Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Announces American Manufacturing Program, Promises to Spend $600 Billion
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is great news. I know my net worth has skyrocketed. I can prosper with either administration but Trumps is far better
Hate to tell you but you need to check tax bracket tables. 50% of people pay no federal income tax. Please let us know how you give 50% of people who pay no federal income tax a federal income tax break. I'll wait.
Let me break it down further.
You have 5 people who have a bill due of $10 all who are responsible for about $2 of that bill each
Person A pays $0
Person B pays $0
Person C pays $.50 (cents)
Person D pays pays $1.50
Person E pays $8
You want to give these 5 people a $2 break total. Who gets the break.
Last edited:
There is a political party, and there is a king's court full of jesters. You decide which is which
Person A gets $2
Person B gets $2
Person C gets $1.50
Person D gets $0.50
Person E pays $6
Was that supposed to be hard?
$2 break total. TOTAL!!!! You gave a $10 total break not a $2 break. BTW this is pretty much an illustration of our current tax revenues except it is even more slanted
And no you don't give people money for consuming something. You don't walk into a restaurant, eat and then demand they pay you. You pay for what you consume. Do you not think people should pay for what they consume?
You can't give person A or B anything. They don't pay anything. Person C can get a little as can person D. You have to give Person E the most because they pay the most and like any tax break the break has to go to the people that actually pay the taxes.
Okay. I misunderstood. Again, simple math.
Person A gets $0.40
Person B gets $0.40
Person C pays $0.10
Person D pays $1.10
Person E pays $5.60
Sure I can. See above. (And despite your attempt to limit the discussion to federal income taxes only, that's not the only tax that they pay. So it's disingenuous to say they don't pay anything. Most of them pay other federal payroll taxes, as well as state and local taxes. Many of which are regressive.)
SO wait. You want to pay someone for consuming "things". I said federal income tax specifically. They pay nothing toward federal income tax. Not arguable. They also consume a lot of what federal income tax funds
No, you said you want to give them a tax break, not me. I simply want the tax break to be distributed equally.
I know what you said and rejected it. I think it's disingenuous to limit tax breaks to progressive taxes while ignoring regressive taxes.
Property taxes
Sales taxes
Tariffs
Lotteries
Etc.
When a clown enters a palace, he doesn't become a king. The palace becomes a circus. NO KINGS!
Why do you want a tax break distributed evenly but not the expenditure when the consumption is relatively the same. All those other taxes you listed are paid by everyone. I promise you I pay more in sales and property taxes than 95% of people so the wealthy do not avoid that.
Why don't you want the middle and lower class to pay their fair share?
See you think the wealthy get federal income tax cuts. Who gets federal income tax cuts are the people who pay the federal income tax taxes who happen to be wealthy.
You can't give tax cuts to those who pay no federal income tax or very low so 60% of people are out the window to even get a tax cut.
I am amazed at how many Dems don't do simple math when they calculate things.
I watched the Dem party do far more king things than the Repubs do which is why they get my vote.
I have no idea what "expenditure" and "consumption" mean in the context of the scenario that we were discussing. We were talking about paying taxes, not government spending.
Sure, but, again, they are regressive taxes where the less you make the higher percentage of your income you pay. I certainly don't consider that fair or even practical.
What do you consider a fair share of the overall tax burden?
Yes. Seems completely rational to think that the wealthy get tax cuts when the wealthy get tax cuts.
Last edited:
Well everything the federal government spends is an expenditure and a consumption. Federal income taxes for the most part is their source to be able to pay for those expenditures and that consumption. All of us citizens roughly consume about the same amount of federal resources, similar to going to a restaurant and ordering food. My bill and your bill will roughly be the same if we both go to Chilis and have dinner. No one charges what you and I consume based on how much we earn. They charge us based on what we consume., The federal government should be no different. It should split its bills up by sending its citizens bills that are evenly split in theory. Now I understand since I do very well I should pay a little more and have no issue.
The wealthy get tax cuts because of my illustration above. When any tax cut goes through you can't give a tax cut to people who pay $0. It isn't possible. For someone who pays very little you can't really give them a tax cut because they don't pay enough. Therefore you have to give cuts to people who pay enough to get a cut which happens to be the wealthy since the top 20% pay 80%+ of federal income taxes. Telling me they pay other taxes would be like me saying I shouldn't have to pay my restaurant bill at Chilis because I already paid for my bill at Outback. Irrelevant.
Every person in this country should be paying federal income taxes and they don't. So fair share is a pretty easy mathematical equation since the amount needed is known.
Last edited:
We were talking about taxes (revenue), not spending.
Hah! That's total nonsense.
Great! What is the "mathematical equation"!
All taxes are is how the spending is funded. Nothing more. Therefore collecting taxes is deciding who pays for expenditures. This is not arguable.
Please take civics. Get back after.
What is the equation.
I will let you figure it out. IF 5 of us go out and spend $100 total on anything (you pick) and we relatively consume the same amount of that anything then what would be a fair amount for each of us to pay?
Last edited:
Joseph R. Biden, Jr., signed 162 Executive orders between 2021 and 2025.
Donald J. Trump signed 186 Executive orders in 2025.
Those pesky facts sure are annoying to the right these days.
You said it's a "pretty easy mathematical equation". What is it exactly? Why do you need me to figure it out?
What makes you think every single person in the US consumes the same amount of federal government services? Does a one year old living with his parents off the grid "consume" the same amount of government money as a billionaire who receives subsidies from the federal government?
There is zero correlation between the number of executive orders and acting like a king. There are degrees of executive orders. What I do know is forcing a candidate on the people who got zero votes is more king like than anything the Repubs have done.
The math equation is to take the federal spending for a year and divide it up one of 3 ways (Using a $10 budget as an example):
1). Per taxpaying household. That means you and I pay the same amount whether I have 3 kids, 0 kids or 1 kid. ($5 for your household and $5 for my household)
2). Per person. That means if I have a wife and 3 kids I pay the amount representative of that (5 people) and if you only have a wife you would pay your representative amount (2 people) ($7.14 for my household and $2.86 for yours)
3). Per tax payer. That means if I only work in my house I pay that amount. If your wife works you would pay yours and her amount. ($3.33 for mine and $6.66 for yours)
I believe #1 is the most realistic and fair. #2 next, and #3 next (#3 makes no sense to me, but one might argue that).
For reference there is about $6.75 Trillion spent and 165 million returns filed. That amount is $40,909 per tax payer. That is as close to a true fair share as there can be. The problem is for households filing "married but separately filing". Taking that into account would push the number slightly higher. So if you pay $50,000 or more you are likely paying your fair share of government spending.
I certainly don't think every person consumes about the same and I would actually say the poor consume far more government services than I do but we all relatively consume close to the same amount within reason. I certainly don't consume 10x more than someone who pays 10X less in taxes. Assuming you are US based I would be willing to bet your family and mine consume about the same amount in government resources
A billionaire does not receive subsidies from the government on a mss scale. His company might but he personally (federal income taxes are personal) does not.
Last edited: