The debt ceiling

[Dave Gray]

It's a fallacy and pipe dream to think you can tax the rich enough to keep spending like we do. If you took every single penny the top 1% of Americans ($550,000 or more per household) earn in a year you still wouldn't put a dent into our national debt. The remaining 99% pay very little of the taxes taken.

Sure, it won't erase the debt but you can keep it from going the wrong direction.

There are things we need as a society -- the money exists.  It's just that income disparity is crazy.  Bezos makes double my salary in one minute.  That's unsustainable.

We shouldn't have billionaires.

[pondwater]

It's all a show. Both sides are the same, just on different ends of the spectrum. Republicans like to pretend to be fiscally prudent and Democrats like to pretend to care about the citizens. Neither of those two things are even remotely true. And the show goes on. It's amazing to me that so many people fall for it.

[Spider-Dan]

If you took every single penny the top 1% of Americans ($550,000 or more per household) earn in a year you still wouldn't put a dent into our national debt.

But you would put a huge dent in the yearly deficit (turning it into a surplus).  So over time, running many surpluses would erase the debt.

The remaining 99% pay very little of the taxes taken.

Incorrect.  The 99% pay the overwhelming majority of taxes in this country.  They just don't pay the majority of income taxes, which is the main kind of tax the wealthy care about.

[pondwater]

But you would put a huge dent in the yearly deficit (turning it into a surplus).  So over time, running many surpluses would erase the debt.

Not if it's spent first. The US government (Republicans and Democrats) is incapable of exercising the spending restraint needed for that to be a viable solution.

Incorrect.  The 99% pay the overwhelming majority of taxes in this country.  They just don't pay the majority of income taxes, which is the main kind of tax the wealthy care about.

Incorrect, income taxes is exactly what we're talking about. The federal government is generally prohibited from imposing direct taxes. The 16th Amendment clearly says income tax. It doesn't say wealth, assets or property.

There are two paths to the pipe dream of a wealth tax: Pick one

1 - The SCOTUS rules that direct taxes are constitutional
or
2 - A new constitutional amendment authorizing the US Government to impose a direct tax.

In my opinion, neither of those are viable options in any of our lifetimes.

[CF DolFan]

But you would put a huge dent in the yearly deficit (turning it into a surplus).  So over time, running many surpluses would erase the debt.
Incorrect.  The 99% pay the overwhelming majority of taxes in this country.  They just don't pay the majority of income taxes, which is the main kind of tax the wealthy care about.

The 1% pay about 42% of taxes while the top 10% pay almost 75% of the taxes generated. This means 3/4 of the taxes paid are by people making 150k or more. The top 10% also spend the most money generating most of that tax base as well.

[CF DolFan]

It's all a show. Both sides are the same, just on different ends of the spectrum. Republicans like to pretend to be fiscally prudent and Democrats like to pretend to care about the citizens. Neither of those two things are even remotely true. And the show goes on. It's amazing to me that so many people fall for it.

A lot of truth in this post. Speaking of which it's almost time for black lives to matter again. That was recently brought to my attention from a black coworker. hahaha

[Spider-Dan]

The 1% pay about 42% of taxes while the top 10% pay almost 75% of the taxes generated. This means 3/4 of the taxes paid are by people making 150k or more. The top 10% also spend the most money generating most of that tax base as well.

You are reinforcing the point I just made.

This chart is clearly labeled INCOME TAXES in two different locations, and yet when I point out that the wealthy only care about income taxes, you post a chart of income taxes as if they are the only kind of taxes that matter.  Q.E.D.

[pondwater]

I curious as to what kind of taxes are being discussed besides taxes that the Federal Government can legally impose?

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

I curious as to what kind of taxes are being discussed besides taxes that the Federal Government can legally impose?

Generational wealth transfers.  

Unrealized capital gains.

[Spider-Dan]

Not if it's spent first. The US government (Republicans and Democrats) is incapable of exercising the spending restraint needed for that to be a viable solution.

The last time we ran a surplus, it wasn't the Democrats that ended it.
The Republican position on surpluses is that if they exist, it means taxes are too high.  This position is factually incompatible with paying down the national debt.  It makes such a goal literally impossible.

Incorrect, income taxes is exactly what we're talking about.

No, it's what you're talking about, because it's the only kind of tax that conservatives care about.

The federal government is generally prohibited from imposing direct taxes.

This has nothing to do with a claim of "Who pays the most taxes in the US?"  We aren't only counting the kind of taxes that you care about.

I curious as to what kind of taxes are being discussed besides taxes that the Federal Government can legally impose?

Every time you guys respond, you just reinforce what I'm saying about conservative obsession with income taxes.

The vast majority of working class Americans would probably consider the federal payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare that are withheld from their compensation to be pretty substantial, but in the conservative framing of tax policy, those federal taxes are insignificant.  (It is worth noting that the truly wealthy - those who do not have to work for a living, and derive their income from capital gains - pay nothing in SS/Medicare taxes, as those taxes are only levied on wage income.  This explains why these huge tax categories are ignored in virtually all conservative discussions of tax policy.)

Furthermore, there is another premise implied by the framing of the above question: that taxes paid to the federal government are somehow more important than taxes paid to state or local governments.  They are not.

[Spider-Dan]

Just to clarify, there are two separate claims being made:

1) The top 1% pays the vast majority of "taxes" in this country.
This is false; they only pay a majority of income taxes, which is far from the only form of taxation.

2) The national deficit (and, over time, the debt) can be reduced by cutting spending.
This CANNOT be true as long as one of the major political parties continues to believe that a budget surplus necessarily means taxes must be reduced until we are back in deficit status.

[masterfins]

Or increasing revenues. 

You're correct it needs to be a combination of raising revenues AND cutting costs.

[pondwater]

The last time we ran a surplus, it wasn't the Democrats that ended it.
The Republican position on surpluses is that if they exist, it means taxes are too high.  This position is factually incompatible with paying down the national debt.  It makes such a goal literally impossible.
No, it's what you're talking about, because it's the only kind of tax that conservatives care about.
This has nothing to do with a claim of "Who pays the most taxes in the US?"  We aren't only counting the kind of taxes that you care about.
Every time you guys respond, you just reinforce what I'm saying about conservative obsession with income taxes.

The vast majority of working class Americans would probably consider the federal payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare that are withheld from their compensation to be pretty substantial, but in the conservative framing of tax policy, those federal taxes are insignificant.  (It is worth noting that the truly wealthy - those who do not have to work for a living, and derive their income from capital gains - pay nothing in SS/Medicare taxes, as those taxes are only levied on wage income.  This explains why these huge tax categories are ignored in virtually all conservative discussions of tax policy.)

Furthermore, there is another premise implied by the framing of the above question: that taxes paid to the federal government are somehow more important than taxes paid to state or local governments.  They are not.

Explain to me the legal pathway to have the federal government impose a direct tax citizens?

SCOTUS or constitutional amendment. Any other ideas?

[masterfins]

Here's the problem:

The last time the US gov't got serious about cutting spending and eliminating the deficit (so we can pay down the debt), when Republicans got full control in 2001, their response was, "If we are in a surplus, it means the American people are being taxed too much."  They immediately cut taxes, putting us back into a deficit status.

The debt and deficit are a shell game; the only time anyone cares about them is in the context of cutting spending that they already disagree with.  It is pointless to even discuss the debt/deficit when one of the major parties believes that taxes should only go down, because no matter how much you cut spending, they'll just keep cutting taxes even faster.

The parties argue just to argue.  It was under Clinton from 1998-2001 that the US actually operated with a balanced budget.  The Republicans actually hated Clinton so much because he co-opted their ideas.  It was Clinton that actually instituted some Welfare reform.  The Republicans should have been cheering him on, but it was the derisiveness of people like Gingrich that hurt this country; and it has only gotten worse since then (by both parties).

Really that's why term limits are needed so badly, so that our Representatives (both Democrat and Republican), will work for the people and not their party.

[Spider-Dan]

Explain to me the legal pathway to have the federal government impose a direct tax citizens?

There is no need to create a new legal pathway for the federal government to impose additional direct taxes; the existing legal pathways are sufficient.

We can go from a budget deficit to a surplus (and, over time, eliminate the national debt) the same way we already did so under Bill Clinton: by raising income taxes on the wealthy.  And since the majority of taxes (not just federal income taxes, but ALL TAXES) in this country are paid by the working class already, this seems like a fair arrangement.