But, for the most part, the vast majority of the wealthy pay a higher percentage than the lower and the middle class. I am confused by your statement, as in order to accomplish it, you'd have to raise the percentage on the lower and middle class or lower the percentage on the upper class in order for everyone to pay the same effective tax rate percentage.
I was not clear. I don't want to see a situation where the upper class pay a less % than middle class. That's the situation today and it's significant due to lower taxes for investment income vs wages. At min, correct that in any good tax reform.
This graph is no surprise to me, but others may not realize the dramatic change in the relationship between top executives and their employees since the 1960's. No wonder CEO's so often appear to be divorced from reality when talking about employee benefits, wages, standard of living, and the like. They live so far "above" their employees when it comes to compensation that it is ridiculous, in my opinion. I'm talking about large corporations, not small businesses, of course.
Did the Middle Class binefit from this tax plan? Yes. Democrats want to keep reminding people how good this is for the wealthy to try and keep the attention away from the fact that is is also good for the rest of the country.
People rightly suspect that whatever benefits that they receive (and the larger benefits that the upper class receive) will be more than offset when Paul Ryan goes after Medicare, Social Security and other benefits and services that they like and need. http://www.businessinsider.com/enti...-12?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=referral The tax plan could have very well have targeted the middle income people and have given the middle income people a larger tax cut and a smaller one to the upper income level and corporations and eliminated things like the carried interest loophole. But that's not how this thing got structured.
This is indeed awesome for the wealthy. 1.5T+ in PERMANENT tax break that mostly go to the top for the next 10 years is the best gift ever. And guess what, after 10 years, that tax cut will continue to cost an arm and leg, while the middle and lower will lose all of their cuts. Better yet, due to already large deficit ballooning even more by these awesome tax breaks for the top, Congress will tackle entitlements once and for all. The middle and lower class will love it. Here is $1 for you. Sorry, but your social safety net services need to be cut by $10. And no more health insurance for your poor kids.
Hear it is there rate should be the same as any other that's what i'm saying no more no less the top and bottom both pay less then the middle class.
SMH just a incorrect assumtion to my answer to the question there rate should match what everyone pays and i'm not just speaking about the 1%'s as you may think.
So you want a massive tax increase on the poor? You monster. There will be dead bodies in the street.
I'm sure they could find other ways to get the funds they want. They'd probably switch to a national sales tax or whatever. For the record, I'm fine with a flat tax or "fair tax", I just find it odd when 45% of the country pays nothing at all in income tax while the narratives fly about the people at the top not paying enough or that the poor don't benefit enough from tax cuts because there's no tax to cut.
LOL why are you parroting that lie? The poor don't pay any taxes as it stands, they still won't pay any taxes after the tax cut.....and several that once paid some small amount of taxes will join the poor in not paying any.
So . . .explain to me again what is wrong with a simple Flat Tax . . .everyone pay I think the number was 13% No deductions . .No loop holes? Rocket River
Other than the fact that it would be the most massive income tax increase on the poor in modern history (most since the 40's when the rate for the poor went from 4% to 24% in just a few years)? Nothing, but you'd get absolutely crucified for suggesting it due to how it would be spun. When people cut taxes on the poor, they spun it as hurting them, can you imagine what they'd do to you for suggesting that big of a tax increase on them?
