Americans are not paying their fair share; they are not Economic Patriots!

4est_4est_Gump

Run Forrest! RUN!
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Posts
89,007
How Much is Too Much?
Jim O'Sullivan, The American Thinker
January 9, 2013

...

Currently the federal government uses marginal income tax rates ranging from 10% to 39.6% which are applied to adjusted gross income to define our tax bills. The states add tax burdens ranging from a low in Alaska of 7.0% to highs in Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York of 12.3%, 12.4%, and 12.8% respectively. Hence a combination of federal income taxes and state tax burdens -- without considering the myriad "other" taxes -- place top earners very near the 50% threshold (e.g. if you earn an adjusted gross income of $400,001 as an individual or $450,001 if filing jointly in NY, the tax rate would be 35% + 12.8%=47.8%).

But the costs/burdens of the federal government (and state govs.) go well beyond their tax regimens. Our current government, in particular, has burdened us with other meaningful costs (read hidden regressive taxes) that include energy, regulatory, legal/litigation, and more recently ObamaCare. Further hidden taxes can be cited such as inflation, Fed interest rate policy, tariffs, and waste and fraud. Together with all other taxes, the combined "tax" load on Americans, both individuals and couples, is well above the numbers found on their federal and state income tax forms.

Some of the statistics utilized:

U.S. population (2011) Total=306,110,000; Adult population=243,955,000 (U.S. Census Bureau)
U.S. households (2010) Total=115,538,000; Persons per household=2.59 (U.S. Census Bureau)
Federal Income Tax Revenues (2011) Individual Income Taxes Collected=$8.093 trillion (U.S. IRS)
Number of Passenger vehicles=254,400,000 vehicles (2007) (U.S. Bureau of Transit Statistics)

Government Regulation

Government regulatory costs, benefits, overuse/abuse, even constitutionality are often discussed with little agreement. To address these factors, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Small Business Administration (SBA), and the Heritage Foundation conducted extensive studies (between 2008 & 2012) that stated the costs associated with regulations ranged from $1.75 trillion to $1.80 trillion. Further regulatory costs are expected to grow rapidly since the Obama administration has added 11,327 pages of new regulations between 2009 and 2011. The growth of regulations accelerated in 2012 with the number of pages expected to exceed 4,450.

The 2008 Small Business Administration study calculated regulatory burdens at $1.752 trillion. The study suggested that 70% of the total or $1.236 trillion were economically driven costs, that environmental regulations added $281 billion; tax compliance another $160 billion and homeland security startlingly topped $75 billion in cost.

Using $1.70 trillion as a reasonable estimate of total regulatory costs, these costs by comparison are almost double the yearly income taxes collected from individuals and cost each adult approximately $6,960 annually. Yet regulations also provide benefits. Democrats insist the benefits exceed the costs in opposition to Republicans who believe the reverse. For this analysis one third of the annual cost per adult is believed to be unnecessary and a hidden tax of $2,320 per adult.

ObamaCare

ObamaCare taxes became effective January 1st. Estimates of the act's costs over ten years run from $700 billion to $1.1 trillion or $70 - 110 billion per year (CBO est.=$1.1 trillion). Yet if the past is prologue, the track record of the Congressional Budget Office or Bureau of Economic Analysis (CBO or BEA) in estimating government program costs means ObamaCare's actual price will double or even triple in two or three years.

Upper income earners will suffer the brunt of the tax increases. Individuals earning $200K+ per year or couples taking home $250K+ will pay a 0.9% Medicare tax increase on wages above those amounts and an added 3.8% tax on investment income. Employers (with 50+ associates) will face partially paying for their employees insurance or remitting a $2,000 penalty for each employee.

Health care insurers, drug companies, and medical device companies will also pay higher taxes and fees. Most notably medical device manufacturers will endure a 2.3% excise tax on sales. These are just three of twenty additional new taxes/fees directly related to ObamaCare. Administration officials and ObamaCare supporters argue that much of the extra tax load is borne by business not individuals... but the end user (a consumer) will ultimately pay all the taxes, penalties, and fees.

Given a preliminary estimate of $1.0 trillion in cost for ObamaCare the average adult's share per year will run $410.

Energy

Energy policy or a lack of a policy has cost individuals and households a significant and growing percentage of their income. On Obama's inauguration day, the average price of a gallon of gas was $1.82. Subsequently the average price skyrocketed to over $4.00 per gallon.

Gasoline consumption per driver varies from 281 to 729 gallons per year based on a variety of assumptions/factors. Government statistics (albeit dated) indicate that approximately 200 million+ drivers operate passenger vehicles in the U.S. A number of studies performed by the U.S. Energy Information Agency and the Department of Transportation have posited that the average household consumes 1,100 gallons per year. Thus if an average household contains 2 adults the gallon usage per adult equals 550 gallons.

Although oil is a fungible commodity, I believe that an energy policy aimed at real energy independence would have held a gallon of gasoline below $2.25 a gallon (vs. $3.55 now). A simple calculation demonstrates that current policy is levying a hidden tax on adults of at least $750 per year.

Legal/litigation

The costs associated with civil litigation (aka torts) exploded in the 1970s and 1980s. The costs and side effects of the system soon captured the attention of economists who recognized its economic drag. As a consequence, numerous studies have been conducted to quantify the costs/benefits and the costs of excessive/unnecessary tort actions.

Three studies are referenced with regularity. Towers Watson calculates the per person cost of frivolous tort actions at $838 or $1,052 per adult. The Tillinghast estimate touted by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce puts the price per person at $880 or $1,100 per adult. The Pacific Research Institute's study generated a stunning estimate of $2,457 per person which translates to $3,071 per adult. Each of these studies has been criticized for being inaccurate. Critics contend the studies are totaling the costs of all tort litigation. In contrast, others believe the costs are understated, since the fear of a tort action negatively changes behavior, risk taking and investing; costly factors that are very difficult to measure and quantify.

A comparison of the U.S. civil system and similar systems in Europe and other industrialized nations generally indicates our system is twice as expensive. Those systems require that the losing litigant pay the winners' legal fees and do not allow contingency billing, to name just two differences. In summary a cost of $1,050 for every adult appear reasonable given the evidence highlighted above.

Hidden taxes/costs are increasing and quite meaningful to most American budgets today. A total of the four discussed above equals $4,530. These costs are not just largely hidden but are regressive in nature and have a greater impact on low wage earners and the elderly. Such costs also push many taxpayers into an ever growing group that involuntarily tithes over 50% of their income to government. Congress and the president could materially reduce these costs by recognizing their existence and by legislating straightforward solutions. Instead we get the politics and theatrics of the fiscal cliff nonsense that accomplished little over the past few months.
 
The principled answer to the leftist who believes he is on the side of right, and therefore that the means to his ends are inconsequential, is that no one is born into this world owned by anyone else, including the abstract concept of "society." An argument against such reasoning is implicitly an argument for the enslavement of some human beings to others. Since this is anathema to the state of nature and is self-evidently a grotesquery, all rational justification for omnipotent government is ruled out. A human being's life is his own means and end-in-itself.

Since civilization flourished due to reason and not pure emotion, as agricultural and productive organization allowed human beings to employ resources in the environment to better their situation, the politicization of emotion, or the use of force to back feelings, leads to anarchy and social destruction. Leftists should consider this well before believing that any particular misfortune obligates the socialization of suffering, forestalling but never removing accumulated ruin -- whether through the means of debt or through the mass wreckage of human lives.

Running counter to this history of social disaster, the Constitution is the pinnacle of reasoned political science and the legal barricade against the mob mentality that drives majoritarian democracy. Demagogues arise under such a system of government, because they promise the majority the spoils of government looting, meanwhile stoking the flames of populist passions. The rule of law and the scientific method were developed precisely to protect human beings from the hazards of acting on raw emotion and ignorance. Democratic politicians and left-wing activists, on the other hand, thrive on these human vulnerabilities.


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013...trick_politicizing_emotion.html#ixzz2HTqk9p8U

Contemporary leftists, on the other hand, view their opponents as people you send off to the Gulag, unworthy of any respect, deserving of any kind of low blow, no matter how foul. So you accuse Goldwater of insanity, slander Justice Thomas as a sexual monster, casually publish plays, books, and films calling for the assassination of President Bush, and assault the first serious Republican female candidate at her weakest point -- her family. And of course, you scream to high heaven if any form of turnabout occurs in your direction, as in the case of the Obama family, which was declared "off limits" early in the presidential campaign, at the same time that Palin's family was being stretched on the media rack.

This style of political loathing has become effectively innate. It has been systemized to such a degree as to become integral. Modern liberalism cannot do without it. An entire structure has been erected on the basis of political hatred, and from that structure a whole new strategy has arisen.

J.R. Dunn
 
A_J's corollary #11, “The New Age Liberal defines a fair share of taxes as, ‘When you pay your taxes, you have no more money left than anyone else has.’



Izzy does not want to be exceptional.

He wants to pull us all down to his level so that he is more comfortable with failure...


;) ;)
 
Arnold+Schwarzenegger+FJnXxD2uoYUm.jpg

Teaypical CooliefourkneeAH terrorist,
More fwom thee four me...

Aways the hand out four handouts!
 
I'm smart enough not to fall for your phony ambush techniques, and smart enough to know how to whistle you up like a pup.:D

blah blah blah, did you have fun staying up all night on here being a sweating pressed bitch? About time to go to McDonald's for that breakfast meal, yay?

yew pitful pathetic fuck, yew....:D
 
Fair share.

I believe a new model is in order.


If the dems are in power they pay for government out of their pockets.

If the pubs are in power the pay for government out of their pockets.

So if you want to be in charge ante-up.
 
Back
Top