Joe the Plumber: Official Thread

[fourteenandoh]

Originally Posted by ORD_Buckeye

This isn't about spreading any wealth whatsoever. It's about how we, as a a modern democracy and civil society, assign the relative tax burden to our citizens. .

so why are people who don't pay taxes getting a tax credit? that's wealth redistribution. that has nothing to do with spreading the burden of govt.

['BusNative]

Originally Posted by fourteenandoh

so why are people who don't pay taxes getting a tax credit? that's wealth redistribution. that has nothing to do with spreading the burden of govt.

Originally Posted by 'BusNative

helpful info:

The American Spectator: Getting To 95 Percent

Some of those who pay no income tax still pay payroll tax, which can be refunded.

[fourteenandoh]

Originally Posted by 'BusNative

Some of those who pay no income tax still pay payroll tax, which can be refunded.

payroll tax is social security right?

['BusNative]

Originally Posted by fourteenandoh

payroll tax is social security right?

As far as I know, but check out the description of the proposal from the same link above:

The other issue that is important to clarify is that when the McCain campaign asserts that ?32%? (or 40%) of all workers pay no income taxes, this is misleading. Obama?s Making Work Pay Tax Cut directly offsets the first $500 of payroll tax that a worker pays each year. It is therefore ONLY available to workers who pay payroll taxes, and no worker receives a tax cut that exceeds their payroll tax payments. Since its inception in 2007, this was the design of the Making Work Pay Tax Cut: ?This refundable income tax credit will provide direct relief to American families who face the regressive payroll tax system. It will offset the payroll tax on the first $8,100 of their earnings while still preserving the important principle of a dedicated revenue source for Social Security...Accordingly, the allegation that the Making Work Pay Tax Cut goes to workers who do not pay income taxes is entirely misleading ? the 95% of workers that Obama claims will benefit are all workers who pay payroll taxes, and none will receive a tax cut from the MWP cut that is greater than their payroll tax liabilities.

[DaytonBuck]

Originally Posted by 'BusNative

Some of those who pay no income tax still pay payroll tax, which can be refunded.

Payroll can be refunded? FICA and Medicare?

[fourteenandoh]

Originally Posted by 'BusNative

As far as I know, but check out the description of the proposal from the same link above:

i honestly wasn't sure.

so if someone gets a tax credit for their payroll tax, but still receive social security benefits when they retire, isn't that the same thing? its taking money from one person to pay for 15 other people's retirement. wealth redistribution.

[NewYorkBuck]

Originally Posted by 'BusNative

This just cannot be proven to be true - it remains to be seen if small business owners making over $250k are even a material portion of small business owners (see 'Bus v AKAK re: 2%), let alone American tax payers in general.

I guess this just cannot be proven to be false either then.......


In any event, what is known is small business owners are four times and likely to make over 100k per year than the general public. Assuming this will continue at higher incomes (and this ratio will probably get even more disproportionate at higher incomes if I had to hypothesize), then the percentage of people that Obamas $250k+ tax will be very disproportionately on small business owners - you know the guys who do most of the job creation that Obama says he wants......

['BusNative]

Originally Posted by NewYorkBuck

I guess this just cannot be proven to be false either then.......


In any event, what is known is small business owners are four times and likely to make over 100k per year than the general public. Assuming this will continue at higher incomes (and this ratio will probably get even more disproportionate at higher incomes if I had to hypothesize), then the percentage of people that Obamas $250k+ tax will be very disproportionately on small business owners - you know the guys who do most of the job creation that Obama says he wants......

Have you read the article that leads this thread? Just curious what you're opinion is. Your numbers don't jive with that article, nor with the national tax statistics vis-a-vis the 95th percentile of taxpayers.

['BusNative]

Originally Posted by DaytonBuck

Payroll can be refunded?

If you qualify under Obama's tax refund plan... go back a few posts.

Originally Posted by fourteenandoh

i honestly wasn't sure.

so if someone gets a tax credit for their payroll tax, but still receive social security benefits when they retire, isn't that the same thing? its taking money from one person to pay for 15 other people's retirement. wealth redistribution.

I wasn't addressing the wealth distribution discussion - I can if you want me to - just the refund on no taxes paid issue.

[ORD_Buckeye]

Originally Posted by NewYorkBuck

I guess this just cannot be proven to be false either then.......


In any event, what is known is small business owners are four times and likely to make over 100k per year than the general public. Assuming this will continue at higher incomes (and this ratio will probably get even more disproportionate at higher incomes if I had to hypothesize), then the percentage of people that Obamas $250k+ tax will be very disproportionately on small business owners - you know the guys who do most of the job creation that Obama says he wants......

The 4x likely to make a 100K sounds reasonable to me but to extrapolate it upwards without statistical corroboration, I'm not buying. In fact, I would disagree with the notion that ratio continues upward. My hunch is that at the 250K and up levels, the recipients drastically shift towards large firm lawyers, top management of large corporations, top earners in finance and banking and consulting. As one continues up the income ladder towards 7 figures, I see the ratio skewing more and more drastically away from small business owners.

My personal experience is that 90% of the people that I know in those brackets work for large corporations or blue chip law/consulting/advertising/architecture firms. The ones who run their own companies fall into two catagories: either those companies have long ceased to be what most would consider "small businesses" or they operate very small, niche high margin companies.

Medical professionals I would consider to be a sector in and of themselves.

That's my hunch. I'd like to see some raw data to prove or disprove our respective opinions.

[MuckFich06]

Joe the Plumber meet Adam the Intellectual Father of Capitalism (Smith):

"The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. . . . The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. . . . It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan (October 22, 2008) - Adam Smith On Spreading The Wealth

[MuckFich06]

Originally Posted by Tresselbeliever

Just as a side question, have you read Atlas Shrugged?

No, I actually ran across that quote by happenstance and it appealed to me. (But yes, given my arguments in this thread I can see the irony of quoting Rand).
Edit: I found a more appropriate sig quote for this time of year.


Back on topic, here's an interesting chart.



Is Redistributing Wealth a Bad Thing? You Betcha!

[GoodLifeSean]

I can't take the phrase Joe the Plumber anymore. I mean seriously, I saw the recent commercial, in Green 15 miles north of my home, Palin and McCcain brought up Joe the Plumber, and I for one am getting sick of it. Listen I know it was a legit point about fears of socialism, but damn, don't run it into the ground. It's like the Spartan Spirit skits that used to be on SNL they started out funny, but then just got run into the ground.

Next time someone talks about Joe the Plumber to me I'm going to start reffering to everyone I talk to them about as ____ the ____ such as, "Oh this is my mom, Betty the State Worker or this is my friend Jeremy the Starbucks Barista. I understand it's a rallying cry, but this phrase, much like New Coke in its time needs to die. (The Phrase, not Joe Werzulbacher, he can keep living, I don't like unnecesary death.)

[bigballin2987]

Originally Posted by GoodLifeSean

I can't take the phrase Joe the Plumber anymore. I mean seriously, I saw the recent commercial, in Green 15 miles north of my home, Palin and McCcain brought up Joe the Plumber, and I for one am getting sick of it. Listen I know it was a legit point about fears of socialism, but damn, don't run it into the ground. It's like the Spartan Spirit skits that used to be on SNL they started out funny, but then just got run into the ground.

Next time someone talks about Joe the Plumber to me I'm going to start reffering to everyone I talk to them about as ____ the ____ such as, "Oh this is my mom, Betty the State Worker or this is my friend Jeremy the Starbucks Barista. I understand it's a rallying cry, but my friends this phrase, much like New Coke in its time needs to die. (The Phrase, not Joe Werzulbacher, he can keep living, I don't like unnecesary death.)

[NewYorkBuck]

Originally Posted by ORD_Buckeye

The 4x likely to make a 100K sounds reasonable to me but to extrapolate it upwards without statistical corroboration, I'm not buying. In fact, I would disagree with the notion that ratio continues upward. My hunch is that at the 250K and up levels, the recipients drastically shift towards large firm lawyers, top management of large corporations, top earners in finance and banking and consulting. As one continues up the income ladder towards 7 figures, I see the ratio skewing more and more drastically away from small business owners.

My personal experience is that 90% of the people that I know in those brackets work for large corporations or blue chip law/consulting/advertising/architecture firms. The ones who run their own companies fall into two catagories: either those companies have long ceased to be what most would consider "small businesses" or they operate very small, niche high margin companies.

Medical professionals I would consider to be a sector in and of themselves.

That's my hunch. I'd like to see some raw data to prove or disprove our respective opinions.

Nope - single biggest factor contributing to someone being a millionaire is owning their own business.

http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-bud...#39;t-Tell-You


See #3 - half of all millionaires made their money by running their own business. So as I predicted, it seems the higher your wealth, the more likely you are to have gotten there by running your own business. (The truly "rich" are that 3% who get their money inherited through trusts and the like, but as mentioned they will never pay taxes in our current system.)

So it seems like the left is left with the "inconvenient truth" that their taxes on 250k and above will directly lead to job destruction, as small business are responsible for most of the job growth in this country, especially right now as is shown by the following article.

Small Business Job Growth Remains Strong ? The StartUp Blog at PartnerUp

So the SINGLE engine that is driving job creation right now is the one that Obama wants to tax even heavier than their already crushing burden.

Sounds like great idea.......