of soda.

      Seriously, CEO salaries aren't the reason why costs are so high, they are TINY fractions of company worth.

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I don't drink coke.  Better that we should re-distribute his massive, unearned and evil income to everyone in cash.  With 350 million people in the country, we will each get 3 cents.  If we do it to ten more evil CEO's we could each buy a gumball.

        1. 0
          JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Well... for a gumball I'd be willing to vote for the government to take all the money away from rich people smile

      2. Jeff Berndt profile image89
        Jeff Berndtposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        "The top 1% pay 24% of every dollar they earn in taxes."

        They also get about 24% of all the income in the US, so that works out to about fair.

        1. 0
          JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Nope, they get 16.9% of all the income, but pay 36.7% of all the taxes. Dollar for dollar, the top 1% pays more than double their fair share(but I know, I know, that's not enough and they are evil)

          1. dmop profile image86
            dmopposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I must say I love these discussions, I am glad that we all keep it clean (most of the time), and are mature enough to disagree with out getting too personal. I could be wrong on some of my points, it wouldn't be the first time. I do know that I have two good friends that are millionaires, and I have heard both of them brag about not paying any taxes. I have also done the math that is used to represent most of the figures presented to us (the general public) in regards to taxes and the national deficit, and it just doesn't add up. If the 3.5 million millionaires in the US are paying their share, not to mention the 403 billionaires, we would not be in the shape we are in.

            1. Cassie Smith profile image75
              Cassie Smithposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              The assets of millionaires and billionaires may or may not be liquid and it doesn't necessarily mean that they earns an income of millions of dollars each year.  Assets are different from income.  As for your friends bragging about not paying income tax, don't be too envious, it could mean that they had to absorb losses in previous years or business related expenses that offset earnings.  Of course they can also cheat, but the IRS is ever watchful on high income earners.  Cheaters may be able to get away with it once but they will set off red flags and the IRS will be auditing them.

              1. dmop profile image86
                dmopposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                The point is they don't have to cheat, the system is set up to protect those with lots of money; they set it up that way on purpose. They spend trillions every year making sure it stays that way, and making sure that it is inconspicuous enough that most will never realize it.

          2. Jeff Berndt profile image89
            Jeff Berndtposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Are you counting all income from all sources (including capital gains), or just income earned from a job?

            Either way, the top earners get most of the income, and pay most of the taxes. How is that not fair?

            1. 0
              JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              That counts all income and all federal taxes.

              They make 16% of the money. Fair would be paying 16% of the taxes. But they pay 37% of the taxes.

              That link is from older information, nor did they get any of their information from any governmental agency that actually has the information.

              1. John Holden profile image61
                John Holdenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                So by that reckoning the rest should be paying tax at 84%

                1. 0
                  JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  No, by that reckoning the rest pay 84% of the tax burden. I'm not talking about tax rates, I'm talking about who is paying the percentage of total tax revenue.

                  So, let's say the IRS took in $100 in tax revenue. The top 1% would have made 16% of the total income in the united states, but paid $37 in taxes.

                  The bottom 50% would have made 13% of the total income, but paid $2 in taxes.

  34. oceansnsunsets profile image88
    oceansnsunsetsposted 4 years ago

    To answer the question, I am a taxpayer, and cringe every time I get my paycheck.  It is what it is, and I will keep voting to try to have some say in how those dollars the government takes are spent.  I hope all people will do that.

  35. lovemychris profile image79
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    There is plenty of money in this country to take care of all the people in it, and then some.
    No body need even be hurt!

    Nobody need be in poverty, horrible neighborhoods, hungry, cold, starving and malnourished.

    Truth is, we seem to like it this way. We champion the gready hoarders as if they are gods.

    "Oh, don't take from them...it might be me some day"

    We are moral degenerates, swimming in a sea of wealth.
    It's just allowed to be concentrated in a very small pot.

    Some people tuck their kids to bed hungry, on the street somewhere. At the same time, other people fly their children to summer camps in private jets.

    Anyone who says this is the result of hard work vs laziness is refusing to be honest.

    It's a rigged system, and we all support it because we might be them someday.

    Well, we forgot the old adage, there but for the grace of god go I.

    Or, as John Lennon said, "I am he as he is we as we is he and we are all together"!

    1. 0
      JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      You don't have to like the problems to not want the government to control our finances.

      1. lovemychris profile image79
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Gvt is the entity which made it this way.

        Tax breaks
        Loop-holes
        lawyerly shenanigans
        Out-sourcing
        Different labels to income

        etc
        etc
        etc

        A gvt is a collection of people living and working together.
        The robber barons have stolen ours.
        They will just have to give it back.

        We need some backbone, like Iceland!

      2. Onusonus profile image85
        Onusonusposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        It's nice to see all the liberals being so benevolent with other people's money. I wonder just how much money they themselves give to the poor. I'd be willing to bet it's not a very impressive percentage. In fact I'd be willing to bet that they have a boat load of excuses as to why they aren't charitable with their own money, but have no problem telling other people how to spend theirs.

        1. dmop profile image86
          dmopposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I say let everyone spend their own money how they choose as long as it doesn't adversely affect others. I don't mean to say one can't pay for another companies services rather than mine, I mean don't slip a cool million to a few politicians to write laws that keep my business in the dirt and make sure yours is the only real choice.

          1. Onusonus profile image85
            Onusonusposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I agree, crone-capitalism is the place where government regulation should be used in order to promote competition, not prevent it.

  36. Ralph Deeds profile image69
    Ralph Deedsposted 4 years ago

    Too many multi-millionaires means disproportionate resources wasted on McMansions, second and third houses, Bentleys, Armani suits, Piaget watches and other ego supports bought to let other people know how rich they are, while too many children are mal-nourished, ill-housed and clothed and poorly educated, not to mention too many roads, bridges and schools in disrepair. It also means that 81-year-old billionaires like Adelman whose greedy instincts made him a bundle of money but gave him no expertise on public policy but disproportionate influence on our government thanks to Citizens United.

 
working