Advertisement

Archive for Wednesday, December 19, 2012

Letter: Tax calculations

December 19, 2012

Advertisement

To the editor:

Got to thinking about the position that President Obama is taking on raising taxes on the top 2 percent, those making over $250,000. That is adjusted gross income. In other words, that is the amount on which an individual would pay tax. That means that the family would deduct the interest on both of their homes, medical expenses, charities, home office, telephones for business, country club dues when used to entertain clients, half of their entertainment meals, etc. What was left would be the $250,000. Total income could easily be $400,000-plus. You also have to remember that stock dividends are not taxed.

When I divided the number $250,000 by 12, I came to the realization that it equals what a person making $10/hour makes in a year, $20,830. If the tax rate increase should go into effect, then the 3 percent increase would cost the lowest end high earner, i.e., $250,000, $625/month.

Would a person pulling down $20,000 a month, even be aware that they didn’t have an extra $600 to spend each month?

Makes one wonder what these people in Congress can be seriously and honestly thinking about: pride, bullheadedness, or concern that their big donors will not fund their next trip to Washington.

Comments

Richard Heckler 1 year, 4 months ago

Not all wealthy people are against paying more into the cookie jar. Then again some wealthy families go the extra mile to keep people employed at decent wages because they understand that minimum wages will not support self sustainability.

The more money people make the more they spend ,save and/or invest = strong economy.

1

Richard Heckler 1 year, 4 months ago

--- This GOP ENTITLEMENT - TABOR is Coming by Grover Norquist = Grab Your Wallets! http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2005/0705rebne.html

--- This GOP ENTITLEMENT - Bailing out The Reagan/Bush Savings and Loan Heist aka home loan scandal sent the economy out the window costing taxpayers many many $$ trillions (Cost taxpayers $1.4 trillion), Plus millions of jobs, loss of retirement plans and loss of medical insurance. http://rationalrevolution0.tripod.com/war/bush_family_and_the_s.htm

--- This GOP ENTITLEMENT Bailing out the Bush/Cheney Home Loan Wall Street Bank Fraud cost consumers $ trillions, millions of jobs, loss of retirement plans and loss of medical insurance. Exactly like the Reagan/Bush home loan scam. Déjà vu can we say. Yep seems to be a pattern. http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2009/0709macewan.html

--- This GOP ENTITLEMENT - Bush/Cheney implied many financial institutions were at risk instead of only 3? One of the biggest lies perpetrated to American citizens. Where did this money go? Why were some banks forced to take bail out money? http://www.democracynow.org/2009/9/10/good_billions_after_bad_one_year

--- RECKLESS GOP Tax cuts = THE GOP ENTITLEMENT program for the wealthy which do nothing to make an economy strong or produce jobs. Tax cuts are a tax increase to others in order to make up the loss in revenue = duped again. Bush Tax Cuts aka Entitlements.

--- This GOP ENTITLEMENT program for the wealthy is at the expense of the middle class = duped one more time. http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2001/0301miller.html

--- In the end big debt and super duper bailouts HAVE BEEN the results which does not seem to bother Republicans, as long as they are in power.

1

Richard Heckler 1 year, 4 months ago

Social Security privatization will raise the size of the government's deficit to nearly $300 billion per year for the next 20 years, almost tripling the size of the national debt.

There is no rush to change Social Security Insurance for the USA has 20 years or more to address the matter.

Social Security adds to the deficit = GOP nonsense. Reality: It's not just wrong—it's impossible! By law, Social Security's funds are separate from the budget, and it must pay its own way. That means that Social Security can't add one penny to the deficit.

Absolutely Save Social Security!!!

Social Security privatization will raise the size of the government's deficit to nearly $300 billion per year for the next 20 years, almost tripling the size of the national debt.

There is not the problem that politicians claim.

--- Not everyone collects Social Security

--- Until 1984, the trust fund was "pay-as-you-go," meaning current benefits were paid using current tax revenues. In 1984, Congress raised payroll taxes to prepare for the retirement of the baby boom generation. As a result, the Social Security trust fund, which holds government bonds as assets, has been growing. When the baby boomers retire, these bonds will be sold to help pay their retirement benefits.

--- If the trust fund went to zero, Social Security would simply revert to pay-as-you-go. It would continue to pay benefits using (then-current) tax revenues, and in doing so, it would be able to cover about 70% of promised benefit levels

--- The system won't be bankrupt in any sense. On this point politicians are consciously misrepresenting the truth with the intent to deceive." That is what the dictionary defines as lying. - http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2010/0111orr.html

Social Security is going broke is nonsense created by those posing as republicans.

Reality: There is no Social Security crisis. By 2023, Social Security will have a $4.6 trillion surplus (yes, trillion with a 'T'). It can pay out all scheduled benefits for the next quarter-century with no changes whatsoever.

After 2037, it'll still be able to pay out 75% of scheduled benefits—and again, that's without any changes. The program started preparing for the Baby Boomers' retirement decades ago. Anyone who insists Social Security is broke probably wants to break it themselves.

1

Richard Heckler 1 year, 4 months ago

Congress Out Of Touch

Could it be that congress is wayyyy out of touch?

The Washington Post and ABC News survey found that Americans prefer to keep Medicare the way it is and oppose cuts in Medicaid. More than half say they are against small, across-the-board tax increases while calls to raise tax rates on the wealthiest Americans enjoyed solid support.

Seanator Sanders, a member of the Senate Budget Committee, has proposed legislation to impose a 5.4 percent surtax on millionaires that would raise up to $50 billion a year in new revenue. He also has called for eliminating tax breaks for oil and gas companies and loopholes that corporations use to shelter income overseas.

"While we have to move toward a balanced budget, we have to do it in a responsible way," Sanders said. "We need shared sacrifice, not just cuts that balance the budget on the backs of the sick, children, the poor and the elderly."

http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=34fe9001-d1bc-4a2f-8314-f2ad62c40e26

1

Larry Sturm 1 year, 4 months ago

why shouldn't the top 10% pay more in taxes they are reaping the profits of wars that we shouldn't be in if their weren't big profits in war there wouldn't be any war. If the middle class pays 90% of the taxes, guess who's paying the billions and billions of dollars for the wars.

2

rockchalk1977 1 year, 4 months ago

The federal government has a spending problem Mr. Roth... not a revenue problem. What happens when you divide $16.3 trillion by the number of taxpayers in America? http://usdebtclock.org/

1

KansasLiberal 1 year, 4 months ago

If george w. bush hadn't started his two illegal wars of choice, hadn't given away huge tax cuts during his wars, hadn't started the unnecessary and expensive Department of Fatherland Security, and hadn't given away billions to drug companies with his Medicare Part D we wouldn't be in any financial trouble right now. We were doing fine before bush screwed everything up.

2

Liberty_One 1 year, 4 months ago

LTE summation: Let's steal a little more from the rich, they won't miss it!

1

rwwilly 1 year, 4 months ago

There must be at least a million ways to justify increasing the tax load on the well to do..."wealthy", "rich", whatever. I ask the same question to all proponents of increasing taxes on the wealthy, "When is enough, enough? The top 20% of reporting households pay approximately 90% of all income taxes. What percentage SHOULD the top 20% pay that would make you happy?" I have yet to get an answer. Give me a number not an adjective.

0

Cant_have_it_both_ways 1 year, 4 months ago

The mindset continues of taking from the producers and giving to the non producers.

1

streetman 1 year, 4 months ago

Sorry, pal -- stock dividends ARE taxed.

1

jhawkinsf 1 year, 4 months ago

Merrill - If this "fiscal cliff" crisis is made up, by Ben Bernanke as you suggest, then why is it that both President Obama and Speaker Boehner have fallen for the ruse?

Could the answer possibly be that Ben Bernanke, President Obama and Speaker Boehner are all better informer than you, and that the fiscal cliff is very real? Give that some thought between your cutting and pasting.

1

Richard Heckler 1 year, 4 months ago

What Fiscal Cliff? Ben Bernanke came up with "Fiscal Cliff' nonsense.

Much information .... YOU decide. http://www.motherjones.com/search/apachesolr_search/Fiscal%20Cliff

--- Killing Social Security Insurance Is Not An Option. http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2010/0111orr.html

--- Killing Medicare Insurance is simply not an option. http://www.thenation.com/article/159769/paul-ryans-plan-destroy-medicare

President Obama and the USA Congress what are you going to do? This country cannot wait another fours years for the republican party to cooperate. The democratic party cannot wait another fours years for republicans to stop being obstacles to new USA industry that cannot be outsourced and millions of new jobs that cannot be outsourced.

Think jobs jobs jobs and new economic growth are one. Of course citizens need a minimum of 17.50 per hour. At $33,000 a year that isn't much money.

BTW if tax breaks created new USA employment and if republicans would stop killing our economy with their home loan scams this conversation likely would not be taking place.

1

Commenting has been disabled for this item.