Taxes and Income (Top 1% Pay 39% of all Federal Income Taxes)

Wall Street Journal ^ | 17 December 2007 | Staff

[DB]

I would agree with that.

[MrB]

You can wax idealistic all you want about freedom being free

"Of course freedom's free, otherwise it would be called expensivedom" Cindy Sheehan, brainchild and darling of the left.

[nascarnation]

As a wave of well-paid boomers like myself retire, and don’t necessarily get replaced in the workforce at the same high wage levels, will income tax receipts trend down?

Given the marginal tax rates (50% on social security before full retirement age - right?) I expect to be working the underground economy pretty hard at age 62.

[Kellis91789]

“In short, the FICA taxes are simple income taxes which may be used for any purpose (and have been used exactly that way for many decades now).”

Prove that. Prove that FICA taxes have been spent without the SSTF receiving something in return.

You may argue that the special purpose notes written from the treasury to the SSTF are worthless, but the fact is that they are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government, the same as any other T-Bill.

Sure, the SSTF could have done better investing in other places, and the Treasury would have had to borrow using regular T-Bills rather than the special purpose notes to the SSTF, but that is quite different than your misleading statement that the SSTF money has simply been “spent”. It was not “spent”. It was “lent”.

[Zero Sum]

My apologies. When you wrote, "Are you placing a price on a man’s freedom ?" I interpreted that as a rhetorical question with the implicit assertion that "freedom has no price". Since that was not your intent then I don't know why you asked the question, but I still shouldn't have put words in your mouth.

However, my point still remains. I find it a weak analogy to compare one's identity as an American to picking something off the shelf at Wal-Mart. I do not consider being an American simply a "good or service" that the government provides.

I have not been "conned" into anything: While the tax structure and the governmental largesse in this country are presently deplorable (and unfortunately getting worse), and the government has no business trying to be an economic "equalizer", I see no reason that those who are able to become rich under America's protection should not be willing to offer in proportion for its protection and preservation. If that does not make me a true "conservative" in your estimate, then so be it.

[Kellis91789]

[I interpreted that as a rhetorical question with the implicit assertion that “freedom has no price”.]

I guess it is a difference between what those freedoms actually COST the government to provide and what they are WORTH to the individual. I interpreted your view as: Both a rich man and a poor man would pay everything they have to avoid slavery, therefor freedom is WORTH different amounts to each person. The same is true of extortion, however. If we want to believe that a good government is one that is not an extortionist, then I think we have to take the view that it merely tries to recoup its COSTS rather than assay what it is WORTH to each individual. Since the law and the armed forces are supposed to protect everyone equally, I assign the cost equally.

[I do not consider being an American simply a “good or service” that the government provides.]

We seem to be talking past each other. It is not simply “being” an American that is the good or service, but the protections and freedoms which cost the government money to provide.