Skip to comments.Bottom 70 Percent of Families Will Receive More Benefits Than They Pay in Taxes Under Obama Plan
Posted on 09/25/2009 10:11:32 AM PDT by reaganaut1
New reports from the Tax Foundation show that President Obama's policy proposals will increase the financial dependence of middle-income Americans on the federal government.
"Attempts to put 'price tags' on health care and cap-and-trade proposals vary among government agencies and think tanks," said Tax Foundation President Scott Hodge, "but one vital question has been left unanswered: Counting all federal taxes and spending, how would these policies affect American families' financial ties to the government? The foundation's new 'fiscal incidence model' answers that question."
"Currently the bottom 60 percent of the income spectrum receives more in federal spending than they pay in federal taxes," said Hodge. "By 2012, if President Obama's proposals on taxes, health care and climate change become law, the bottom 70 percent of American families will, as a group, be receiving more in federal spending than they pay in federal tax."
Even if none of Obama's policies becomes law, the extent of current income redistribution is remarkable: The top-earning 40 percent of families will transfer $826 billion to the bottom 60 percent in 2012. If Obama's policies become law, the federal government will redistribute nearly $1 trillion from the top-earning 30 percent of families to the bottom 70 percent (those earning up to $109,000).
Incorporating new data from the Mid-Session Review of the President's Budget, as well as recently released aggregate economic data from BEA and new income tax statistics from the IRS, Hodge has authored two new analyses in the Tax Foundation Fiscal Fact series: "Accounting for What Families Pay in Taxes and What They Receive in Government Spending" and "Basic Facts on Redistribution and the Impact of Obama's Policies." The two publications are available online at http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/25195.html and http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/25196.html, respectively.
(Excerpt) Read more at taxfoundation.org ...
“This trend really started rolling when Reagan expanded the EITC against all advice that this very thing would happen. The Gipper blew very few calls in his time, but this was certainly one of them. (Withdrawl of Marines from Lebanon and Sandra Day OConnor the only others that come to mind)”
That’s exactly what Barry meant about spreading the wealth around.
No, you are getting to KEEP your own money. That is not a “Service” from the Feds. This also ignore things like Gas taxes etc that we all pay to fund things almost NONE of us actually use, like Mass transit schemes. Even though those are useless, they are counted as “goods and services” we “get” from the Govt. No they are ego building projects foisted on us by politicians looking to hand out tax dollars to their campaign donors.
Not if its $20 in government delivered services. As a rule of thumb, 50% of any wealth that passes through the government's hands is destroyed. In general, civilian government workers cost much more than the free market value of their output.
I'm unclear on what they're counting as "benefits" for middle-income families. Are they all on food stamps? Or is the author counting things like the mortgage deduction as a "government spending benefit"?
Conservatives cannot compete with vote buying schemes. Free money yields votes. The only brake to vote buying schemes is a sharp economic decline probably involving a dollar decline and high unemployment. However, we may never recover from a dollar decline so conservatives may not be able to change the situation much. Conservatives would need solid control of government to affect any substantial change anyway. Even in 2004 - 2006, conservatives never had control of government.
If you believe this, you are a d@mn fool. This may indeed be the case for the first few years. But soon enough, that top 30% will figure out how to hide their assets better and taxes will have to go up yet again on the bottom 70%.
“...70 percent of American families will, as a group, be receiving more in federal spending than they pay in federal tax.”
Then,IMHO, those 70% should not get to vote (more money out of my pocket).
Let’s think about this for a second...if the the top 30% become the main source for paying for all of these idiot ideas, it is only a matter of time before they feel that they now “own” the people that they are paying for. In all reality, it sounds like we are doing a 1,000 year full circle back to serfdom.
Any educated married couple who work will by the end of their working careers rise into the top 30%. A lot of this "class" division is artificial, the jealousy of a 20 year old for the earnings of a 40 year old when by the time he is 40 will have the same salary expectations.
As Margaret Thatcher stated, “The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.”
And 95% of America will get a tax cut of $1.27...
Well, you must admit that the risk from a 350 Billion Dollar deficit is quite a different thing than a 1.5 or 2 Trillion Dollar deficit.
There’s only so much income to divert. Wealth tax is next.
the only way to pay for the bank bailouts etc is for the majority of serfs to pay something....so look for larger sales taxes, more taxes or fees on parks,entertainment,restaurants, car registration,etc....
look for SS taxes to go up....
look for the quality of anything govt to go down briskly....
the govt knows where the easy money is...
I agree with you....the more money you make "on the books" the more money they tax...
I'd love to see more bartering and more under the table dealing....
we've got to get it into our heads that our govt is truely a monster and we have to starve the monster....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.