Posted on 04/18/2016 7:43:19 AM PDT by Java4Jay
An estimated 45.3% of American households — roughly 77.5 million — will pay no federal individual income tax, according to data for the 2015 tax year from the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan Washington-based research group.
(Excerpt) Read more at marketwatch.com ...
And the rest of us support them.
If 45% of the American Indians decided not to hunt or grow crops there would have been 45% less to deal with when the EuroInvaders came.
Same thing should happen here. You don’t produce, you don’t eat unless you are sick, hurt or old.
And welcome to another tax day rant that will soon be forgotten.
Worse than not paying any share is the incessant carping by this group of liberal parasites that taxpayers are not paying their fair share.
We didn't have a grossly bloated, unconstitutional federal leviathan back then either.
So “we’re gonna cut your taxes” has no popular appeal to 45% of Americans
But soaking the other 55% will never be enough for people like Hillary and Bernie and the FSA (free sh#t army)
45% of all American HOUSEHOLDS pay net zero.
By this it implies 45% of all TAXPAYERS. if you want to say 'all Americans'... the percent changes drastically.
assuming 140m taxpayers (it varies by year, but stays roughly around this number). 45% of taxpayers pay net zero... meaning 63m people. add the nontaxpayers (190m) and you have 253m that aren't paying or pay net zero. and 253m of the 330m is 77%
therefore the correct headline should be:
77% of Americans pay no federal income tax
It is unconstitutional because the amendment process was corrupted. States tried to remove their approval, as is their right, prior to ratification. The federal government denied that right. Without those states, the proposed amendment would have not been ratified.
Black's Dictionary of Law, in its 1891 edition (reiterated verbatim in 1910), defined "income tax" this way: "A tax on the yearly profits arising from property, professions, trades, and offices."
West Publishing Co produced a widely used Judicial and Statutory Definition of Words and Phrases in 1904. It defined "income tax" as a "tax which relates to the product or income from property or from business pursuits.. ... [it] includes a tax on the gross receipts of a corporation or business."
http://onenewsnow.com/perspectives/bryan-fischer/2014/04/15/16th-amendment-irs-has-no-legal-authority-to-tax-your-wages-or-salary
“Trump is talking about taking it up to about 50%”
Someone should ask Trump about the concept of 50% of us paying no tax
Looks like 45% aren’t paying their “fair share”.
You really think you'll get a coherent answer?
Plus, there’s a good percentage getting PAID, including illegal aliens, for kids who live out of the country or don’t exist.
Romney should have strapped on a pair of balls and explained his 47% comment. Instead he folded like the loser he is.
The re-election of Obama proved that parasite overload is real and it’s here.
As for the notion of 47% paying no federal taxes, that would include, I assume, retired people living on fixed incomes. Are they deadbeats? I don’t think so.
Of course, a federal income tax was not legal in the early years of this country. They had to pass a constitutional amendment to make it possible. One of the selling points was that only the very rich would have to pay, and the original rates were very very low. So this idea that lower income people should not pay income tax is consistent with the original concept, and I have no problem with it on that basis.
However, it was not the original concept that the highest marginal rates would be 35% or 45% or even higher! It was also not the original concept that specific interest groups would be bribed to vote for one party (democrats) over another on the basis of “credits” and other giveaways at the expense of the other groups!
Every citizen should pay taxes even if it is just 5%. Those that don’t shouldn’t get to vote.
Stop working so hard. Start giving more to charity. Lower your taxable income and taxes. Narrow income inequality. Spend only what you have to with companies that support conservative principles.
Interesting. I was not aware they could see the future.
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.