The Reaganomics Fraud:

[mrplunkey]

Here is Kentucky:

Kentucky (KY) Income Tax Rates and Tax Brackets 2010/2011

 

[mrplunkey]

Here is North Carolina:

North Carolina (NC) Income Tax Rates and Tax Brackets 2010/2011

 

[mrplunkey]

How many charts you need? There are plenty of states that use graduated income tax rates based on income.

 

[mrplunkey]

Here's Georgia:

Georgia (GA) Income Tax Rates and Tax Brackets 2010/2011

 

[75th]

Wow...did you not even read your own post?

I'll get it for you:

Also keep in mind that those numbers dont include state taxes. When you factor in local income, sales, and property taxes, the middle class gets boned even futher - state taxes are much more regressive than federal taxes.

That's not true at all. Property taxes go up with property value. If a top earner doesn't want a high-end piece of real estate, there's no reason they should pay higher taxes.

And the same can be said for sales taxes.

Posting a bunch of charts limited to state income taxes as if it somehow supports your claim (which it doesnt) is pretty disingenuous.

In case you missed the quote from the study I referenced:

The average state and local tax rate on the best-off one percent of families is 6.4 percent
before accounting for the tax savings from federal itemized deductions for state and local
taxes. After accounting for this tax savings — an effect commonly referred to as the “federal
offset” — the effective tax rate on the top one percent is a mere 5.2 percent.

The average tax rate on families in the middle 20 percent of the income spectrum is 9.7
percent before the federal offset and 9.4 percent after — almost twice the effective rate that
the richest people pay.

The average tax rate on the poorest 20 percent of families is the highest of all. At 10.9
percent, it is more than double the effective rate on the very wealthy. This group generally
derives no benefit from the federal offset.

The study takes into account sales, income, property, etc taxes by state.

 

[75th]

And again, since you posted some figures confined to only federal income taxes:

Werent we talking about the effective tax rate, taking into account payroll, capital gains, etc? You don't think that's a much better barometer given the context of this conversation?

 

[mrplunkey]

Plus, state taxes are graduated and in loony states like CA, include additional penalties for $1M+ earners.

Also, what about the apparently progressive nature of state tax liability as you claimed earlier?

And I provided tax brackets by state based on income.

C'mon now. You got caught bullshitting, I called you out on it, now I'm going to let you off the hook. There's no reason to be snippy about it. You might catch me saying something inaccurate one day too. Good luck!

 

[75th]

And I provided tax brackets by state based on income.

C'mon now. You got caught bullshitting, I called you out on it, now I'm going to let you off the hook. There's no reason to be snippy about it. You might catch me saying something inaccurate one day too. Good luck!

lol nice try. You know full well that my quote of "state tax liability" was directly based off our earlier conversation - the one where I posted proof about how when state taxes (including property, sales, and additional taxes) are factored it, it is a larger (ie more regressive) burden on the lower and middle class compared to the wealthy.

You claimed that property taxes especially equate to taxes being paid through the state as progressive.

http://www.elitefitness.com/forum/chat-conversation/reaganomics-fraud-742413-3.html#post10048747

You can be a grown up and admit you were wrong (as I had no problem doing about the poll) or you can continue to throw out charts that have nothing to do with the conversation at hand.

I wouldnt blame you if you did the latter, though. It is hard to argue with the numbers I posted.

 

[75th]

While were at it, I'll repeat something else you conveniently glossed over (as it's tremendously hard to argue against):

Do you or do you not think that an effective federal tax rate INCLUDING payroll taxes, capital gains taxes, etc is a much better barometer for our current discussion compared to ONLY federal income tax rates?

If not, explain why. If so, what are your thoughts on the facts I posted showing that the wealthy have gotten a 10% effective tax break over the past 10 years, whereas the middle class has only experienced a 1% drop over the past 10 years and a 2% drop over the past 30 years?

 

[mrplunkey]

lol nice try. You know full well that my quote of "state tax liability" was directly based off our earlier conversation - the one where I posted proof about how when state taxes (including property, sales, and additional taxes) are factored it, it is a larger (ie more regressive) burden on the lower and middle class compared to the wealthy.

You claimed that property taxes especially equate to taxes being paid through the state as progressive.

http://www.elitefitness.com/forum/chat-conversation/reaganomics-fraud-742413-3.html#post10048747

You can be a grown up and admit you were wrong (as I had no problem doing about the poll) or you can continue to throw out charts that have nothing to do with the conversation at hand.

I wouldnt blame you if you did the latter, though. It is hard to argue with the numbers I posted.

What part of "state taxes are graduated" did you not understand? Is there really ambiguity in that statement?

Lick your wounds and fight another day. All you're doing is keeping an embarrassing thread on the front page at this point.

Hell, I may even bump it from time-to-time next time you make another unsubstantiated claim.