Given the recent utopian ideas by the Dems, I thought some articles would be interesting. I admit that I am taking the short cut approach and simply reproducing articles from others. I would prefer researching independent sources (or supposed independent sources such as the Census or other government agencies), but I wasn't able to quickly arrive at the numbers. Another source would be to find the total value of the US Stock Market or perhaps a Forbes calculation of the wealthiest people in the US.
I welcome someone to provide research to confirm whether the statistics below are in fact accurate. Assuming (and I know what that means), these numbers are correct, the real impact of sticking it to the rich to solve our problems is an absolute lie -- and the Dems know it. They are simply pandering to the masses that want something for nothing.
I am referencing two sources for ways to "solve" our budget issues. One is taking the net worth of the wealth and another to take the net income of the wealthy. Of the two alternatives, a one time tax confiscating income would be far more preferable than taking the net worth of the wealthy. Government confiscation of the net worth of the wealthy would prohibit future accumulation of income on which to tax. Assuming the gov't could keep its greedy hands off the yearly income and vow to take only one year of so called wealthy people's income would still not help tremendously. However, taxing 100% of income every year would totally eliminate the incentive to produce income, regardless of net worth.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2011/03/confiscate_americans_wealth_to.html
"Using the latest statistics from the IRS, in 2004 there were 2.7 million adults with a net worth above $1.5 million. If the government were to seize all the wealth above the $1.5 million threshold, Washington would realize a one-time windfall of $4.0 Trillion -- and no one would again attempt to accumulate wealth. Assuming it was applied to the national debt (unlikely with the Left in charge as they would spend it) the national debt would only be reduced from$14.5 Trillion to $10.0 Trillion.
Assuming Michael Moore & Company decide that $200,000.00 per year is sufficient for any household, then in 2008 (the latest IRS statistics) the 6.9 million filers that had adjusted gross income above $200,000.00 would have forfeited all their income above that ceiling to the government. The one-time gain to Washington D.C.: $221.0 Billion; but in the future no one would work long enough to earn more than $200,000.00 per year. Tax revenues in subsequent years would never increase unless tax rates are raised which are self-defeating and historically results in even lower tax receipts.
The long-term impact on the economy and the country would mirror that of the failed socialist nations throughout history."
http://radioviceonline.com/tax-the-rich-run-the-numbers-on-taxing-the-millionaires-in-the-united-states/
"Tax the rich – Run the numbers on taxing the millionaires in the United States
January 28, 2012/22 Comments/in Economics, Featured /by Steve McGough
This is a rehash of my April 2011 post. Since we’re taking about the “Buffett Rule” I thought it appropriate to duplicate this post.
We got a bunch of traffic and very few comments on the previous post … let’s see how this one does.
I heard a radio ad today [April 13, 2011] promoting Gov. Dannel Malloy’s (D-Conn.) budget plan which mentioned some sort of “Do the Math” website. OK, let’s do some federal math. If you confiscated every dime from US taxpayers with returns that showed an adjusted gross income (AGI) of more than $1,000,000, how many days could the federal government operate?
Baselines: I’m using AGI figures from the 2008 tax year to run the federal government during 2009, when there was a $3.55 trillion budget and a $1.42 trillion deficit. I know, my dates are a bit off when it comes to budget cycles, but stick with me on this.
So, if you outright took every single dime from the individuals and families who had an AGI of more than $1,000,000 – those rich bastards – how many days? How many days could we run the federal government?
Calculating in your mind are you? Those millionaires .. there are a bunch of them and they are living the good life aren’t they?
Tax the rich!
There were quite a few “millionaires” back in 2008. As a matter of fact, more than 321,000 returns were filed with adjusted gross incomes of $1 million or more. The problem is, even if we confiscated every single dime they made in 2008, the federal government would only be able to operate through April 11. That’s 111 days.
Keep in mind, this is only the federal government, with absolutely no consideration at all for states, local municipalities or cities. They would have to get there money elsewhere since the feds took it all.
So, why don’t we grab more? Let’s say we confiscate every single dime from individuals and families who made more than $200,000 in 2008. How many days could we run the federal government? Certainly, we’re casting a very wide net that includes people who are making really good money, so we should be able to run the federal government in 2009 with plenty left over.
Not so much. Those 4.75 million individuals or families won’t be able to cover the tab. Take it all and you can run the federal government through Sept. 10. Only 253 days.
Other Notes
•Those 2008 millionaires – all of them – could barely pay off 75 percent of the 2009 federal deficit of $1.42 trillion, let alone anything else.
•We’d have to confiscate more than half of every dime earned by individuals and families in 2008 who made more than $100k, and every single dime of those making $200k to fund the federal government in 2009.
•My numbers come straight from the IRS website, which only lists income up through 2008. I’d be happy to run the same numbers if someone can point me to 2009 IRS figures. (2010 won’t be available quite yet I assume.)
•“Millionaires” in 2008 made up a whopping .2 percent – that’s point two percent – of wage earners, and contributed 24 percent of the $1.032 trillion of income tax collected.
•Those earning more than $200k in 2008 made up 3 percent of wage earners, and they contributed 52 percent of the income taxes collected in 2008.
•Those earning more than $100k in 2008 made up 12.7 percent of wage earners, and they contributed 75 percent of the income taxes collected in 2008." |
Friendly Face
Posts: 496
10/16/15 8:36 am
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Redistribution of wealth -- By the numbers
