Two-Thirds Favor Cutting Federal Payroll by 10% - Rasmussen Reports™

Two-Thirds Favor Cutting Federal Payroll by 10% - Rasmussen Reports™: "Sixty-six percent (66%) of voters nationwide favor a proposal to cut the federal payroll by 10% over the coming decade. A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey found that just 22% are opposed and 12% are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Earlier surveys found that 46% believe government employees make more money than comparable workers in the private sector.
Only 15% say government workers make less than similar private sector workers.
In addition to believing that government workers are paid more, voters overwhelmingly believe those on the public payroll have more job security but don’t work as hard as their counterparts in the private sector."

There is a name for this??

Potential Tea Party Targets for 2012 | RedState

Potential Tea Party Targets for 2012 | RedState: "We have a significant opportunity to improve the Senate GOP through some primaries. Here is a list of potential targets for primaries — these are all of the Senate Republicans up for re-election in 2012:

John Barasso (WY)
Scott Brown (MA)
Bob Corker (TN)
John Ensign (NV)
Orrin Hatch (UT)
Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX)
Jon Kyl (AZ)
Richard Lugar (IN)
Olympia Snowe (ME)
Roger Wicker (MS)"

The Progressivity of the Tax System - dialog btw GOS and CMP

This is important. 

            Thanks GOS, now we’re getting to the meat of the issue.  By shear volume of funds paid the rich do pay more in taxes.  The top 5 percent of the nation pays the bulk of the money to the Fed; I think it’s 40 percent of revenue.  Additionally, that same 5 percent holds 90 percent of the nation’s wealth.  So who pays?  That’s not the debate.  About a century ago our nation realized that we had a dilemma, 1 – 5 percent of the nation held 90 percent of the wealth.  Thus the progressive tax system was formed.  In 1915 President Woodrow Wilson, along with the 63^rd U.S. Congress, decided that the nation had to address this imbalance noting that the Forefathers did not want a nation owned by the moneyed class.  If the situation continued, ‘The wealthy would own every inch of the United States.’ 

 

            If there is anyone who does not know that the top income earners pay more in taxes I would be amazed.  Amusingly, if there is someone stating that people say that the rich is not paying as much in taxes as the middle income then that person should show some type of proof.  Just saying so does not make it so.  As a lower-mid income maker I realize that if someone making $10 million has a problem paying their share then that burden falls to the sub-millionaire group.  The middle income makers in the U.S. pays about 25% of there income.  In example, Juan Six Pack makes $40,000 @ 25% = $10,000; Carol Big Bucks makes $10,000,000 @ 33% = $3,300,000.  For argument sake let’s divide the percents, 29% is the result.  Now Juan pays $11,600, and Carol pays $2,900,000.  The amount left over to buy bread, butter, and beans is Juan now has $28,400, and Carol has in $7,100,000 for buying bread, butter, and beans. 

 

I apologize for the Sesame Street ® approach to tax policy but if I understand your link and statement correctly you have a problem with who pays taxes.  One, if the problem is that the middle and lower income groups are not paying taxes I say that they are paying there share.  Two, if the issue is that the rich is overpaying then okay.  We all must “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”, Matthew 22:21.  Yes, that may be a little heavy but dang it pay your taxes.

 

Below are follow-ups to the above link and discussion.  The statement and links show that the elite group of wage earners lookout for their friends.  Please see bullet 1 the columns Ave Tax cut and Share of the Tax cut, as one can see nothing is fair about the amount or percent or change.  See bullet 2 for a written CBO breakout.  See 3 for all visual learners.

 1.        

Table 1
Who Benefits?:  Distribution of ____ Administration Tax Cuts in 2004
(excluding the effects of the corporate and estate tax cuts)
	Average Income	Average Tax Cut	Share of the Tax Cut	Percentage Change in After-Tax Income
Lowest 20 percent	$16,600	($230)	2.80%	1.50%
Second 20 percent	$38,100	($720)	8.30%	2.20%
Middle 20 percent	$57,400	($980)	11.50%	2.00%
Fourth 20 percent	$84,300	($1,520)	17.70%	2.30%
Top 20 percent	$203,700	($4,890)	59.90%	3.30%
All	$80,100	($1,680)	100.00%	2.70%
81-90 percent	$116,600	($2,210)	13.40%	2.50%
91-95 percent	$155,000	($3,180)	9.80%	2.70%
96-99 percent	$243,100	($4,830)	12.00%	2.80%
Top one percent	$1,171,000	($40,990)	24.60%	5.30%
Source:  CBPP calculations based on CBO data.
2.      http://www.nyGOSes.com/2007/01/08/washington/08tax.html

The top 1 percent of income earners paid about 36.7 percent of federal income taxes and 25.3 percent of all federal taxes in 2004. The top 20 percent of income earners paid 67.1 percent of all federal taxes, up from 66.1 percent in 2000, according to the budget office.

By contrast, families in the bottom 40 percent of income earners, those with incomes below $36,300, typically paid no federal income tax and received money back from the government. That so-called negative income tax stemmed mainly from the earned-income tax credit, a program that benefits low-income parents who are employed. –

3.        For more about where we spend see below this chart is CBO data.

  

---

From: GOS [mailto:grumpy_old_soldier@verizon.net]
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 06:34
To: flash_rob@msn.com
Subject: Greg Mankiw's Blog : The Progressivity of the Tax System

 

GOS has sent you a link to a blog:

CMP: This is from a link at Redstate. My position has always been that there can be only ONE set of facts, then who do I believe, the voices that say the most financially wealthy DO pay the most in taxes, or the voices that say they do not? GOS

Blog: Greg Mankiw's Blog
Post: The Progressivity of the Tax System
Link: http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2009/01/progressivity-of-tax-system.html

--
Powered by Blogger
http://www.blogger.com/

Who gives a s**t about the Constitution? It's only a bunch of stupid old rules!

Obama to nominate Hillary as Secretary of State Monday despite Constitutional prohibition.

Why do we wonder why nothing EVER gets done in Washington when this kind of crap goes on! How do we hold these people accountable when they break the very laws and subvert the very principles they are expected...BY OATH!...to uphold?