Tags: bill | spetrino | wealthy | rich | tax | cuts

The Give-and-Take Over 'Giving' Tax Breaks to the ‘Rich’

By    |   Friday, 17 Dec 2010 11:08 AM

Please help me to halt a conspiracy to mislead the American people — and let’s get the facts straight.

I am fighting mad and would like your input on “giving tax breaks” to "the wealthy" or "the rich."

Politicians, such as Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., and columnists in various media outlets (like the New York Times and Washington Post, to name just a few) are against “giving tax cuts and breaks" to the wealthy and/or rich, defined as those making more than $250,000 a year.

I don’t have an advanced Ivy League education, but this is something even a child should understand. The “rich” aren’t being given anything.

Please help me to answer this question: If I decide to take a maximum of 50 percent from you in state, federal and local taxes — instead of taking 53 percent — am I giving you something?

My interpretation is that I’m not giving you anything. Instead, I’m just taking less from you.

As for the estate tax, people have paid taxes on their income all their life — and to somehow have them pay 35 percent instead of 55 percent — isn’t giving them anything. Again, it is just taking less.

I have many friends and relatives who are unemployed — and I mean no disrespect — but the fact is that the 13-month unemployment-aid extension for the jobless in the same bill – that is an example of actually giving something to someone.

Meanwhile, most folks complain the rich aren’t paying their fair share.

Again, the facts prove just the opposite. In 2007, the most-recent data from the IRS, the top 1 percent of earners paid 40.4 percent of the income taxes collected by the federal government, up from 24.8 percent 20 years earlier.

The top 1 percent of earners, in fact, pays more than the bottom 95 percent, who pay a combined 39.4 percent of the income taxes collected by the federal government, down from 58 percent, 20 years earlier.

The fact is: No other country in the world has the bottom 95 percent of the taxpayers paying as little as the United States does. But do you hear anyone saying that the bottom 95 percent needs to pay more in taxes to lower the deficit?

With unemployment at 9.8 percent, does it make sense to raise taxes on the wealthy — those who actually create jobs — or tax the bottom 95 percent, who are trying to make ends meet? Neither option makes sense.

We don't need to tax more, we need to spend less.

The United States has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. The U.S. government brings in $2 trillion. It spends more than $3.5 trillion, some of which is wasted on “earmarks.” The bill approved by Congress had more than 2,000 pages in it and more than 6,500 earmarks from members of both parties.

Some spending is necessary but what about $3.5 million to research Formosan subterranean termites in New Orleans or $500,000 for oyster safety in Florida?

Please e-mail us at financialcustomerservice@newsmax.com with your feedback.

About the Author: Bill Spetrino
Bill Spetrino is a member of the Moneynews Financial Brain Trust. Click Here to read more of his articles. He is also the editor of the Dividend Machine. Discover more by Clicking Here Now.

© 2017 Newsmax Finance. All rights reserved.

   
1Like our page
2Share
BillSpetrino
Please help me to halt a conspiracy to mislead the American people and let s get the facts straight. I am fighting mad and would like your input on giving tax breaks to the wealthy or the rich. Politicians, such as Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., and columnists in various...
bill,spetrino,wealthy,rich,tax,cuts
552
2010-08-17
Friday, 17 Dec 2010 11:08 AM
Newsmax Inc.
 

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

NEWSMAX.COM
MONEYNEWS.COM
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved