Monday, April 16, 2007

Taxing Thoughts

From The Federalist:

“To take from one, because it is thought his own industry... has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who... have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.” —Thomas Jefferson

“The collection of taxes which are not absolutely required, which do not beyond reasonable doubt contribute to the public welfare, is only a species of legalized larceny.--Calvin Coolidge

And just in case you think living in DarthDoyle's State is horrific enough, this will depress you:

“Liberals are at it again. Just three months into their majority, Democrats are once again proposing the biggest tax increase in history... If it is passed, [the Democrats’ 2008 proposed] budget will impose the largest tax increase in history on American taxpayers—totaling nearly $400 billion over five years. Families with children, low-income families, and small businesses all would be hit with hundreds if not thousands of dollars in increased taxes.

Just what taxes will be raised?

Here are some of the specifics of the liberal proposal:

The 10% Tax Bracket Will Become 15%: More than five million families and individuals who previously owed no taxes will become subject to taxation.

Marriage Penalty Relief Will Be Eliminated: 23 million Americans will owe an average of $466 in additional taxes in 2011.

The Child Tax Credit Will Be Cut in Half: 31 million Americans will pay an average of $859 more in taxes in 2011...

You’re a family of four earning $60,000 a year: Your income-tax bill will rise 61% in 2011, from $3,030 to $4,893...

You’re an elderly couple earning $40,000 a year: Your taxes will go up by 156% in 2011, from $583 to $1,489...

You’re a woman: You could be one of the 83 million American women who could see their taxes rise by an average of $2,068...

You’re married: You could be one of the 48 million married couples who will pay an average of $2,899 more under the liberal tax increase...

You have kids: 42 million families with children will pay an average of $2,181 more in taxes.”

—Newt Gingrich

I don't think you need much more good news today...


Anonymous said...

I have a feeling that I've witnessed statistical abuse. I wouldn't mind seeing the base stats if you have a link. I would speculate that there is some double accounting going on. Additionally, the assumption is that certain tax cuts would be allowed to sunset. I don't see that occuring with the 15 to 10% tax cut. I don't see the Child Tax Credit being changed.

A couple of interesting items:
*That family of 4 making $60K would go from an actual income tax of 5% to 8%. A rise of 61% sounds better, but any change in such paltry amounts is going to show a high percentage skew.
*The elderly couple earning $40,000 per year isn't poor by any stretch of the imagination. Even at $1500, they are still netting more from the gov't in SS than they are losing in income tax.
*The marriage penalty is interesting. I'm not eligible for the Wisconsin credit because my wife doesn't work. The marriage penalty taxes a dual income household as if it were single income. I don't find this profoundly offensive.

Dad29 said...

The assumption underlying your comments is that the SPENDING is just fine.

It ain't.

The Gingrich quotes are not backed by a link, sorry.

To most people I know, $1800.00 is NOT a "paltry amount." What planet are you living on?

Anonymous said...

$1800 is paltry in comparison with $60,000. Functionally it is no different than $3.00/gallon gas and $3.09/gallon gas.

Dad29 said...

That's not responsive to my argument, which is that SPENDING is out of control.

And I don't accept "paltry" as an attribute of $1800.00. If you think it's "paltry," then make the contribution on my behalf. Be sure to document it carefully with the IRS.

Billiam said...

mz, you sound like a typical lib. We'll take their money. It's only 1800.00. They can afford it..
Man, I despise the Dem party. Talk about Socialists. If you take 1800.00 more of MY MONEY, I'll have to cut spending elsewhere. I've already cut my spending by quite a bit. I do what Democrats, certain Republicans, and any Government Can't seem to do. I spend LESS than I make. I avoid spending too foolishly. It's NOT Governments responsibility to take care of the people. It's YOUR responsibility to take care of yourself and your family. By taking more of my money, I have less to give to charity, or to save. But then, that's what the New Socialist Democrat party wants. Cradle to grave Governemnt. The problem Soc Dems can't see, is that it's a recipe for disaster. Look at Europe, and see the destiny of a Socialist US. Falling birth rate, HUGE debt, no political will, and stagnant economy.

Anonymous said...

I wouldn't argue that spending isn't out of control. Tax Policy and Spending Policy are related, but they are hardly the same thing.

Take that $60,000 couple. They aren't as high income as that customary school teacher and firefighter couple, but they are no where near the poverty line. Their tax profile would be:
Soc Sec: $3720 (double if SE)
Sales Tax: $1500 (based on $30,000 in discretionary spending.)
Property Tax: $4600 (based on a $180,000 home, thrice income)
Income Tax: $3000 or $4900 (depending on which system is used.)

I won't even add in state income tax. Of the over $12,000 in taxes they paid, $1800 is not all that signficant. This is especially so when $1000 of this is due to double accounting the child tax credit with the tax increase. We are talking less than $150/month. If a man making $60K was offered a $150/month increase for his annual raise, he would call it paltry.

Call me a liberal. Just goes to show you aren't fit for adult conversation.

Dad29 said...

With Wisconsin income tax of about $2K, we coume up with a rough total of 25% of income.

Adding $1800 to that makes it 28% of income.

You will recall that a Revolution was fought over TWO percent, on tea.

But let's look at easier stuff:

Tax Freedom Day in 1946/7 was April 5th--we were still paying off war bonds like mad.

In the early 1960's it was mid-March. Since LBJ, it's never been before March 28th.

This year, it will be April 30th.

Your argument that it should be sometime in May is absolutely wrong, and your characterization of $1800.00 as a trivial expense is, unfortunately, flippant at best.

Sorry, mz. We cannot possibly agree that the level of taxation is consonant with common sense, historical norms (except, perhaps, in dying Europe or Statist regimes), or the national interest.

Billiam said...

MZ, re-read what I wrote. I said you SOUND like a liberal. There's a difference between that and calling you a lib. Unfit for adult conversation? Try READING what I wrote before the insult.