Federal Taxes At Historic Low, Statistics Consistently Show

The Orange Country Register:

While Republican lawmakers appear unified against tax increases and many Tea Party activists want existing rates rolled back, statistics consistently show that federal taxes are at a historic low.

Read the whole story: The Orange Country Register

Comments

[thinklib]

12:43 AM on 04/20/2011

If Democrats would quit fighting against a Fair Tax, things like this wouldn't happen.

[JDZSB]

11:59 PM on 04/19/2011

I would like our liberal minded friends to clearly specify how much of our income that the government(s) should confiscate for their version of income redistribution. Clearly, income redistribution is behind Obama's unwillingness to cut the cost of government and continues to harp on more taxes from the "wealthy". And who do you think are the wealthy in this country? Between local city taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, state income taxes, state sales taxes, government use taxes (like on gasoline), medicare taxes, social security contributions, and federal income taxes, and a myriad of all kinds of government fees and permits for just about anything, each taxpayer in this country is carrying a hug tax burden, that for me, is well over 50% of my gross income, and I am not wealthy. So, how much is enough of this theft? Yes, theft (isn't that what you call taking from one to give to another)?

[lesterbud]

12:27 PM on 04/20/2011

If you are paying "well over 50%" of your gross to taxes, you certainly are NOT wealthy. Rich people, including me, pay a far lower percentage of our income in taxes. The mega rich pay nothing at all. That disparity, by the way, is a far larger contributor to the problem than the communists you see behind every tree.
If you think you can live without government services and that usage fees are unfair, well, you are NOT thinking at all.

[BrentWI]

12:44 PM on 04/20/2011

Well said!!

[itgravybaby]

07:31 PM on 06/01/2011

People who think the rich don't pay taxes have a very limited definition of "tax".

[Boomerwoman]

11:31 PM on 04/19/2011

Oh, but "Deficits don't matter". Right Republicans? Isn't that what Cheney said? And what were you howling about then? Oh, that's right....you were SILENT.

[Skeetshooter]

05:54 PM on 04/19/2011

A-S-T-R-O-T-U-R-F=Tea Party. Wonder why their rally number have fallen off? Less walking around money.

[justjp]

06:29 PM on 04/19/2011

Sorry Skeet. You nailed the li b talking point. The Tea Party is stronger than ever and as 2012 approaches you will see it grow even more formidable. We are only 2 years old and we whupped your tails in 2010. 2012 is gonna be painful for the left.

[Laws4Sale]

08:18 PM on 04/19/2011

Your Reagan would fail your T-Test today, He wanted all to share the pain! You guys just want "them" and "the others" to bare all the pain!

[BBackSoon]

10:57 PM on 04/19/2011

Maybe, but I really doubt it.

[Darth Hater]

03:38 PM on 04/19/2011

They should change their name to the Bea Party.......... Black enough already!!!!!!!

[Ravenlea]

02:02 PM on 04/19/2011

http://www.care2.com/causes/politics/blog/top-10-us-corporate-tax-avoiders-named-on-senate-floor/

[Donna1224]

01:55 PM on 04/19/2011

Tea Party people will not listen to anything that they don't believe is true. They probably didn't even pay their taxes yesterday!

[justjp]

06:30 PM on 04/19/2011

That would be half of the dem congress sweetie

[lesterbud]

12:29 PM on 04/20/2011

By the way, do you know how your hero, Ronnie, felt about unions and collective bargaining?
He held, on several occasions, that the destruction of collective bargaining would signal the collapse of freedom.

[Cw Fahringer]

12:45 PM on 04/19/2011

For Republicans, the only thing more important than reducing the deficit is increasing it—via massive tax cuts

[justjp]

06:31 PM on 04/19/2011

It's not your money l ib i ot. Go earn your own

[Cw Fahringer]

06:47 PM on 04/19/2011

Excuse me you flea bagger...you must have thought you were on the FOX's website...you see unlike you or anyone in your party, I can add....and when I do add up my taxes at year end, I am in the top bracket comfortably....you see, I unlike you, have values....and I, unlike you, pay over 100k in a year in taxes and based on my values, do not mind paying a little more to make sure your children can eat and your mother can have medicare, and your father can collect his welfare check and I even believe YOU should be allowed to get your teeth back and I would even be willing to pay you a little more income so you can stop drinking that TEA

[Boomerwoman]

11:32 PM on 04/19/2011

Citizen....we all share the responsiblity to pay our taxes. You ARE a citizen aren't you?

[Soquel by the Creek]

12:41 PM on 04/19/2011

According to the Tax Foundation, California had the 6th highest tax burden in the nation in 2009.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/topic/15.html

Because of high taxes, high housing costs, and a lackluster state government, California's business climate ranks 2nd worse in the nation. Similarly, California's unemployment rate is also 2nd worse in the nation. Because California government requires revenue generated by the private sector, our poor business climate DIRECTLY IMPACTS the state's spending on schools, infrastructure, and social spending.

Raising taxes in California will only worsen our already bad business climate. We must reduce the cost of state government. It doesn't need to come only from schools but requires prudent, responsible prioritization. Unfortunately, the California Legislature is incompetent on such matters. Could it be from all the special interests? Here are the top 15 spenders in California politics.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-QYjqoLlSLHc/TWrGCBvd3zI/AAAAAAAAAjs/bRo2KjEibAo/s1600/big_spenders_in_ca_politics_barchart.png

[codycap]

02:01 PM on 04/19/2011

Because it takes a 2/3 vote of both houses to either pass a budget or raise revenue via taxation, 33.4 percent of either house can block the entire legislative process until it gets what it wants. (like the 60 vote rule in the US Senate)

Far-right Republicans who have taken the Grover Norquist pledge not to raise revenue and to shrink government till it can be drowned in a bathtub. They run the legislature by saying no.

This has led to gridlock, huge deficits from lack of revenue, and cuts so massive as to threaten the viability of the state.

All it takes is an organization with money to go around the Legislature and put a proposal through a state plebiscite, something that has occurred 71 times in the past decade alone."

This is what is breaking California not any socialist agenda but a Fascist agenda.

[Boomerwoman]

11:33 PM on 04/19/2011

Prop 13 in 1978. Look it up. High times for the rich, yea boy. That plan sure worked. And it was the REPUBLICANS that set up that failure. You reap what you sow.

[Soquel by the Creek]

12:40 PM on 04/19/2011

Although effective taxes RATES are lower, tax REVENUES have generally increased over time thanks to a growing economy. While tax rates have changed over time, the percent of GDP allocated to taxes remains relatively flat.

Here are federal revenues in inflation-adjusted dollars, which have tripled since 1965.
http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/federal-government-revenues

The problem is that federal spending outpaces revenues. Since the 1960's, the U.S. government has nearly consistently spent more than it collected. The big disaster arrived around 2008.
http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/growth-federal-spending-revenue

While tax revenues are an issue, so is government spending. The budget DEFICIT, just this year, is larger than President Clinton's ENTIRE 1995 budget. I will only support additional taxation once the federal government has a plan for actual budget reductions. State and federal taxes are already my single largest expense.

[DutchUncleAl]

04:08 PM on 04/19/2011

Why would you believe anything published by a biased Foundation with a stated agenda?

[lesterbud]

12:32 PM on 04/20/2011

He likely believes Obama is a Muslim born in Kenya.
He likely believes the financial crisis was caused by Obama.
He likely thinks crop circles are made by bored aliens.
He likely thinks he is a real American.

[rksnj67]

01:06 AM on 04/20/2011

Just using the Heritage Foundation for your facts shows how much you don't know. They are supporters of the Milton Friedman school of economics. Friedman's theories were shown to be a failure.

[Soquel by the Creek]

12:39 PM on 04/19/2011

There are a couple of factual misrepresentations in the story.

PARTIALLY TRUE/PARTIALLY FALSE: "statistics consistently show that federal taxes are at a historic low."

Before 1913 and the 16th Amendment , there was no federal income tax. Marginal tax rates have varied greatly since. The top MARGINAL rate ranged from less than 10% to over 90%.
http://soquelbythecreek.blogspot.com/2011/03/tax-infographic-is-political-rorschach.html

It is true that the average EFFECTIVE rate has dropped since 1980, as shown in the data from the Tax Foundation. See Table 8. The effective tax rate for the bottom 50% of taxpayers has been cut in half. The effective tax rate for the top 1% of taxpayers dropped by 32%.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/250.html

[BigDeadlift]

12:50 PM on 04/19/2011

Good comment. Even though the 16th Amendment was passed in 1913, it was not envisioned that average Americans would be paying significant taxes at that time. Before the 1950's (I still find it suspicious that this is the reference point the article uses). The average American paid little or no income tax except during WWI, WWII and part of the Great Depression. Even the tax rates during those periods appear low compared to what we pay now.

Howard Galt

A Conscious Conservative

www.conservative conscious.blogspot.com

[Soquel by the Creek]

12:38 PM on 04/19/2011

There are a few factual misrepresentations in the article. See my comments on the original story.
http://www.ocregister.com/news/-117079-ocprint--.html?cb=1303228268

[BigDeadlift]

12:23 PM on 04/19/2011

This article is misinformation that borders on a flat out LIE!

The United States of America was founded in the late 1700's. That is long before (by almost 200 years!) the year 1955, the reference date in the article. Most Americans paid little or no income tax or other federal taxes until 1932 (with the exception of a 1918 tax to fund WWI). The United States got along fine without an income tax, except during a major war, until the 1950's. That's over 150 years of average Americans paying little or no federal taxes! This article now wants to call it "historic" that taxes are lower than they were when they were the highest in American history. How about a little truth here? Taxes are higher than they have been thoughout most of the United States' 200 plus year history. The Income Tax leads to politicians dividing the people, controlling our lives and lining their pockets. All direct taxes should be abolished. We didn't have them for over 150 years, we don't need them now.

Howard Galt

A Conscious Conservative

www.conservativeconscious.blogspot.com

[feo]

12:47 PM on 04/19/2011

There have, in fact, been federal taxes forever. What dio you think the Whsikey Rebellion was about?In any case, in 1800 the federal government did not fleets of truck etc etc; today it does; these items cost money. Quit whining about taxes.

[BigDeadlift]

01:05 PM on 04/19/2011

The tax in the case of the Whiskey Rebellion was not a direct tax. It was privilege tax on Whiskey distilleries. You only had to pay the tax if you wanted to make whiskey. You didn't have to pay it just to survive. The funny thing was that Alexander Hamilton made a classic governmnet mistake that foreshadowed taxation in America. The reason that he chose whiskey to tax is that he felt it was "sinful" and hoped that he could control drinking with the tax. Already you have government using tax code not to raise revenue but to control the people.


Howard Galt

A Conscious Conservati­ve

www.conser­vativecons­cious.blog­spot.com

[dc2nm]

01:39 PM on 04/19/2011

We do need them now. This is not the 19th century and many things have changed worldwide. As much as you may want it, there is no going back to a primarily agrarian society.

[BigDeadlift]

12:33 AM on 04/20/2011

Educate me. For what do we need them? I can somewhat understand that income taxes were levied to fight WWI and WWII. Those were large unexpected events that potentially threatened national survival. However, soon after each of these events ended people went back to paying nothing or nearly nothing. What changed in the 1950's, besides possibly the voracious growth of the military industrial complex and the welfare state, that government must now collect taxes on income?

Howard Galt

A Conscious Conservati­­ve

www.conser­­vativecon­s­cious.bl­og­spot.co­m

[vikingway2deal]

12:04 PM on 04/19/2011

Republicans want to give the wealthy another huge tax cut to the wealthy. Republicans
are bankrupting the federal government to shift all the power and money to the wealthy.

[DUSAA-1775]

12:40 PM on 04/19/2011

I believe that the last big tax cut to the rich was by obama and the democratically controlled congress.... it was 5 months ago...perhaps you forgot?

[vikingway2deal]

01:38 PM on 04/19/2011

I know that President Obama extended the Bush tax cuts that overwhelming went to the wealthy. Does anyone remember that at this time period the Republicans were holding the American people hostage by threatening to vote against an extension of unemployment benefits?
Most of the people unemployed in America is because of the reckless behavior of the banks. The Republicans supported the financial deregulation of Wall Strert banks, thus, supporting their reckless financial transactions. This lead to a worldwide financial meltdown. The bailout of the banks to the tune of trillions of dollars , which is still ongoing, was financed with taxpayer dollars. Maybe the banking industry should be footing the bill for the federal deficit since they they did the lion's share in driving it off the cliff.