- Feb 8, 2009
- Reaction score
you sure love throwing around that 45% number, and it really is a smoke job once again.. It does not really mean what you are implying it does. Lets remove out of that percentage the number of people who are being supported by someone else who does in fact pay taxes, lets take out of that number those that are earning a living and who pay sales tax, gax tax, or any other form of tax besides income tax, I might be missing something more here... like community service..but we will not include that, lets include the people who do not earn any money, and who do not pay any taxes of any kind, and who are given money by the government out of other peoples tax dollars, those are the only ones who are truely not paying any form of tax... so your 45% number... no good not by a long shot.
Yeah, it kind of is. And it's a conservative staple in arguments about taxation, so it's part of 'our side', you know. Are you not even familiar with the conservative point of view on taxation in the USA?
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Tax Day is a dreaded deadline for millions, but for nearly half of U.S. households it's simply somebody else's problem.
About 47 percent will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009. Either their incomes were too low, or they qualified for enough credits, deductions and exemptions to eliminate their liability. That's according to projections by the Tax Policy Center, a Washington research organization.
In recent years, credits for low- and middle-income families have grown so much that a family of four making as much as $50,000 will owe no federal income tax for 2009, as long as there are two children younger than 17, according to a separate analysis by the consulting firm Deloitte Tax.
The result is a tax system that exempts almost half the country from paying for programs that benefit everyone, including national defense, public safety, infrastructure and education. It is a system in which the top 10 percent of earners -- households making an average of $366,400 in 2006 -- paid about 73 percent of the income taxes collected by the federal government.
The bottom 40 percent, on average, make a profit from the federal income tax, meaning they get more money in tax credits than they would otherwise owe in taxes. For those people, the government sends them a payment.
"We have 50 percent of people who are getting something for nothing," said Curtis Dubay, senior tax policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation.
These are all conservative think tanks, by the way. Hardly a popular liberal position.
And again, simple proposition. If you're in favor of people who get taxpayer paid services for nothing being required to not be illegal drug users, then you should have no problem with nearly half the US population being forced to take drug tests before entering a national forest or driving on our highways. It's the same thing - they get something for nothing.
Unless you have a different motivation for wanting Welfare recipients to be drug tested.
umm in regards to the entitlement argument and the law... hello they are changing the law. they are including stipulations to qualifying for it... so adding the passed drug test by passing a law is doing exactly what you are saying.... changing the law.. so that argument is done...
The law they are 'changing' is a state law. Hello, the Welfare 'entitlement' is a federal law. That's why Michigan's attempt was struck down - it was found to be in conflict with the US Constitution.
oh ya your gun argument, also invalid and using smoke screen logic to muddy the waters..
the big difference is entitlements are not included in the constitution, there is however a very specific part that says.... "shall not be infringed" thats pretty damn clear. So ya none of your arguments you are using really hold any weight when looked at with how do you like to put it... oh ya logically.... thanks
Saying my argument is a 'smoke screen' does not invalidate it. Welfare is an entitlement. Period. Not my decision, and I'm not even in favor of it, but it is one. You can argue all day long that it should not be, or that I'm using a smokescreen, but the simple fact is that I'm right about this, and you are wrong. The courts say you're wrong too. Let me know when you gain the authority to overturn that.