What Phil Mickelson has in common with low-income Americans
Professional golfer Phil Mickelson has been in the news lately for complaining — and then apologizing about complaining — about the marginal tax rate he faces under new tax laws at both the federal level and in his home state of California. He claimed he now pays more than 60 percent of his income in taxes.
Presumably, he apologized because now is not the most popular point in U.S. history for questioning the wisdom of the government for taxing sharply the income of Americans who earn tens of millions of dollars a year. And as someone who earns a goodly chunk of his millions precisely because of his popularity (think endorsements), Mickelson has to consider such things.
So perhaps readers will be more interested to know that Mickelson has nothing on low-income Americans when it comes to watching his take-home earnings dissipate with each additional dollar. But not only because of tax rates.
Based on data released earlier last fall by the Congressional Budget Office, the Heritage Foundation produced two charts that depict the way federal benefits help to discourage low-income workers from trying to earn more money.
That one’s pretty self-explanatory. If you are a single parent with one child, our social-welfare system practically begs you not to try to increase your earnings between the $5,000 and $20,000 levels — because, if you do, you stand to lose benefits at a rate nearly equal to the additional income. So, while our system does a decent job of keeping people from being abjectly penniless, the price it imposes on them is a daunting climb to improve their position.
Here’s the second chart:
This is truly breathtaking. If you earn between $10,000 and $23,000 a year in this country, the government takes more of each additional dollar you earn than it does from Phil Mickelson.
Here’s what that looks like in practical terms. At the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour, $10,000 per year comes out to 26.5 hours per week. To reach $23,000 per year, a single parent with a minimum-wage job would have to work 61 hours per week. Who on earth would work twice as hard, knowing they’d actually be able to spend much less than half of each additional dollar they earned?
At $10 an hour, it’s the difference between working 19.2 hours per week and 44.2 hours per week. Again, it is not rational to expect anyone to make that jump. Even worse, consider a mix of the two scenarios: A single parent could get a raise of $2.75 an hour (that’s a wage increase of about 38 percent) and pick up two more eight-hour shifts per week — and be barely better off than he or she was before the raise and the extra work.
There are scenarios in which this arrangement arguably does help people improve their lives: for instance, a single mother who is able to keep herself and her child afloat long enough to finish college and take a job well above the “low-reward zone.” But there are also plenty of scenarios in which low-income Americans may just resign themselves to their current standard of living because the challenge of rising from $10,000 a year of earnings to more than $25,000 a year is so daunting.
That’s not good for them or for our nation. Our policies should encourage additional work both out of respect for individual dignity and because our fiscal condition requires that we have more people paying into the system rather than drawing money out of it.
Judging by our political debates of late, Democrats’ answer to this dilemma is to pretend the whole problem would be solved if only people like Mickelson paid even more in taxes. As Mickelson’s initial comment about his taxes made clear, not all of these high earners are willing to do that. And in any case, the math doesn’t add up.
Mitt Romney did his presidential campaign, and the GOP more broadly, an enormous disservice by suggesting, in that infamous speech to campaign donors, they simply write off these Americans, at least from a political perspective. Instead, the proper approach is to reform the safety net and the tax code so that they help people when they need it most but do not effectively trap them in their present condition. That, and to encourage other related behaviors — such as waiting until marriage to have children in the first place — that keep people from arriving at such a desperate position in the first place.
It is bad policy to punish people for working harder, no matter how much they earn. Republicans have done a good job of convincing the public that they believe this is true for high earners. Their challenge is to make clear that this very sound principle applies to people at the lower end of the income spectrum, too.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
168 comments Add your comment
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
January 23rd, 2013
11:52 am
So we can give them more than the dummycrats do.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
January 23rd, 2013
11:58 am
Start by raising the minimum wage to $10 an hour.
Hillbilly D
January 23rd, 2013
11:59 am
the proper approach is to reform the safety net and the tax code so that they help people when they need it most but do not effectively trap them in their present condition
Agree on that but honestly, not exactly sure how we get there.
That, and to encourage other related behaviors — such as waiting until marriage to have children in the first place — that keep people from arriving at such a desperate position in the first place.
That’s a no-brainer but I’m not sure the government can really do anything about that. Personally, I think churches, across the spectrum, should quit dabbling in politics and concentrate on things like that. That fight can only be won through persuasion, in my opinion.
It is bad policy to punish people for working harder, no matter how much they earn. Republicans have done a good job of convincing the public that they believe this is true for high earners. Their challenge is to make clear that this very sound principle applies to people at the lower end of the income spectrum, too.
That’s it in a nutshell. I’ve said before that the Republican party has lost the “Reagan Democrats” and if they want to be players, they have to get them back. I don’t believe they really understand why or how Reagan appealed to that group. They were what got him elected and he knew how to work that. The current group doesn’t seem to have a clue.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
January 23rd, 2013
12:00 pm
Blog posting is down to 6 hours a day, now? You think you angry white men can keep your stuff together for 6 hours a day?
I doubt it.
Jefferson
January 23rd, 2013
12:02 pm
Phil don’t work, he knows it thus the retreat. No real comparison.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
January 23rd, 2013
12:14 pm
I was also wondering about the 6 hour time frame, will the libs be able to make one comment that comes even close to being thought provoking in such a short time period? They can’t even do it with 24 hours on their side.
Nick
January 23rd, 2013
12:17 pm
I wish Phil did not apologize because he believes what many people in this country do, the systems were in place as a crutch for those in need, but the Dems have made it a permanent form of income and dependency. Why should I work and earn $7 or $10 an hour- when I can earn the same without any taxes staying home?
And yeah he earns $45 Million a year, why should be complain? Because even if he comes down to 50% after all the deductions are taken, you are handing the government $22.5M a year for what? They are not taking these tax hikes in and reducing spending, but rather the opposite to spend what additional revenue they took in. I have worked 28 years since I was 16 and after 5 years of being self employed, I am succeeding and making top $- but living and working in NYC- Federal, State and City I am starting at 51% without sales, real estate, payroll, SS and all the other wonderful taxes here in NY. And for this so called leader to tell me I do not pay my fair share is why I regretted supporting the schmuck in 08. And I know of VERY FEW people that have become successful or climbed out of poverty thanks to welfare or the other social programs. What kind of system rewards you for having more kids and gives you more money when you do? There is zero incentive for these people to go out and work and he won because he is promising them these benefits indefinetley and those evil working folk can pay 100% in taxes and it would not make a big different in the scheme of what we are facing that is the sad reality.
Aquagirl
January 23rd, 2013
12:17 pm
I’ve said before that the Republican party has lost the “Reagan Democrats” and if they want to be players, they have to get them back.
It starts with sane, objective observations like Kyle’s. Unfortunately the Republicans made a deal with two devils—talk radio and the Christian Coalition. That worked for a few years but you can only spend so much time screeching about parasites, gays, and socialists before normal folks decide you’re insane. As Kyle pointed out it’s gotten so bad their last presidential candidate had to adopt and spout these views.
Republicans should learn from the Democrats—exorcise (maybe literally) the portion that thinks they’ll win by setting up scary strawmen. Relying on fear and hatred against “those people” is not a long-term strategy. There are only so many Aesops in the world.
Matz
January 23rd, 2013
12:19 pm
You lost me at “Mickelson.”
Just Saying..
January 23rd, 2013
12:20 pm
Alright, good information.
Legislation to address the problem explained here would look like?
Or better to vote no on Obamacare 33 more times?
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
January 23rd, 2013
12:25 pm
Aesops, who happens to be married to one of “those” people.
Republicans should learn from the Democrats—exorcise (maybe literally) the portion that thinks they’ll win by setting up scary strawmen.
The dummycrat party would literally not exist if it didn’t have warehouses full of strawmen. The war on women? Pushing grandma over the cliff?
Our mistake is listening to liberals when they offer advice. We should learn to politely listen, say to them “that’s nice” and then do exactly what Kyle did this morning – articulate sound policy to those willing to hear it. The exact opposite of what they wish us to do – out pander them.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
January 23rd, 2013
12:28 pm
Rephrase that last little bit – “try to” out pander them.
MANGLER
January 23rd, 2013
12:38 pm
Preach about waiting until marriage to have a baby / don’t allow marriage to everyone who wants it
Refuse to talk about sex in schools outside of only saying “don’t do it” / make them fend for themselves because they got pregnant
Declaring that life starts at the moment of fertilization / eliminate funding for birth control and contraceptive programs
Don’t want to allow abortions / don’t want to help support the child or mother
Scream for smaller government / legislate sexual behavior and personal decisions
All life is sacred / don’t touch the guns
Many mixed signals y’all got
Aquagirl
January 23rd, 2013
12:40 pm
Aesops, who happens to be married to one of “those” people.
You’re married to a low income single parent with child(ren)? I know it’s not kosher to call folks a liar here, but that seems—um, not really possible.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
January 23rd, 2013
12:41 pm
One of our future articulaters, Rand Paul, left a giant, gaping hole this morning in the dummycrats presidential prospects for 2016.
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
12:43 pm
Kyle: “It is bad policy to punish people for working harder, no matter how much they earn.”
That’s it in a nutshell. Indeed. Not bad policy, but bad thinking. Some people looking at taxes as “a punishment,” instead of as dues paid for living in a civilized society, and a payment for all that the society is doing to make their earning possible.
Logical Dude
January 23rd, 2013
12:43 pm
A quick glance at the first chart shows someone earning $5000 has about $20,000 in disposable income.
So, a quick glance tells me the yellow shaded area is BS.
Unless they define “disposable income” differently that I do. Nobody will have more disposable income than what they earn.
Skip
January 23rd, 2013
12:44 pm
Except he’s not paying 60% so all this is BS. Or does a child do his taxes? Go back to bed Kyle, you got nothing.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
January 23rd, 2013
12:45 pm
You’ve divided “those people” into subcategories now, aquagirl?
DeborahinAthens
January 23rd, 2013
12:45 pm
You are so full of it! I am in the next to the highest tax bracket, and I got here by sheer hard work–12 hour days, weekends meeting clients, etc. No one, no one, no one in their right mind would say, “Gee whiz, if I increase my pay by $50,000 I might go into the next bracket and instead of paying 36% I will have to pay 39.5%. I’ll just kick back.” People, if you have a brain, do some calculations. The net amount you put in your pocket is what drives your ambition–unless you are an idiot. Just as important, no employer who sees an increase in sales of his product and needs to ramp up production says, “Gee, my orders are up 100% from last year and I don’t have any more widgets in inventory, but oh, golly, gee, if I hire more production workers, I have to pay more benefits, my costs of doing business will go up. I’ll just ship these last few widgets, and tell those other customers to go buy their widgets at my competitor.” Read my lips, lower taxes do not stimulate economies and create jobs. If that were true, we would not have had two massive recessions and the incredible shucking of jobs under George W. Bush. Under his regime, we had the lowest tax rates in my memory. But you guys keep nattering about it and showing graphs from the the biased Heritage Foundation, and believe it. Meanwhile, I am proud to pay my share of taxes to make this the greatest country in the world, where our roads are paved, we fly safely, our soldier citizens can fight for us without having to ask their Moms to raise money for body armor, our police show up on time, the fire departments are good. You cannot get services for free.
Skip
January 23rd, 2013
12:47 pm
Except he doesn’t pay 60% so all this is BS. Get a 5Th grader to do his taxes so he comes out better.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 23rd, 2013
12:48 pm
Legislation to address the problem explained here would look like?
———-
Current policy looks like record poverty, four years of unemployment not seen since the 1930s, and annual trillion-dollar deficits.
JDW
January 23rd, 2013
12:49 pm
“If you are a single parent with one child, our social-welfare system practically begs you not to try to increase your earnings between the $5,000 and $20,000 levels — because, if you do, you stand to lose benefits at a rate nearly equal to the additional income. ”
Kyle you are ABSOLUTLY RIGHT! Could you please call the powers that be in the Republican Party today and ask them to stop insisting on the asinine means testing laws that have been demanded in the past and have led to this injustice. Benefits should decrease on a percentage basis, say 30 to 40 cents on the dollar, not dollar for dollar as earned income rises.
Dang!
January 23rd, 2013
12:49 pm
Wouldn’t it be nice if Obama would just go ahead and tell us what a “fair share” would be? Even after his latest tax increase on the upper middle class, he is still saying he wants more so that the producers in this country pay their fair share. As it stands now, it is always a little more than they pay now.
saywhat?
January 23rd, 2013
12:50 pm
And the conservative solution to this problem is……..
a) Taper off assistance at a higher income level
b) Lower the amount of assistance given at lower income levels.
c) Raise the minmum wage
d) a and c
The correct conservative answer is of course “b”. Not because it is unfair that people should have to work harder for less, conservatives are quite alright with that.(After all, its what they want teachers and union members to do). They want to make sure that even a crappy income earned by doing backbreaking work for long hours looks desirable in comparison to squeaking by while doing a little less work, getting a little help from the government, but getting to spend a little time with your family.
In other words, to help somebody over a wall, coservatives want to dig a deeper ditch in front of it.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 23rd, 2013
12:52 pm
DeborahInAthens: You cannot get services for free.
————
The half of Americans who pay no income taxes do.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 23rd, 2013
12:58 pm
The conservative solution is to get Obozo’s foot off the neck of the economy. Unfortunately, the parasites decided to go with the sure thing–the handouts Obozo sends them.
Bruno
January 23rd, 2013
12:59 pm
Kyle: Our policies should encourage additional work both out of respect for individual dignity and because our fiscal condition requires that we have more people paying into the system rather than drawing money out of it.
Kyle: That, and to encourage other related behaviors — such as waiting until marriage to have children in the first place — that keep people from arriving at such a desperate position in the first place.
Aquagirl: but you can only spend so much time screeching about parasites, gays, and socialists before normal folks decide you’re insane.
Obviously people like Aquagirl don’t like the manner in which the message is being delivered (and there is some validity to her point), but in the end the conservative vision for our country (strong, intact families; hard work; self-reliance) creates the best results, both individually and collectively. For whatever reason, the Libs don’t embrace this vision, and seem more focused on validating and subsidizing single parenthood/alternative lifestyles.
The Lib motivation behind this is an embrace of “diversity” and a refusal to “punish” those who make bad choices. And again, there is some validity in this viewpoint. No one wants to live in a Taliban-like society with draconian punishments for anyone who dares to be different. However, promoting “diversity” comes at the expense of “unity”. Not “punishing” those who makes bad choices ultimately supports and enables the bad choices. There has to be a balance.
JDW
January 23rd, 2013
12:59 pm
BTW as for Phil…there is a reason he is not in tax preperation. His top max tax rate is is the 50% range…he gets to deduct those state taxes prior to paying his federal taxes.
Aquagirl
January 23rd, 2013
12:59 pm
You’ve divided “those people” into subcategories now, aquagirl?
“Those people” is a universal concept, so yes, there are subcategories. If you lived in 18th century Spain those people might have been Romani.
The particular group changes but the idea is the same. Those People are not like you, they are dangerous to your family, inferior, and are the cause of society’s ills. You can’t trust them because they’re always waiting to destroy your way of life.
Go back and read some of your posts and you’ll see “those people” are your favorite topic.
Logical Dude
January 23rd, 2013
1:02 pm
Looking deeper, I see that it’s the government assistance that causes “disposable income” to be above earnings.
Yep, still not what *I* would call “disposable income”, but I see and agree with the conclusions that yes, there should be more incentives to move up in earnings.
But not at the expense of penalizing the most needy in the country.
Dang!
January 23rd, 2013
1:03 pm
A more important threshhold is the point at which the mother you described begins to lose benefits with a higher income. As it stands,this person gets:
Section eight assistance or free housing.
food stamps.
earned income credits.
free childcare.
free healthcare.
Etc., etc.
Past a certain point, this all goes away. We have designed a welfare state, disguised as compassion.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
January 23rd, 2013
1:05 pm
You can’t trust them because they’re always waiting to destroy your way of life.
Look in the mirror, ag, I’m “those people” in the world you live in.
brian
January 23rd, 2013
1:12 pm
enjoy this life rich people because if the religous texst are right, people who have more than they now what to do with [glutney] are going to end up in hell. Remember half the people on this earth do not receive daily food requirements.
Bruno
January 23rd, 2013
1:14 pm
Preach about waiting until marriage to have a baby / don’t allow marriage to everyone who wants it
Kind of a non-sequiter there, Mangler. Last I checked, gay people cannot procreate with their partners.
Refuse to talk about sex in schools outside of only saying “don’t do it” / make them fend for themselves because they got pregnant
The Dem solution?? Hand out contraceptives to elementary school children, refuse to require parental permission for underage abortions.
Declaring that life starts at the moment of fertilization / eliminate funding for birth control and contraceptive programs
In case you skipped biology class, life does begin at the moment of fertilization. And, in case you forgot, all “funding” comes from someone else’s pocket. Why shouldn’t folks pay for their own birth control, especially in light of how cheap condoms are.
Don’t want to allow abortions / don’t want to help support the child or mother
See my 12:59, Mangler.
Scream for smaller government / legislate sexual behavior and personal decisions
My guess is that the majority of conservatives like myself have no interest in legislating anyone’s sexual behavior or personal decisions as long as those decisions don’t harm others.
All life is sacred / don’t touch the guns
Only matched by the hypocrisy on the Left regarding their rejection of the death penalty while simultaneously pushing for unrestricted abortions.
TBone
January 23rd, 2013
1:14 pm
Phil get the hell out of Californication and move to somewhere you can enjoy your own fruits from your labor and not be a slave to the state. I hear Florida is nice until hurricane season.
Logical Dude
January 23rd, 2013
1:16 pm
Kyle: Republicans have done a good job of convincing the public that they believe this is true for high earners. Their challenge is to make clear that this very sound principle applies to people at the lower end of the income spectrum, too.
Exactly right, Kyle. Unfortunately, it seems as if the Republicans don’t care at all about low income earners at all. I know it’s not totally true, but almost every national/state message regarding low income earners makes it look like they are “takers”, “moochers”, and “that 47% that will vote for Obama”.
IF Republicans ever get a good message again, they’ll bring good solutions for all earners, not just whine about class warfare when taxes might go up on the “rich”.
td
January 23rd, 2013
1:16 pm
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
12:43 pm
Kyle: “It is bad policy to punish people for working harder, no matter how much they earn.”
That’s it in a nutshell. Indeed. Not bad policy, but bad thinking. Some people looking at taxes as “a punishment,” instead of as dues paid for living in a civilized society, and a payment for all that the society is doing to make their earning possible.
Please enlighten us to what the 47% that pay no dues provide to the “civilized society”? What contributions do they make?
Bruno
January 23rd, 2013
1:18 pm
Looking deeper, I see that it’s the government assistance that causes “disposable income” to be above earnings.
Yep, still not what *I* would call “disposable income”, but I see and agree with the conclusions that yes, there should be more incentives to move up in earnings.
Kind of fun watching that dim bulb grow a little brighter now and again…….
Aquagirl
January 23rd, 2013
1:22 pm
Look in the mirror, ag, I’m “those people” in the world you live in.
Why would you say that? If you’re really a living, walking, breathing stereotype of “those people” you’d be the first one I’d ever met. Did you climb out of a novel or TV show? People IRL aren’t like that. And it’s why I no longer vote Republican—I’m not convinced Those People Of The 47% are lying on their couches plotting to get my money, when they aren’t in line at the grocery store buying steak and beer next to their EBT stuff. Or fitting rimz on their car or whatever you think fills the stereotypical Taker’s days.
On the other hand you think in absolutes so maybe you really are a Sith Lord, complete with scary facial features and/or fantastically evil laugh. Picturing Darth Maul on a keyboard is kind of amusing.
Logical Dude
January 23rd, 2013
1:25 pm
Bruno: Kind of fun watching that dim bulb grow a little brighter now and again…
Ain’t it though? Like I said in my first post “at first glance” , and like I said in my second post “Looking Deeper”.
Now, how can Republicans adjust their message that yes, they actually care about these folks earning under $20,000 a year?
Bruno
January 23rd, 2013
1:27 pm
The particular group changes but the idea is the same. Those People are not like you, they are dangerous to your family, inferior, and are the cause of society’s ills. You can’t trust them because they’re always waiting to destroy your way of life.
So, praytell, Aquagirl, how is this description any different from the average Lib’s feeling toward those who call themselves “conservative”??
Once again, you Libs keep deluding yourselves that you’re somehow better than the average Con. You’re not.
td
January 23rd, 2013
1:35 pm
What happens if that single mom with one child making $7.50 or $10 an hour had been married to the father of the child and he was making and additional $7.50 or $10 an hour? It seems to me that having children out of wedlock or having children before you have an education or marketable skill set is the real problem.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 23rd, 2013
1:38 pm
JDW: BTW as for Phil…there is a reason he is not in tax preperation. His top max tax rate is is the 50% range…he gets to deduct those state taxes prior to paying his federal taxes.
——–
Wrong. At his income level, the AMT would kick in, essentially eliminating the deduction for state taxes. Been there…
commoncents
January 23rd, 2013
1:38 pm
Logical Dude: “Now, how can Republicans adjust their message that yes, they actually care about these folks earning under $20,000 a year?”
If those folks earning less than $20,000 listened and heeded the advice, the class wouldn’t be filled with single parents. If the evil republicans reduced benefit amounts, those who worked harder/longer/in the first place would see an immediate value in their productivity, and possibly be inclined to continue.
The republicans in congress care, but most of them are too stupid to relay that message properly on the national level.
Jefferson
January 23rd, 2013
1:47 pm
Those born with the silver spoon never truly understand the working poor, but they talk about them.
1961_Xer
January 23rd, 2013
1:52 pm
Nobody will have more disposable income than what they earn.
Sure they will. Refundable Tax Credits. SNAP. How many more sources of unearned disposable income do you need? We’re the Federal and State governments, and we have plenty.
1961_Xer
January 23rd, 2013
1:56 pm
The republicans in congress care, but most of them are too stupid to relay that message properly on the national level.
“Tough love” does not invite the votes. Appeals of personal responsibility does not invite votes. Cutting them off the dole does not invite votes.
If you are giving me $xxx per week, no amount of reasoning/logic/love behind taking that $xxx from me is going to get me to vote for you.
Bruno
January 23rd, 2013
1:57 pm
Now, how can Republicans adjust their message that yes, they actually care about these folks earning under $20,000 a year?
LD–I can only answer your question by giving you my background. I grew up in the poorest family in town, primarily due to the fact that my father was a compulsive gambler. My parents divorced when I was about 13, leaving my mother to raise us all by her lonesome. Although we qualified for state assistance, we chose not to accept it, choosing to work our way out of poverty instead. As such, my mom worked 3 jobs while all of us kids took on jobs as well. My first full-time job was at age 11, and I haven’t stopped working since.
Quite frankly, I don’t feel that the State owes anyone anything other than an opportunity. In my case, I studied hard, aced my college entrance exams, and was accepted to a prestigious engineering school (Harvey Mudd College).
Obviously not everyone can replicate my pathway, but where there’s a will, there’s a way.
mike
January 23rd, 2013
1:58 pm
Yes it is terrible that ole Phil has to pay more taxes on all the money he earns because of his golfing skills. I see he is really struggling like all those working poor families, like all those soldiers and their families, like all those eldery people who have worked their whole lives and just about anybody else who is struggling everyday to survive. It is pretty sad this is all you goobers talk about each and everyday.
Daly
January 23rd, 2013
1:58 pm
Quit worrying about what Phil makes. If anyone wants to make what Phil makes, then a good start would be to head to the golfing range and hit balls 8 hrs a day everyday. Go ahead! What are you waiting for?
guest
January 23rd, 2013
2:02 pm
Good grief Mike, way to miss the entire point.
Mark
January 23rd, 2013
2:03 pm
First off you can’t really live on 10K/yr as a single parent. You are better off on welfare than flipping burgers at McD’s or stocking shelves at Wal-Mart. This data makes sense because the spot between 10 to 20K is about the spot that you lose all your welfare/gov’t benefits. Now what would make sense is that people on welfare would have go to an 2 year associate program so that they can earn 30K a year. If I had a choice between welfare or McD’s (not corporate in Oakbrook, they’ve been a client so that’s different) I would pick welfare and have the time to improve myself to earn a living wage not a completely hand to mouth wage. It’s disgusting that you’re comparing Lefty to people who make 5k a year. There is not much dignity being 40 and flipping burgers in a rural McD’s. Not much dignity at all
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
January 23rd, 2013
2:13 pm
I give up, what is a “Sith Lord?”
JF McNamara
January 23rd, 2013
2:16 pm
I don’t think this is a shocker. The problem has existed for years. What’s the solution?
Dusty
January 23rd, 2013
2:26 pm
Well, KYLE, You could have posted your last paragragh alone and I would have gotten the message. Honesty and hardwork can overcome many things. I wish we could post that about every day of the week.with the additional “So try it!”..
It is the message of the GOP from every conservative no matter how;liberals try to change it. Has nothing to do with radio personalities, whether you own a gun or not, or even actual political participation. It is merely a standard that has been proven “good” for centuries.
And…
Thank you, BRUNO, for your honesty and self reliance when so much worked against you. I believe we could use you as the “poster boy ” of conservative principles. You have lived it, risen with it, and excelled.
I believe that is the American way once held in high regard. .There’s still hope to retain it. But some days I worry.
Cheesy Grits is gone but not forgotten
January 23rd, 2013
2:27 pm
I can hear the Violins playing softly for Phil now.
HDB
January 23rd, 2013
2:32 pm
When people don’t have a path towards progression, they tend to stagnate. What should be looked at is creating a pathway of mobility. What should be done is the linking of welfare benefits to education and job training. Benefits shouldn’t be cut until the program is completed and the person gets a full time job…or six years, whichever comes first. Also, child care and universal health care would assist greatly in getting persons off of welfare. If that person gets an internship during that training, let that person earn that wage in addition to the benefits…that would motivate one to reach for a higher goal….and work towards self-sufficiency!!
Comparing a welfare recipient to Lefty, however, isn’t appropriate at best; Lefty has the flexibility to move to another state, place more of his income in tax-deferred/tax-free status, thereby reducing his tax burden to where he could get away without paying ANY taxes!!
Aquagirl
January 23rd, 2013
2:32 pm
I give up, what is a “Sith Lord?”
Sorry, I forget not everyone attends Dragon*Con.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgpytjlW5wU
The guy in black—the future Darth Vader—is a Sith Lord. I’m surprised you haven’t heard the term before because it’s a lib meme.
George Lucas is certainly someone you’d call a lib, a lot of people think he put that line in there deliberately as a reference to the “you’re with us, or you’re with the terrorists” line from George W. Bush in Sept. 2001.
Frankly I think Mr. Lucas was misguided, as Dick Cheney was clearly the Sith Lord in that administration.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
January 23rd, 2013
2:37 pm
Damn, cheesy said something coherent. And here I thought it would never happen.
Real Athens
January 23rd, 2013
2:38 pm
“Rand Paul, left a giant, gaping hole this morning in the dummycrats presidential prospects for 2016.”
No fan of “monarchies” myself, but If you truly believe this to be true, you’re a damn fool.
md
January 23rd, 2013
2:41 pm
“Start by raising the minimum wage to $10 an hour.”
If it were that easy, why not make it $20, $30, etc…..
Going up to 10 from 7 might not be a problem for corps that are making some profit, but for those that may be in the hole or just breaking even it would most likely mean someone has to go. If a corp only has $14 to pay employees in it’s budget, instead of having 2 employees it can then only afford 1…….
So be careful what you wish for……
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
January 23rd, 2013
2:41 pm
Why, of course, I forgot. The libs would vote for someone who shirked their basic responsibilities and got four American heroes killed and one of our embassies burnt slam to the ground. What was I thinking?
md
January 23rd, 2013
2:44 pm
“There is not much dignity being 40 and flipping burgers in a rural McD’s.”
And why is somebody that is 40 flipping burgers in the first place?
Dusty
January 23rd, 2013
2:51 pm
MarkV
You show the weakness of America’s last decades. That is: If you can get more money from government handouts, then don’t do honest lowlevel work such as flipping hamburgers or picking fruit. That’s it! Throw away your freedom of self reliance. Live off the money of others (taxes). Be a taker and not a giver.
Their only pride left will be “I don’t work at no McDonald’s!”
JDW
January 23rd, 2013
2:58 pm
@LBB…”Wrong. At his income level, the AMT would kick in, essentially eliminating the deduction for state taxes. Been there…”
I believe that would only happen should his effective rate fall below 28% which it should not.
Real Athens
January 23rd, 2013
3:02 pm
The AMT has been “de-fanged”. It is now indexed to inflation ala the fiscal cliff negotiations.
http://business.time.com/2013/01/03/at-long-last-a-permanent-patch-for-a-dreaded-tax/
Bruno
January 23rd, 2013
3:03 pm
Thank you, BRUNO, for your honesty and self reliance when so much worked against you. I believe we could use you as the “poster boy ” of conservative principles. You have lived it, risen with it, and excelled.
Dusty–Thanks for the compliment, but none is needed. I came from a time and place where you were expected to work and provide for yourself, it was the norm. I’m not sure what happened along the way to lead us to the current Entitlement Mentality.
getalife
January 23rd, 2013
3:06 pm
Keep slobbering on the wealth cons.
Stay the course.
Our President need the house.
Thank you.
JamVet
January 23rd, 2013
3:08 pm
What was I thinking?
Probably the same thing as that loser and coward Mitt Romney – blame our public servants/employees of Uncle Sam for sympathizing with their murderers.
Michelson could always move to Singapore…
Dusty
January 23rd, 2013
3:13 pm
JFMcNamara asked: what is the solution to our problem of non working , dependent on government Americans?
New immigrants (sometimes illegal) have shown us how to solve one problem. They come and work for basic wages and filll the needs for the foundation of economic survival. They survive happily with families, send money “home” to support others and usually possess a strong faith.. They work hard, support each other, practice thrift, and appreciate employment.
They show us repeatedly how it can be done with self reliance. and determination, something so many others have forgotten.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 23rd, 2013
3:20 pm
Rather than the successful understanding the poor, we should insist that the poor understand the successful. Maybe they would learn to do the things that lead to success.
Dusty
January 23rd, 2013
3:25 pm
Here comes GETALIFE with “slobbering” and JAMVET with his disgust of anyone rich, ’specially Romney, a man in the political world who would dare run for the presidency
Wealth envy is an ugly thing but some people can’t hide it.
I ‘m leaving for some fresh air. .
Bruno
January 23rd, 2013
3:29 pm
Rather than the successful understanding the poor, we should insist that the poor understand the successful. Maybe they would learn to do the things that lead to success.
LBB–A suggestion I’ve made for years. IMO, it’s a waste of time to study failure.
It seems that some school programs are making a swipe at “success training” by putting buzzwords on their signs. Personally, I think Newt’s idea about allowing kids to work as school janitors was right on the mark. Nothing prepares you for work better than work.
Donald Norman, Marietta GA
January 23rd, 2013
3:41 pm
I read quite a bit of this article, but could not hold my breath long enough to complete it. Indeed, the system is broken, at least if it intended to lift folks out of poverty. If, as I suspect, the system is designed to keep people on the public nipple then it works just fine.
Before I address the broken system, however, I’d like to clear up the intentionally muddy waters. The government does not take more and more from folks caught in it’s clutches. It gives them less because they are earning more.. There is the disincentive for work.
The fix is really very simple. Instead of lowering the entitlement by the same (or whatever the ratio is, ‘m not sure.) amount the working poor increase their income; the system should reward work by implementing a different ration of entitlement taken away for increased income. Say, for example, Sally is a single mom who works part-time, but does not make enough to make ends meet. So, public largess agrees to make up the difference so that she and her children are clothed, sheltered, and feed. In time Sally is made full-time and doubles her income. It would be stupid for her to take the full-time position if the public funds are lowered by the same amount. But, if the entitlement were lowered one dollar for every four dollars of increase it would make sense for Sally to jump at the raise.
This way if Sally began by receiving $12,000 in entitlements while she was earning $7,000 at her job, she could double her income on the job and earn $14,000 while still receiving $9,000 in support ($12,000 – ($1 of every $4 of increased pay)) for a total of $23,000. A setup like this would make since all around. It is good for Sally because she realizes that there is a way off the public dole. Her self image will be lifted along with her income. It’s good for the government in the long run because Sally and her family will, in the near future, will be completely self-supported as she continues to make herself more and more valuable as an employee.
Aquagirl
January 23rd, 2013
3:43 pm
IMO, it’s a waste of time to study failure.
Not at all. If you don’t know what’s wrong, how can you fix it? The problem is we study things but we don’t have the will to fix them. That’s too much trouble. Or sometimes the problem costs more to fix than to band-aid. We can’t fix everything.
If someone is 40 and flipping burgers they might have an IQ of 80. Maybe they were basically raised by wolves and snacked on lead paint chips as a child. Cry as you might, that person will probably never be self-supporting. Screaming at them to get off the dole and get sterilized is not realistic.
Matt321
January 23rd, 2013
3:52 pm
Strange to see you credit Heritage, when this has been a problem widely talked about among liberal think tanks for a long time. But good to see you on board reducing effective marginal rates of the poor!
For those interested in policy prescriptions, Milton Friedman proposed a negative income tax to replace all poverty programs. A variant of this would be a universal tax credit, paid out in monthly installments, to every American with an income of less than, let’s say, one million dollars (indexed for inflation). The universal tax credit could be set to the poverty line (so no one lives below the poverty line), a living wage, whatever.
Of course, paying for this could be a problem. You could, for example, eliminate every single loophole, deduction, credit, etc., and write a multi-tiered progressive marginal tax rate scheme (that treats every dollar that comes in the door as income, whether inheritance, gift, earned, or unearned) to pay for it all. This would mean every American would be guaranteed food and shelter, and the wealthier you were, the more you’d contribute to this American guarantee. Also, since you got the tax credit no matter what, there’d be no higher effective marginal rates on low income earners.
Peadawg
January 23rd, 2013
3:53 pm
Read all the way to “the Heritage Foundation” and stopped.
Michael
January 23rd, 2013
3:54 pm
Who the heck is his accountant? Might get Romney’s so he can bring it on down to 12%.
Jefferson
January 23rd, 2013
3:57 pm
A man (or woman) that takes pride in his job and does it well deserves respect no matter what his job,pay or age is. To be condiscending of pay and occupations is a childish character flaw that just shows your mommy and daddy did a poor job raising you.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
January 23rd, 2013
4:06 pm
So, here we are. Bush gets a memo saying that al qaeda is threatening to attack the US. Now, as most of you already know, the US is a rather large place. What should Bushie have done? Put some cannons at the Jefferson Memorial? Mount some AA on the Golden Gate Bridge? M1 Abrams patrolling the Superdome? 50 Cal machine guns bristling from the windows of your neighborhood A&P?
So how did the libs react to this memo after 9/11?
Now, fast forward, bruno’s office gets a memo from one of her own employees detailing threats against a specific place that even had an address, so the libs could find it. Turns out, bruno doesn’t read her mail at work. She doesn’t even have any procedures in place, you know, like daily situational briefings about the different areas of the world, presented to her by people she employs. Nope, it seems as though memos and cables are scratch paper or go straight in the trash can under bruno’s watch. Apparently, no one has been instructed to read such material and share the information with the person in charge of making the decisions.
And how do the libs react to this?
Attack Rand Paul.
Bruno
January 23rd, 2013
4:06 pm
Not at all. If you don’t know what’s wrong, how can you fix it? The problem is we study things but we don’t have the will to fix them.
It’s kind of a subtle point, Aquagirl, but the only way to know what’s “wrong” is to fully understand what makes things “right”. Then, from a practical standpoint, it’s a lot easier to simply do what’s “right” rather than trying to remedy 10,000,000 wrong ways.
A very close analogy exists in health care. It’s a lot easier and more effective to practice good health habits than to try to cure the 10,000,000 various illnesses which result when we don’t practice good health habits.
Bruno
January 23rd, 2013
4:14 pm
If someone is 40 and flipping burgers they might have an IQ of 80. Maybe they were basically raised by wolves and snacked on lead paint chips as a child. Cry as you might, that person will probably never be self-supporting. Screaming at them to get off the dole and get sterilized is not realistic.
And in case you’re misinformed, Aquagirl, I’m fully in favor of helping those who CAN’T help themselves, as is every conservative I’ve ever met. I draw the line at those who WON’T help themselves.
A man (or woman) that takes pride in his job and does it well deserves respect no matter what his job,pay or age is. To be condiscending of pay and occupations is a childish character flaw that just shows your mommy and daddy did a poor job raising you.
I couldn’t agree more, Jefferson. The condescension you speak of exists on both sides of the political aisle, however. On the Con side, it’s usually expressed directly. On the Lib side, it’s typically disguised as some kind of benevolent paternalism.
wallbanger
January 23rd, 2013
4:19 pm
This makes too much sense for most liberals to even understand it.
tireofit
January 23rd, 2013
4:20 pm
A point could be made that no one needs more than 100,000,000 dollars. If that’s not enough for someone then you know where you can go. I certainly live on that.
JamVet
January 23rd, 2013
4:25 pm
Brilliant analysis, wallbanger! Absolutely brilliant!
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
4:30 pm
td @ 1:16 pm
“Please enlighten us to what the 47% that pay no dues provide to the “civilized society”? What contributions do they make?”
They make things and provide services for others, such as for you, td, at incomes that even the Republicans themselves have considered too low and have made laws to provide those people with assistance and not require them to pay taxes.
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
4:33 pm
Dusty @ 2:26 pm
“Well, KYLE, You could have posted your last paragragh alone and I would have gotten the message. “
The last paragraph? The one about taxes being punishment? Is that how you understand what taxes are?
Aquagirl
January 23rd, 2013
4:38 pm
I’m fully in favor of helping those who CAN’T help themselves, as is every conservative I’ve ever met. I draw the line at those who WON’T help themselves.
Who are you to decide who can’t and who won’t? I’ve worked with functionally illiterate adults who are quite intelligent, but they will never read or write very well. I was raised in a house with two parents who read constantly. I don’t remember a time I couldn’t read. If I had been raised by a crack addict who wh@red me out at 14, I doubt I would have those skills.
The idea of working hard and pulling yourself up by your bootstraps doesn’t extend as far as many conservative/Republicans think. Some people overcome great adversity, we should encourage that, but I’m not gonna slam anyone who doesn’t climb every freakin’ mountain. I don’t sit around and decide if they’re lazy or not based on 5 seconds of observation in the grocery store line where its OMG lookit that welfare mamma and her food stamps! Slut!
Again, that’s why I no longer vote Republican, the party shows a complete lack of empathy. That’s why they fought gay marriage to the last gasp, yanking out all sorts of nonsense and babble.
Most people want to work, raise a family, and go about their business as long as you extend them the same courtesy. A few don’t. The Republican non-intelligentsia inflates the latter group to a Mongol horde who will pick ‘Merican clean like locusts and take yer guuuuuunnnnssss!
That’s simply not true, unless you live in talk radio land.
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
4:40 pm
Dusty @ 2:51 pm
“If you can get more money from government handouts, then don’t do honest lowlevel work such as flipping hamburgers or picking fruit.
Dusty,
Those people who flip burgers or are picking fruit, those are the moochers you Republican heroes are so disdainful about, when they talk about the 47% who do not pay federal taxes.
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
January 23rd, 2013
4:51 pm
I think you explain how this entitlement scheme works, and that is what it is, a scheme, is that it is based on good intentions. We have been so long without any improvement or success in reducing poverty, that instead of admitting we were wrong and changing our policies, we have settled for just doing things we hope might help.
The Democrats are happy to settle for trying to do something beneficial, even if it doesn’t work, because they are rewarded with a ever growing voter base, that cheers their misguided attempts to help. They are deemed the good folks because they care; and the folks, who say it is not working and we need to quit pretending it is and try other things, are branded the bad people.
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
January 23rd, 2013
5:04 pm
Who are you to decide who can’t and who won’t?
Who are you to decide who can pay more in taxes. You may know the gross income, but you don’t know the liabilities, maybe a kid with cancer, maybe a brother in law with a mental condition, but we are never asked, can you pay more? The government makes this big pronouncement, we need to do more and we don’t have the money, so we are raising your taxes. We do not get to respond, we just have to pony up.
What if we said, hey Mr. President, I really had a hard year and although I made all this money, my outgo was tremendous, and I was wondering could I get a break for just one year, and use that money to help my mother pay off all her medical bills. I don’t think you would get any sympathy.
Buzzy
January 23rd, 2013
5:21 pm
I have to investigate any statistics or charts or opinions from the Heritage Foundation very carefully before I took them to be true.
td
January 23rd, 2013
5:24 pm
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
4:33 pm
Dusty @ 2:26 pm
“Well, KYLE, You could have posted your last paragragh alone and I would have gotten the message. “
The last paragraph? The one about taxes being punishment? Is that how you understand what taxes are?
Absolutely taxes are punishment when they are progressive in nature. If all taxes were the same rate then the harder you work, the more education you get and the more marketable your skill set then the more money you get to keep. That is called incentive for making the right choices in life and working hard. We current reward laziness.
JamVet
January 23rd, 2013
5:28 pm
We currently reward laziness and sheltered wealth and punish human labor and necessities.
Long live the plutocracy!
md
January 23rd, 2013
5:31 pm
A can’t is one that would gladly trade places with a won’t but is unable to………….I have a family full of wont’s, and believe me they could if they wanted to.
And the law of averages says my family isn’t much different than all the others…….
Hillbilly D
January 23rd, 2013
5:45 pm
A man (or woman) that takes pride in his job and does it well deserves respect no matter what his job,pay or age is.
Amen to that. I ain’t near being perfect but I’ve always figured I was no better than anybody else and nobody else is any better than me. We’re all the same in God’s eyes. Like all humans, I fall short but I do my damndest to look down at no man and to look up to no man, especially not for their occupation or how much money they have or don’t have. Do unto others really does work if more folks would try it.
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
5:48 pm
td @ 5:24 pm
“Absolutely taxes are punishment when they are progressive in nature. If all taxes were the same rate then the harder you work, the more education you get and the more marketable your skill set then the more money you get to keep. That is called incentive for making the right choices in life and working hard. We current reward laziness.”
This is a typical condescending, ignorant view of people who make less than you do; many of who work harder than you do, and which you could not live without. The view that progressive taxes are a punishment is again ignorant, and rejected in most developed countries, where people recognize that people who earn more money generally also benefit more from the services that the government provides using the tax revenues.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 23rd, 2013
5:52 pm
Aquagirl: If you don’t know what’s wrong, how can you fix it?
————————-
We know what the biggest cause of poverty is–single parent families. How do we fix it? Remove the incentives to young women to have a baby, get free housing and food and spending money. We didn’t have a whole bunch of single moms living in government housing before we had government housing. We didn’t have them on food stamps before we had food stamps. They weren’t on the government teat until the government started letting it hang out where all could access it.
Want less failure? Stop paying people to fail.
Matt321
January 23rd, 2013
5:56 pm
td, 5:24 pm
“Absolutely taxes are punishment when they are progressive in nature. If all taxes were the same rate then the harder you work, the more education you get and the more marketable your skill set then the more money you get to keep. That is called incentive for making the right choices in life and working hard. We current reward laziness.”
Taxes are all the same rate, within the same bracket. Wage earners all generally pay the same amount of taxes on the first $100,000 of income, for example. Do you understand we have a marginal tax rate system? The more money you make, the more money you get to keep. This is always true. Even at the highest bracket, the marginal rate is only 39% – which means for every dollar you make, you still keep over 60 cents. That’s for the wealthiest Americans. Compare that to the example Kyle gave, though, for extremely poor Americans – for every dollar they make, they only keep in some cases 5 cents.
As Warren Buffet said, there is a class war in this country, and his class is winning.
Bruno
January 23rd, 2013
5:58 pm
The idea of working hard and pulling yourself up by your bootstraps doesn’t extend as far as many conservative/Republicans think. Some people overcome great adversity, we should encourage that, but I’m not gonna slam anyone who doesn’t climb every freakin’ mountain. I don’t sit around and decide if they’re lazy or not based on 5 seconds of observation in the grocery store line where its OMG lookit that welfare mamma and her food stamps!
While you are to be commended for your non-judgmental, generous attitude, I would hope that you don’t think anyone who sticks their hand out deserves assistance.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 23rd, 2013
6:04 pm
The more money you make, the more money you get to keep
——————————-
Seeing as how it’s my money to begin with, I’m not exactly feeling grateful about “getting to keep” some lesser part of it. But your post wonderfully reflects the thinking of the liberal fascists–everything belongs to government except that which they let you keep.
Michael H. Smith
January 23rd, 2013
6:05 pm
I love the way Kyle and the rest of you sane folks torture these poor wuddle (pee-gressive – a.k.a. socialist) liberals by bringing to light the EVILS of the “COMPOUND PROGRESSIVE TAX CODE”, where both the dollar amount and the marginal rates on income increase dramatically.
td
January 23rd, 2013
6:06 pm
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
5:48 pm
“This is a typical condescending, ignorant view of people who make less than you do; many of who work harder than you do, and which you could not live without. The view that progressive taxes are a punishment is again ignorant, and rejected in most developed countries, where people recognize that people who earn more money generally also benefit more from the services that the government provides using the tax revenues.”
Pure socialist talking point.
Worked as janitor in manufacturing factory.
Worked unloading trucks
Worked in grocery store.
Worked on production line building aircraft.
Worked on production line building after market car parts
Umpired adult male softball
All the above was during and after HS graduation and up to 21 years old
Went to college and earned degree.
Worked for DFCS
Started own business
Now run two businesses.
Do not tell me I do have not worked for a living in non skilled labor jobs and do not understand the skill sets needed to work such jobs. I can tell you without any doubt that those jobs get paid what they are worth according to the skill sets needed to do them.
I work harder and longer hours with 1000 times the stress now, and take 100% of the risk and am paid according to the skill sets I have developed. I pay now more money in taxes per year then I made in a year in most of the previous jobs, so I am being punished for making the right choices in life.
Should I pay taxes so that the government can provide basic services for me and my neighbors? Absolutely. Should they be a higher amount? If I make more money then my neighbor then I pay more money then they do. Should I pay a higher % then my neighbor or the postman or the janitor that works for me? Absolutely not. Everyone should pay the same rate and then the more money you make the more actual money you pay.
Bruno
January 23rd, 2013
6:08 pm
Even at the highest bracket, the marginal rate is only 39% – which means for every dollar you make, you still keep over 60 cents. That’s for the wealthiest Americans. Compare that to the example Kyle gave, though, for extremely poor Americans – for every dollar they make, they only keep in some cases 5 cents.
Matt–In case you didn’t read the article or understand the point, poor people only get to “keep” a small portion of the additional income they make within the income brackets set out above because they are being supplied with generous government benefits which are taken away as they earn their own way. Which is a very different scenario from a rich person being taxed at a ridiculous rate. Same effect, but very different causes.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
January 23rd, 2013
6:16 pm
If it were just roads and other essential services we paid for, that would be one thing, but how did my children get on the hook for obozo’s re election campaign and lady gaga extravaganza?
Michael H. Smith
January 23rd, 2013
6:16 pm
You have to wonder why so few people ever focus on the deductions that make the tax rate irrelevant?
I probably pay more tax than those good ol’ rich democrats Bon Jovi or Bruce Springsteen not because I make more but because they have deductions that make it possible for them to… drum roll please… NOT PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE!
Banderson
January 23rd, 2013
6:17 pm
http://deadspin.com/phil-mickelson/
Phil’s imaginary tax problems
td
January 23rd, 2013
6:19 pm
Matt321
January 23rd, 2013
5:56 pm
I understand about the marginal tax rates. There are 6 rates (really 7 if you count 0% for anyone making less then $30,000 per year). 4 of those rate effect people making less the $178,000 per year going from 10% to 28%. $178,000 to $388,000 33% and over $388,000 is 39.5%. Now if you save any of your money then you pay an additional 15% or 30% in capital gains taxes on money made off your investments.
“This is always true. Even at the highest bracket, the marginal rate is only 39% – which means for every dollar you make, you still keep over 60 cents.”
Not true. The 39% is the Federal taxes you pay. Then if you live in CA you pay an additional 13% and if it is GA it is 6%. Now you are up to paying 52% in CA or 45% in GA. You add in sales taxes, payroll taxes and property taxes well then one is up to about 65% in CA and 55% in GA.
How much is enough?
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
6:29 pm
td @6:06 pm
“I can tell you without any doubt that those jobs get paid what they are worth according to the skill sets needed to do them.”
And how did you figure that out? You should be a socialist! The part of the true socialist dogma is that a society can actually determine the worth of the labor and pay people accordingly. It is one of the reasons socialist economies have mostly failed.
What you espouse is a common fantasy of the conservatives. They always point out to a few individuals, themselves or others, who achieve things by a combination of circumstances, and who make the incredible conclusion that people growing in poor families of uneducated parents live and work on the same playing field as those in educated, well-to-to families. And that is only one of the many conditions that affect our lives and determine our fate.
md
January 23rd, 2013
6:45 pm
“The part of the true socialist dogma is that a society can actually determine the worth of the labor and pay people accordingly. ”
Consumers dictate wages, and they are fickle as hell……good luck trying to figure them out.
But for the most part they have been on their 40 year quest for cheap cheap goods and the wages have been coming down in response………
I don’t see it getting too much better in a global economy where billions of others are now realizing they can get theirs too and they do it a whole lot cheaper than we do…..
td
January 23rd, 2013
6:47 pm
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
6:29 pm
Again you do not know what you are talking about. Neither of my parents graduated from HS. We were poor but we never took government handouts. My wife came to this country at the age of 13, could not speak English and had not been to school since 3rd grade. She now has a college degree and a good job and her mom was poor also I know exactly what I am talking about on this subject matter.
Yes, choices you make determine what happens in your life. When one chooses not to get a basic education, have children out of wedlock and abuse booze and drugs then they are going to be poor and remain poor.
If you look back through history then you will find that it is the children of well educated upper middle class parents that did not have to work growing up have become the leaders of the socialist/communist movement. This is because these people have no concept of what work is about and what it takes to run a business. Is this your background?
yuzeyurbrane
January 23rd, 2013
6:53 pm
1. Either Mickelson is lieing or he needs to get a new accountant. The average tax rate for people of his income is much lower.
2. The rest of your article is just bs. What happened to all the takers who paid no income tax at all? Are you now including their FICA, sales, ad valorem, etc., etc. taxes? If so, I am happy you are belatedly conceding that these folks aren’t parasites at all. But why didn’t you speak up when Mitt was running? What do you expect these folks to do when many of the new jobs out there are minimum wage, part-time, no benefits, etc.? On top of that you are for crushing unions! So, let’s cut out the smug hypocrisy. Oh, yeah, how convenient to say it is welfare that makes them work minimum wage. What nonsense.
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
6:56 pm
td @ 6:47 pm
“Again you do not know what you are talking about. Neither of my parents graduated from HS. We were poor …”
Again, I repeat: “They always point out to a few individuals, themselves or others, who achieve things by a combination of circumstances, …” And indulge in the fantasy that everybody could do the same…
td
January 23rd, 2013
6:56 pm
yuzeyurbrane
January 23rd, 2013
6:53 pm
How old are these part time, min wage workers? If they are over 25 then what choices did they make to keep them in this situation for so long and what is their work ethic?
td
January 23rd, 2013
7:01 pm
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
6:56 pm
td @ 6:47 pm
“Again you do not know what you are talking about. Neither of my parents graduated from HS. We were poor …”
Again, I repeat: “They always point out to a few individuals, themselves or others, who achieve things by a combination of circumstances, …” And indulge in the fantasy that everybody could do the same…
And why can’t most do the same? I can see a few but we are now up to 20 to 25% of the population that can not do it. Is that really acceptable in your world?
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
January 23rd, 2013
7:03 pm
td,
thanks for all the hard work that generated your success. People like you are what make America great, not the folks who sit around and decide whats fair, how others should live their life, how generous they should be, how much they have benefited from America, and how much they should give back. Conservatives are too busy working and investing to have time to try and referee life.
Thanks for schooling Mark so well. Simple answer for Mark, one he learned in kindergarten, but has obviously forgotten is “Can’t never could”. Successful people find a way. I like you came from two parents, who never had much, but knew how to succeed, work, and they had us all working by the time we were teenagers and never let us quit. The rest came naturally.
td
January 23rd, 2013
7:10 pm
Rafe,
Amen. The one thing my dad taught (by example) me was the importance of working hard and never quitting no matter what. My mom beat it into my head that you must get an education if you want anything out of life besides hard work everyday.
I will love them forever for those two lessons.
md
January 23rd, 2013
7:13 pm
” Are you now including their FICA, sales, ad valorem, etc., etc. taxes? If so, I am happy you are belatedly conceding that these folks aren’t parasites at all.”
Remember way back in math class when we were taught how to “cancel”?
Well…..that is what you have to do when it comes to all those other taxes as EVERYBODY pays those, and that leaves us with income taxes of which 50% of the filers currently pay zero.
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
January 23rd, 2013
7:20 pm
td
The best lesson that my parents taught me and one I have tried to pass on to my hardworking children is that, at the end of the day it is not how much you made, but how much you saved.
Michael H. Smith
January 23rd, 2013
7:21 pm
Oh wow, government is so kind to keep 40% and GIVE you 60%.
Hey td, if God can get by on a flat 10%, I think our Federal Gub’Ment should be able to get by on a flat two tier 10% and 25% marginal rate with all deductions eliminated.
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
7:26 pm
I find this self-delusion, exemplified by td and others, appalling and disgusting. We all start our lives with different genes, with different parents, in different environments, and life offers us different circumstances. This self-righteous fantasy that because some people start poor but achieve success in life (in the economic sense) everybody can do the same just by making “the right choices” is more than ignorant – it shows a lack of human feelings.
JamVet
January 23rd, 2013
7:36 pm
MHS, you Uncle Sam hating moochers got to pay to play in the USA.
(And I have the name of a great CPA if you really are dense enough to be paying 40%…)
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 23rd, 2013
7:44 pm
yuzey: Either Mickelson is lieing or he needs to get a new accountant. The average tax rate for people of his income is much lower.
——–
Or it could be that you don’t know what you’re talking about. What if his income comes mostly from tournaments and endorsements, taxed as wages, rather than from capital gains?
Think before posting, and next time maybe you won’t appear so ignorant.
td
January 23rd, 2013
7:44 pm
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
7:26 pm
No my friend, we have a term in society for what you are talking about with gene pool, environment and other excuses you are making for the poor and it is called ENABLING.
You and you progressive partners are enabling the poor to become poor and remain poor by not setting and expecting certain standards of behavior and achievement. What is disgusting is that the riches, best educated and most free nation in the world has to provide substance to 25% of our fellow citizens. What is disgusting is that WE do not hold people accountable for their actions and allow them to maintain dependency on the us.
I have faith that everyone is capable of working and providing for themselves. It just makes me sick to my stomach that we allow people to lose all hope and the American work ethic and turn to dependency.
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
7:49 pm
td @ 7:44 pm
Typically, when you have no answer to the argument, you revert to a political attack.
td
January 23rd, 2013
7:54 pm
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
7:49 pm
td @ 7:44 pm
Typically, when you have no answer to the argument, you revert to a political attack.
There is nothing political in my comments. There is no politics involved on the ability to enable a drunk to keep drinking. There is no politics involved in a segment of our population to enable the poor to remain dependent.
Are you trying to tell me that the left does not believe in the American work ethic? Are you trying to tell me that the left wants people to remain dependent on the government for subsistence?
Michael Bean- Apache Junction, AZ
January 23rd, 2013
7:55 pm
Phil Mickelson- San Diego born, raised and currently lives.
I have always respected Phil for is play on the golf course and his community service at both the local and national level.
He has raised that respect to a new level!!
Someone (Phil) has finally come out and taken on the communist State of California. Last weekend in Palm Springs, he stated that because of new state taxes (which he has to pay 1.8 million more a year with 2 million in retro taxes this year) and add to that new federal taxes (almost 63% a year total) something has got to change. (i.e. moving to Texas or Florida that have no state tax)
The left Dems came out and said basically ” shut up and give us your money”.
Phil- stand your ground. I am behind you 100%. This is a land of freedom to say, do or move whatever. whenever or wherever you want.
Your statement in no way offended me but supported me.
My wife and I lived and raised our kids in California and enjoyed our experience but it came to a point last year watching the direction California is heading- we picked up and moved out.
Stick to your guns Phil. And in this day and age that’s your golf clubs- do what’s right and best for you and your family. Big government will not do it.
Good luck for this years season and hope to see you in Scottsdale in a few weeks.
md
January 23rd, 2013
8:03 pm
And now Mark throws down the emotion card……
The fact remains Mark that we do in fact choose everything we do and are where we are because of ourselves……..
It’s just that some choose to do more excuse making and less action……
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
8:05 pm
td @ 7:54 pm
What I am telling you is that you failed to respond to what I wrote @7:26 pm in response to our post, and instead went into a nonsensical tirade about how I and my “progressive partners are enabling the poor to become poor and remain poor …” That is politics.
td
January 23rd, 2013
8:11 pm
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
8:05 pm
td @ 7:54 pm
What I am telling you is that you failed to respond to what I wrote @7:26 pm in response to our post, and instead went into a nonsensical tirade about how I and my “progressive partners are enabling the poor to become poor and remain poor …” That is politics.
Are there or are there not progressives in both parties? We call them RINO’s in the Republican party. A progressive is someone that thinks they are enlightened by intelligence and since they are enlightened then they know better then anyone else. They feel that no person is bad or lazy and that if they are in a bad circumstance then it is due to some other cause instead of the persons choices.
Progressives also think that it is the governments obligation to make sure people no matter their choice to not have to be held accountable for their actions.
Hillbilly D
January 23rd, 2013
8:24 pm
we do in fact choose everything we do
Not many of us choose when and how we die. We choose most things but not everything.
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
8:26 pm
td @ 8:11 pm
td,
It is useless to discuss something with somebody who does not even understand, or refuses to understand, what the point of the argument is, and just wants to tout his political horn.
I’m off.
md
January 23rd, 2013
8:27 pm
“Do” HD…..do.
And some in fact do choose when and how they die.
And we also choose how we respond to things done to us……
Hillbilly D
January 23rd, 2013
8:29 pm
md
We do die. It’s something we do. And granted a few do choose the time and place but very few.
td
January 23rd, 2013
8:34 pm
MarkV
January 23rd, 2013
8:26 pm
In other words you have lost this battle and you know it. You know that it is unacceptable for 25% of our population to be receiving their subsistence from the government. You know we can not continue as a nation to enable people to make bad choices and then not be held accountable for their decisions. You really need to reevaluate your philosophy on this subject and use your intellect to help solve the problem instead of using it to make excuses for inexcusable behavior.
md
January 23rd, 2013
8:40 pm
But dieing isn’t a choice, and it is pretty much done to us and out of our control. We control everything else we do…..
But I see your point.
atlmom
January 23rd, 2013
8:47 pm
The dignity is in earning money from working – no matter what that is, if it’s flipping burgers, so be it. For people who think it’s ‘below them’ – the problem is YOU not someone else.
The issue is that Mr. Mickelson is saying: well, you know, if you’re just going to take all my money because you think you should, I might as well not make it anymore. I might as well just not bother. And that’s a problem. Sure, in golf, there might be someone else who would ‘win’ the money he does – but in business, is there someone else who would be hiring others and building a business? what happens when the wealthy decide that it’s just not worth it anymore to bother?
saywhat?
January 23rd, 2013
8:51 pm
The way to solve poverty is to give poor people $150,000 jobs in state government. Its keeping Chip Rogers out of poverty.
saywhat?
January 23rd, 2013
8:54 pm
atlmom-”what happens when the wealthy decide that it’s just not worth it anymore to bother?”
————————————————
Then the hole in the economy caused by their decision to leave it will be filled by somebody else. People do it all the time. Its called retirement.
Hillbilly D
January 23rd, 2013
8:58 pm
The issue is that Mr. Mickelson is saying: well, you know, if you’re just going to take all my money because you think you should, I might as well not make it anymore.
I don’t really know a thing about Mickelson or golf, used to play a little but it was too frustrating for me. In my younger days, I did spend a good bit of time around professional athletes, though, and the one thing they all had in common was that they are competitive beyond most peoples’ wildest imagination. They work so hard to get where they are, and even harder to stay there, and most all the ones I’ve ever been exposed to have to be forced to quit. It’s few that get to leave on their own terms. I’d be surprised if Mickelson isn’t the same way. No doubt they love the money but it’s not really the prime motivation for most of them. They really do love what they do, to the point of it being a near-addiction, in most cases.
CommonSense
January 23rd, 2013
9:02 pm
The reality is that MILLIONS of people in this country earn more income than they are reporting now and they are truly undertaxed instead of overtaxed and a major reason why we have a shortfall of tax revenues. Little will be done about this because it does not typically involve higher wage earners which have been cast as the scorn of society. This situation penalizes ALL citizens who’s income is fully reportable and pay the appropriate tax. The simple solution is a sales tax system…aka fair tax.
Such a system would benefit EVERYONE in the longterm and maintain a progressive tax system because those who spend more would pay more. It would eliminate waste and most of the IRS workers could be reassigned to colletion of sales taxes instead of wasting millions of hours and billionis of dollars in our current tax system which FEW people understand. In reality, the graphs in this article are not accurately reflective of what is taking place in our current system.
md
January 23rd, 2013
9:11 pm
The deal with Mickelson has more to do with State taxes than anything else. He can’t do anything about the dems voting for him to pay more federal taxes unless he leaves the country, but he can do something about the State taxes. He is a CA boy, born and raised out there, but he also knows half the golfing community moved to FL for a reason.
Saving 13% of every million just by buying another house in another State must be very appealing. I think it is a family issue for him.
Hillbilly D
January 23rd, 2013
9:15 pm
If it hasn’t changed, a lot of people move to Florida because you can declare bankruptcy and not lose your primary residence, no matter how much the house cost or is worth. Former baseball commissioner Bowie Kuhn did that, among others. That was quite a few years back so they may have changed the law, not really sure.
@@
January 23rd, 2013
9:18 pm
I’ve heard tell that some economists estimate unreported income for those receiving welfare is around $1 trillion annually.
My husband and several of his friends are landlords at a duplex village? Anyhoo, one of the tenants (welfare recipient) was evicted for selling cigarettes out of his unit. .50 cents a cigarette. The people buying them were on welfare.
Say wha-a-a-a-a?
Off-topic kinda.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsUTm3z74ls
Wrong on so many levels.
Hillbilly D
January 23rd, 2013
9:27 pm
I don’t know much about cigarettes (hate the damn things with a passion) but I was at the store today and saw a certain brand was $4.10 a pack. If a person smokes 2 packs a day (a lot of folks used to, I’ve pretty much managed to weed most of the smokers out of the folks I hang with, so maybe it’s changed) that’s $57.40 a week, or $2984.80 a year (plus tax). Seems like an awful lot of money going up in smoke to me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWXbVsMkz1U
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
January 23rd, 2013
9:47 pm
HD – When I quit smoking, a carton of cigarettes could be had for about $16. I quit because they used to cost about $12. If I’m remembering right, it was a democrat controlled State of Georgia tax hike that got me to give it up. To pay for health care, I believe. I wasn’t that addicted, even though I was smoking 2 and a half packs a day.
In other words, their scheme of raising taxes worked the exact opposite with me, not only denying them the tax increase but also reducing sales, eliminating jobs and reducing the profits of a company based in the United States, employing American workers.
I don’t even miss the coffin nails and what a blow we could strike on the liberals intentions if everyone else would gather just a little bit of courage.
Banderson
January 23rd, 2013
10:05 pm
td – You can’t just add tax rates for state, federal and so forth and come up with the percentage paid. For example, your state tax paid is deductible from your income for calculating federal tax. Look at the Deadspin article. Mickleson might be paying approx. 50%, which he could resent, but he’s still bringing home $24 million/year. Good for him. If he can find a better country or state for less money, he should move. He could easily move to Florida and not pay state income tax. It’s his choice.
td
January 23rd, 2013
10:09 pm
Banderson
January 23rd, 2013
10:05 pm
Wonder if that is why states that are controlled by the left did not grow as fast or actually lost population in the past 10 years?
bluecoat
January 23rd, 2013
10:13 pm
Having so many jobs before age 21,means you were not very good at any of them.Most work at fewer places in a life time.Running your mouth when you should be working cost you lots of jobs.Been this way all your life.If you have two business now who runs them?As great as you think you are you can’t be in two places at same time.
td
January 23rd, 2013
10:28 pm
bluecoat
January 23rd, 2013
10:13 pm
Since you are obviously from the left then you do not understand the concept of summer jobs, school jobs and working multiple jobs to pay for a college education.
It is obvious that you know nothing about the business world and LLC’s. When you make enough money and are smart enough to buy wait on the housing market to crash and then invest in multiple rental properties then you two can own multiple businesses.
Now go and do a little research before you run your month and look foolish.
bluecoat
January 23rd, 2013
10:31 pm
I guess I just ruined January.Ha Darn
md
January 23rd, 2013
10:33 pm
When I dragged myself out of the dumps, I was working 3 jobs…..all at the same time, guess I wasn’t good at any of them, but they sure as heck got me out of the pit.
Maybe some of these wont’s in the country need to try it, long term it beats the heck out of making excuses as to why they are still in that 1 job not getting anywhere…….
Truth is
January 23rd, 2013
10:52 pm
You all assume that single mothers had children before they were married. That may be true of some, but the majority of us were married, husbands left and we get the kids. Being married or not has no bearing on our one wage earner households. I never received a penny in child support either.
joe
January 24th, 2013
1:20 am
Well I guess that means the rich are not likely to donate money are they ?
Ray
January 24th, 2013
4:33 am
Let’s start by lowering capital gains, dividends, and interest tax rates to zero, so that the question of how much the rich should pay, in fairness, is made mute. Any rate times zero will always be zero. That is the Ryan Plan. Romney can still expect his amazingly low effective even better, maybe even zero.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 24th, 2013
9:04 am
Anyone who pays their own way in this world has my respect. One of the lower levels of hell is reserved for those who enable others to remain dependent on the government to take another’s property and give it to them (means “Democrats”).
MarkV
January 24th, 2013
9:13 am
td,td @ 8:34 pm
“In other words you have lost this battle and you know it. “
td,
I am not surprised that you took the cowards’ way of proclaiming my defeat when I refused to play further your game of deflection and avoidance of the subject. How pathetic!
You are free to spew out your rants on this blog, but I have neither a duty nor a need to respond to your babbling about issues I did not write about, while you ignore my arguments. And I do not need to reevaluate my philosophy, of which you know nothing but pretend to know everything. I might feel sorry for someone who boasts about his material success in life but shows himself never to rise from or fall into intellectual poverty, but I don’t.
zeke
January 24th, 2013
10:03 am
The point is this, NO TAX IS A GOOD TAX ESPECIALLY ONE ONLY DESIGNED TO REDISTRIBUTE MONEY AND ASSETS FROM THE SUCCESSFUL TO OTHERS TO PROMOTE GOVERNMENT AGENDA AND POLICIES! NO ONE SHOULD PAY MORE THAN 10% INCOME TAX, PERIOD!
zeke
January 24th, 2013
10:05 am
Hope he moves to Florida, Texas, Tennessee or another state with no income tax! or maybe to a country with no income tax!
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
January 24th, 2013
11:00 am
Truth is
It is all about choices, Truth, you chose the guy who deserted his family.
nelson
January 24th, 2013
11:06 am
I can understand Phil. He makes a million and gives the treasury 700 thousand. That is a lot. where is the incentive when the more earned, the more taken. It is not in vogue to complain about taxes.
Kyle Wingfield
January 24th, 2013
11:52 am
Immediate commenting is back on, and there’s a new post upstairs.
Bruno
January 24th, 2013
12:02 pm
I find this self-delusion, exemplified by td and others, appalling and disgusting. We all start our lives with different genes, with different parents, in different environments, and life offers us different circumstances. This self-righteous fantasy that because some people start poor but achieve success in life (in the economic sense) everybody can do the same just by making “the right choices” is more than ignorant – it shows a lack of human feelings.
MarkV–If it will put your mind at ease, let me put things into context for you. Conservatives are just as loving and caring as liberals. The difference is that conservatives advocate a “tough love” approach ( = Conditional Love) while liberals are all about Unconditional Love. I’m not sure what your religious background is, but the God of the Bible is the embodiment of both kinds of love. In other words, God loves you no matter what, but there are consequences for wrong actions. In a stereotypical family setting, moms represent Unconditional Love, while dads are left to enforce the consequences of bad behavior. Politically, the Dems want to lavish no-strings-attached Love on the people, while the Republicans attempt to temper that aid with responsibility.
Philosophers may argue back and forth which type of Love is more important or necessary, but in the end, both kinds of love are required for a healthy society.
Doug B
January 24th, 2013
12:12 pm
I certainly agree with the basic premise that harder work should be rewarded, Kyle, but this statement shows a complete lack of understanding on your part:
“Who on earth would work twice as hard, knowing they’d actually be able to spend much less than half of each additional dollar they earned?”
Anyone who needs more money would (which is most people and especially the people you are discussing in this article). You may only get 40 cents of every dollar, but that’s much better than nothing.
MarkV
January 24th, 2013
12:16 pm
Bruno @ 12:02 pm
Bruno – If it put your mind to ease, let me explain a few things to you. I could not care less about your ideas about Love. You have copied my words from my post, as if you were responding to them, but just like td, chose to ignore them and instead filled space with banalities.
Bruno
January 24th, 2013
1:27 pm
You have copied my words from my post, as if you were responding to them, but just like td, chose to ignore them and instead filled space with banalities.
Sorry if you don’t have the intellectual capacity to understand that I did answer your question. I’ll keep that in mind next time. In the meantime, keep up the one-sided, emotion-laded braying.
MarkV
January 24th, 2013
2:06 pm
Bruno @ 1:27 pm
You have just shown that the lack of intellectual capacity is squarely on your side – but I am not surprised you do not understand it. That is immediately clear when you talk about your “answering (my) question.” Is it too difficult for you even to recognize when a sentence is a question, and when it is not?