Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-21-2008, 04:24 PM  
acesn8s acesn8s is offline
MVP
 
acesn8s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Here
Casino cash: $9154
INCOME TAX RATE COMPARISON 1999 vs 2008

Taxes...Whether Democrat or a Republican you will find these statistics enlightening and amazing.

www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html (you can verify the numbers here)
http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/22958.html


Individual Income Taxes Under Presidents Clinton and Bush, 1999 Law and 2008 Law
For taxpayers who take the standard deduction and have no children
TaxpayerTax under Clinton, 1999 tax lawTax under Bush, 2008 tax law
Single, income of 30,000$3,157.50 $2,756.25
Single, income of 50,000$7,262.50 $6,606.25
Married, income of $50,000$5,085.00 $4,012.50
Married, income of $60,000$6,585.00 $5,512.50
Single, income of $75,000$14,262.50 $12,856.25
Married, income of $75,000$9,426.50 $7,762.50
Single, income of $125,000*$29,378.50 $26,472.25
Married, income of $125,000*$23,426.50 $19,462.50
*This chart does not take into account the Alternative Minimum Tax


It is amazing how many people that fall into the categories above think Bush is screwing them and Bill Clinton was the greatest President ever. If Obama or Hillary are elected, they both say they will repeal the Bush tax cuts, and a good portion of the people that fall into the categories above can't wait for it to happen. This is like the movie The Sting with Paul Newman; you scam somebody out of some money, and they don't even know what happened.

EDIT: Edited for accuracy but results still show lower taxes in 2008.

Last edited by acesn8s; 03-24-2008 at 08:46 PM..
Posts: 5,583
acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2008, 04:26 PM   #2
Rain Man Rain Man is offline
All posts benefit the infirm.
 
Rain Man's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: 1.61 KM high city
Casino cash: $62710890
I want my $600, dammit!
__________________
In the final seven games of the 2013 season, the Chiefs averaged 34.6 points per game, scored 38 points or more 4 times, and went 2-5. The NFL has ruined the sport.
Posts: 75,577
Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2008, 04:31 PM   #3
keg in kc keg in kc is offline
oxymoron
 
keg in kc's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: OP/KC/Whatever
Casino cash: $1361157
The thing that I have a hard time grasping is how, if Bush's taxes are less, he's able to increase governmental spending across the board.
Posts: 51,116
keg in kc is obviously part of the inner Circle.keg in kc is obviously part of the inner Circle.keg in kc is obviously part of the inner Circle.keg in kc is obviously part of the inner Circle.keg in kc is obviously part of the inner Circle.keg in kc is obviously part of the inner Circle.keg in kc is obviously part of the inner Circle.keg in kc is obviously part of the inner Circle.keg in kc is obviously part of the inner Circle.keg in kc is obviously part of the inner Circle.keg in kc is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2008, 04:52 PM   #4
jAZ jAZ is offline
Supporter
 
jAZ's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Tucson, AZ
Casino cash: $49095
Quote:
Originally Posted by keg in kc View Post
The thing that I have a hard time grasping is how, if Bush's taxes are less, he's able to increase governmental spending across the board.
I guess borrowing money from your children so that you can have more to spend right now is more acceptable than you might expect.
Posts: 24,756
jAZ has just been standing around suckin' on a big ol' chili dog.jAZ has just been standing around suckin' on a big ol' chili dog.jAZ has just been standing around suckin' on a big ol' chili dog.jAZ has just been standing around suckin' on a big ol' chili dog.jAZ has just been standing around suckin' on a big ol' chili dog.jAZ has just been standing around suckin' on a big ol' chili dog.jAZ has just been standing around suckin' on a big ol' chili dog.jAZ has just been standing around suckin' on a big ol' chili dog.jAZ has just been standing around suckin' on a big ol' chili dog.jAZ has just been standing around suckin' on a big ol' chili dog.jAZ has just been standing around suckin' on a big ol' chili dog.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2008, 04:52 PM   #5
acesn8s acesn8s is offline
MVP
 
acesn8s's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Here
Casino cash: $9154
Quote:
Originally Posted by keg in kc View Post
The thing that I have a hard time grasping is how, if Bush's taxes are less, he's able to increase governmental spending across the board.
According to some the rich are getting richer. If the rich use to make $100,000,000 but now make $150,000,000 they would pay more in taxes in overall dollars.
__________________
Damnit Dorsey!

Damnit Andy!

We deserve better after 44 years.

Last playoff win 1/16/1994
Last Super Bowl 1/11/1970
Posts: 5,583
acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.acesn8s would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2008, 05:23 PM   #6
banyon banyon is offline
Supporter
 
banyon's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Dodge City, Kansas
Casino cash: $81499
Quote:
Originally Posted by acesn8s View Post
Taxes...Whether Democrat or a Republican you will find these statistics enlightening and amazing.

www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html (you can verify the numbers here)


Taxes under Clinton 1999 Taxes under Bush 2008
Single making 30K - tax $8,400 Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $14,000 Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $23,250 Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K - tax $16,800 Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K - tax $21,000 Married making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $38,750 Married making 125K - tax $31,250

.
This seems kind of manipulative with the data, or just flat bad math.

For one thing, the 1998 limits are set artificially high, encompassing the second tax tier from $25,750 all the way to $62,450 and thus taxed at 28.0%. The 2008 tax tier is set to cut off at a different tier, from $8,250-$32,550, or at the 15.0% level. Adjusting for inflation, these are the same people that would have been in the near poverty bracket in 1999 and still paying 15.0%.

This deception carefully continues all the way through the upper brackets, making sure to catch the people that are just in between the two data sets where the limits were raised for inflation.

For someone making $33,000 a year, for example, in 1999 or 2008 (a figure which doesn't try to cheat the data sets) a person would've paid $9240 (28.0%)in taxes in 1999, and then $8250 (at 25.0%) in 2008, so really the difference to them is ninety dollars for their Bush tax cut. This figure would of course be more than offset in the increase in their property taxes, health care costs, fuel costs, and inflation in general, etc. since Bush took office.
Attached Images
File Type: bmp tax2.bmp (789.6 KB, 236 views)

Last edited by banyon; 03-21-2008 at 05:48 PM..
Posts: 32,529
banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2008, 06:02 PM   #7
bango bango is offline
Spacecop
 
bango's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: WCC
Casino cash: $62422
Clinton did not really mess with Reaganomics as much as Bush has. It helped Bill having Republicans acting like Republicans back then. If he had eight years of total control with the Dems having Congress he may not have been so fondly remembered. He also did not really need to raise taxes that much with all of the revenue coming in during a booming economy. Bush could only remember parts of Voodo Economics correct. He lowered taxes, but forgot to cut spending. Clinton's Wars were smaller and less costly too.
__________________
Would the Bigfoot be considered an endangered species?
Posts: 1,421
bango is a favorite in the douche of the year contest.bango is a favorite in the douche of the year contest.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2008, 06:21 PM   #8
SBK SBK is offline
Curry is the pick???
 
SBK's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Georgia
Casino cash: $22487
Quote:
Originally Posted by keg in kc View Post
The thing that I have a hard time grasping is how, if Bush's taxes are less, he's able to increase governmental spending across the board.
Lower tax rate brings in higher revenues for the government.

And there's borrowing trillions more than you could ever pay....
Posts: 8,153
SBK is a favorite in the douche of the year contest.SBK is a favorite in the douche of the year contest.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2008, 06:29 PM   #9
'Hamas' Jenkins 'Hamas' Jenkins is offline
Emptying the Trash
 
'Hamas' Jenkins's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Casino cash: $197804
Quote:
Originally Posted by bango View Post
Clinton did not really mess with Reaganomics as much as Bush has. It helped Bill having Republicans acting like Republicans back then. If he had eight years of total control with the Dems having Congress he may not have been so fondly remembered. He also did not really need to raise taxes that much with all of the revenue coming in during a booming economy. Bush could only remember parts of Voodo Economics correct. He lowered taxes, but forgot to cut spending. Clinton's Wars were smaller and less costly too.
When did Reagan ever cut spending? Reaganomics isn't about low taxes and spending, it's cutting taxes, disproportionately more for the upper classes and putting a brick on the gas pedal of spending.
__________________
A great shot is when you pull it off. A smart shot is when you don't have the guts to try.
Posts: 57,220
'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2008, 06:34 PM   #10
tiptap tiptap is offline
Is this it?
 
tiptap's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Casino cash: $21316
Quote:
Originally Posted by bango View Post
Clinton did not really mess with Reaganomics as much as Bush has. It helped Bill having Republicans acting like Republicans back then. If he had eight years of total control with the Dems having Congress he may not have been so fondly remembered. He also did not really need to raise taxes that much with all of the revenue coming in during a booming economy. Bush could only remember parts of Voodo Economics correct. He lowered taxes, but forgot to cut spending. Clinton's Wars were smaller and less costly too.
Except Reagan didn't cut spending either. He increased government spending. Just like Bush. Except he did add taxes later and of course Bush I did the correct thing and raised taxes. Clinton's surtax carried the government out of the current borrowing excesses. There was a surplus. And of course plenty of capital for private investment.
__________________
Even a superstitious man has certain inalienable rights. He has a right to harbor and indulge his imbecilities as long as he pleases. . . He has a right to argue for them as eloquently as he can, in season and out of season. He has a right to teach them to his children. But certainly he has no right to be protected against the free criticism of those who do not hold them. He has no right to demand that they be treated as sacred. He has no right to preach them without challenge." -H.L. Mencken
Posts: 4,976
tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2008, 06:53 PM   #11
bango bango is offline
Spacecop
 
bango's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: WCC
Casino cash: $62422
Cutting taxes for the wealthy in hoping that they take the surplus and spend it so that a tax stream flows in, or they invest it hopefully. I thought that Ronny cut spending in his first term and raised it in his second mainly on defense in hopes that it would bankrupt the Soviets? I also thought that in doing so the Dems wanted to spend they okayed his spending in trade?
__________________
Would the Bigfoot be considered an endangered species?
Posts: 1,421
bango is a favorite in the douche of the year contest.bango is a favorite in the douche of the year contest.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2008, 07:04 PM   #12
tiptap tiptap is offline
Is this it?
 
tiptap's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Casino cash: $21316
Quote:
Originally Posted by bango View Post
Cutting taxes for the wealthy in hoping that they take the surplus and spend it so that a tax stream flows in, or they invest it hopefully. I thought that Ronny cut spending in his first term and raised it in his second mainly on defense in hopes that it would bankrupt the Soviets? I also thought that in doing so the Dems wanted to spend they okayed his spending in trade?
Tip, the speaker of the House, and Ronny agreed to the spending increase to the military ALONG with spending domestically increase. And at the same time the number of categories of income tax rate was cut. The result was a cut in taxes overall. In the first term. The national dept shot up and the percentage of spending on Defense went up and has only been duplicated during the Bush II regime. As far as bankrupting the Soviets, anyone who truly thought the Soviet Cenralized control was self defeating knew it would come. Ronnie maybe just sped it up some. And I am glad on one hand not to have the Soviet missiles. But why then do have to spend for military expenditures at a rate as if the Soviets, a nation of 150 million and technically savy, is what we are fighting. Fighting a bunch of sand bunnies shouldn't require that kind of expenditure. Additionally the investment in the Military was toward research. As oppose to presently were we throw away materials in the form of real bombs and bullets. And spend money far away from home.
__________________
Even a superstitious man has certain inalienable rights. He has a right to harbor and indulge his imbecilities as long as he pleases. . . He has a right to argue for them as eloquently as he can, in season and out of season. He has a right to teach them to his children. But certainly he has no right to be protected against the free criticism of those who do not hold them. He has no right to demand that they be treated as sacred. He has no right to preach them without challenge." -H.L. Mencken
Posts: 4,976
tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.tiptap is not part of the Right 53.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2008, 07:19 PM   #13
banyon banyon is offline
Supporter
 
banyon's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Dodge City, Kansas
Casino cash: $81499
Quote:
Originally Posted by SBK View Post
Lower tax rate brings in higher revenues for the government.
Hasn't for Bush.

revenue from income taxes fell quite a bit (esp. taking inflation into account, which these numbers do not) from 2001 to 2005.

(in millions of dollars)

2000 1,004,462
2001 994,939
2002 858,345
2003 793,699
2004 808,959
2005 927,722

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfa....cfm?Docid=203
__________________
Posts: 32,529
banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2008, 07:39 PM   #14
Mr. Laz Mr. Laz is offline
Don't Tease Me
 
Mr. Laz's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: KS
Casino cash: $443185
.
Quote:
oooh aahhh... seems so nice under bushy...

BUT!!!!

Total Money Supply in the economy 2000 4.3 trillion dollars

Total Money Supply in the economy 2008 10.2 trillion dollars....

Aka


If each dollar that you earned under clinton was worth a dollar....

Now it is worth 4.3/10.2 = 42 cents.

So we see


2000 single under clinton making 30k - taxed 8400 and you're left with 21,600
2008 single under bush making 30k - taxed 4500 and you're left with 25,500

multiply by .42..... well now you (30k man) REALLY have 10,500 worth of purchasing power under bush in clinton dollars.

did that not convince you?



lets try again....

Canadian Exchange rate 2000 1 us dollar = 1.39 canadian dollars
Canadian Exchange rate 2008 1 us dollar = 95 canadian cents

So we go back to that single individual making 30k....

2000 single under clinton making 30k - taxed 8400 and you're left with 21,600
2008 single under bush making 30k - taxed 4500 and you're left with 25,500

and we multiply the 25,500 x (.95/1.39) = 17,300 that would be... single under bush... in clinton dollars adjusted for canada

A little better if you look at it that way... but the poor chap is still worse off under bush

wait.... lets do it one more time...

2000 pound sterling... $1.55
2008 pound sterling... $2.05

1.55/2.05 = .75

25500 *.75 = 18,750

So... clinton in 2000 and you've got 21,600

or bush in 2008 and you've got 17,300 ; 18,750 ; or 10,500 in 2000 dollars depending on how you look at it after taxes...

lets average

17,300 + 18,750 + 10,500 = 15,500

So... even though you thought you're getting 25,500 it is only worth 15,000 or about 60%

this is getting fun!

Lets compare the guy making 125k to the guy making 30k

Clinton...

125k- 38,750 he's left with 86250 lets say he spent 10,000 on food and clothes... 76,250 disposable income

and our 30k guy under clinton... 21,600 and he spends 10,000 on food and clothes... 11,600 disposable income

THE GAP between rich man and poor man during clinton:

76250/11600 = 6.57

Bush...

125k - 31250 = 93750 but that 93k is only hold 60% value... 56250... he spends 10k on clothes and food... 46,250 disposable

and our 30k guy under bush... 15,500... and he spends 10,000 on food and clothes... 5,500 disposable income

now how much richer is the 125k guy vs the 30k guy?

46250/5500 = 8.4

SO SEE... what really happened was...

under clinton... rich man was 6.5 times richer than poor man

and under bush... he's 8.4 times richer

You don't want me to calculate the change in disparity between the man making over a million dollars annually and the small guy...
Posts: 81,238
Mr. Laz is obviously part of the inner Circle.Mr. Laz is obviously part of the inner Circle.Mr. Laz is obviously part of the inner Circle.Mr. Laz is obviously part of the inner Circle.Mr. Laz is obviously part of the inner Circle.Mr. Laz is obviously part of the inner Circle.Mr. Laz is obviously part of the inner Circle.Mr. Laz is obviously part of the inner Circle.Mr. Laz is obviously part of the inner Circle.Mr. Laz is obviously part of the inner Circle.Mr. Laz is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2008, 07:52 PM   #15
alnorth alnorth is offline
MVP
 
alnorth's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Iowania
Casino cash: $12397942
Quote:
Originally Posted by banyon View Post
For someone making $33,000 a year, for example, in 1999 or 2008 (a figure which doesn't try to cheat the data sets) a person would've paid $9240 (28.0%)in taxes in 1999, and then $8250 (at 25.0%) in 2008, so really the difference to them is ninety dollars for their Bush tax cut. This figure would of course be more than offset in the increase in their property taxes, health care costs, fuel costs, and inflation in general, etc. since Bush took office.
As much as I often like you as a poster, I have to report that both you and acesn8s fail at math. (well, tax math anyway)

It drives me crazy how often people dont get what a marginal tax bracket is, vs their total taxes. People just usually let Turbotax figure it out without understanding why they pay what they pay.

These are *marginal* tax rates. As in, anything above $xx,xxx is taxed at that rate. However, everything below each bracket is still taxed at the lower rates.

Unless you are hit by AMT (which is a flat tax), everyone pays the 0% tax bracket (deductions), the 10% bracket, the 15% bracket, and every bracket up to the last bit they pay into their marginal bracket. If your trying to figure out what it would cost you to earn new money, then your marginal bracket is important, but marginal does not = total taxes.

To use a simple example, lets take that $30,000 single taxpayer under both years. Lets pretend they have no deductions (I am too lazy to look up what the standard deduction was in those two years), so the final answer here will actually be too high.

1999

$25,750 x 0.15 = $3,862.50
$4,250 x 0.28 = $1,190

Tax = $5,052.50

2008

$8,025 x 0.10 = $802.50
$21,975 x 0.15 = $3,296.25

Tax = $4,098.75
__________________
<WarMoose> Think about how stupid the average person is. Now realize that half of them are dumber than that.
<Chunda> Why half?
Posts: 25,465
alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.