EC> are paid by the poorest 20%, so it is making some assumptions about
EC>taxes that are PASSED ON to consumers as well as taxes directly paid
EC>by them.
EC>But even if it were a legitimate number, and one considers it unfair,
EC>and even if one overlooks the fact that 20% is still larger than 17%,
EC>it would be an indictment of state and local taxes (12.3 of that
EC>17.4%), not federal. And even that would require an assumption that
EC>the figure takes into account that many states have a lower sales tax
EC>on food. The idea that there are people who would use the data to
EC>try to argue for changes in the federal income tax makes the whole
EC>thing laughable.
EC>> Total corporate profits for 2011 were $1.97 trillion.
EC>> Corporations paid $181 billion in federal taxes (9%) and $40
EC>> billion in state taxes (2%), for a total tax burden of 11%. The
EC>The actual tax rates, of course, were higher. A few months ago the
EC>United States moved up to the HIGHEST corporate tax rate in the
EC>world. If only 9% wound up being paid, that is because a lot of
EC>companies DID THINGS that tax writers over the years WANTED DONE and
EC>created TAX BREAKS to encourage. Just one more reason to have a flat
EC>tax....
What The Klahn doesn't talk about is government debt. Tax rats are less
important when government debt is lower, since the percentage of any
base is lower when the base is lower. Under Obama the debt will
increase over $5T in 4 years or approximately $15k per every person in
the US. This is double the rate of debt (in real dollars) of any time
in history. The rate of debt growth is higher than the GDP growth,
meaning the government is spending money faster than the growth rate of
the entire country. Therein lies the real problem, not to mention the
drag it creates on the economy.
Jeff
CMPQwk 1.42-21 9999
Democrats -- The party of economic slavery ....
--- PCBoard (R) v15.3/M 10
* Origin: (1:226/600)
|
