Dennis Hastert says poor folks making $40,000 or less don't pay taxes. Is he right?
482610
Shows how out-of-touch Hastert is.\nThe point where you don't pay taxes is down around $18,000 -- not $40,000.  To many people, $40k a year is a decent living.  To Hastert, you're a lazy bum who doesn't pay any taxes.\n\nWhat a doofus (Hastert, that is).
441970
It is?  To the immoral, unscrupulous employer yes, because he/she does not have to pay matching FICA, does not have to provide 401K, insurance, workers comp, and has a docile work force.  For the rest of society, it is a disaster.
992634
60 of them are not millionaires according to their official financial statements. There are only 40 millionaires 22 Republicans and 18 Democrats.
666728
It's a Republican tax plan. What do you expect?\n\nSeriously, there are a couple of sides to the issue. If there are two people living in a town, both working at jobs, driving on the roads and sending their two kids to public schools, does it make sense that one person is paying $40,000 in taxes and another is paying $5,000 in taxes? Same benefits, but one person pays 8 times as much just because he has more education and a better job. That's sliding scale percentage based taxation.\n\nLooked at another way, it's the responsibility of the rich to take care of the poor. The dentist or executive making $100K should be happy to pay $40K in taxes to help support the rest of the country, because he can afford it much more than the baker or cab driver earning only $28,000. \n\nPersonally, I'd rather everyone give the government $2000 per year, flat rate tax. People below poverty line (under $20K per adult per family) are exempt. That would work out to roughly $900 billion or about half of the projected 2007 budget. That's more than enough to support military defense and homeland security, and to pay for the federal highways. Everything else can be handled locally. \n\nAnd if you're only paying a total of $2000 a year in federal taxes, as opposed to $20K or more for the average middle-class household, that's a lot more spending (economic growth). And a lot more that can be spent on charity (replacing welfare) for those who belief in that.
869029
When the Democrats are talking about taxing the rich, they are talking about anyone who doesn't make minimun wage. \n\nThey want to tax everyone as much as people will tolerate, then once the government has everyone's money, THEY get to spend it on what THEY think is right. They believe that those people who have worked hard to earn their money should give it to those who haven't.
790893
Who is the wealthy americans and what do people call rich?  I hear a lot of discussion on this topic, but no politician wants to define this.  So be prepared when your tax bill goes up regardless of what you make.  If you make over the poverty level, you are rich.
1153552
Unfortunately, you're right. Most people don't seem to realize that less than 1% of the population makes over $100,000 per year. The left keeps saying we need to tax them more, but it does the least.\n\n\nWhat the gov. needs to do is stop spending!
471843
Hell! They barely pay any taxes now. It's right at 15%, while everybody else pays close to 30%. With the standard deductions that's what it all works out to be. Average people don't qualify for those deductions for a reason, and the reason is you pay most of the taxes.
326947
No it's not fair but it is the way our taxes are stuctured..however most people think that the middle and low income levels pay the most taxes..HA!!
423637
I don't think separation of church and state said anything about being tax free. If a minister teaches bible, that's one thing, but pastor's like Rod Parsley, who for years has flaunted his political view's, and allows candidates to speak from his pulpit, should lose his tax exempt status forthwith. Not to mention he's a millionaire many times over.
440762
I pay $7600 a year in taxes for 60x100 lot. That's the world of Long Island, NY. About 75% of that goes to the local school district. Yes I have no children. And I've lived in the same house for 34 years. There's got to be a better way. Folks are screwing me to financial ruining.
781043
You know what? I say don't. Even if he wasn't a friend of your dads. You need to see the possible consequences of your actions upon the lives of these workers even aside from what "The Man" says. I see it as a mutual agreement between 2 willing parties that find benefit in eachothers assistance. The government is just not too happy with this simply because they don't get any money from the deal. We are already the richest country in the world. But fact is these people do the jobs that nobody else will do and in return they find a livelyhood in the United States as apposed to having nothing. Even by making less than minimum wage these people are still earning in a week what they would've been making in at least a month or more if working in their homelands. Everybody's happy but the government as usual so "F" it.
671212
I do not like the current system that penalizes those who work harder and earn more.\n\nI am a proponent of the Flat Tax, where everyone who earns more than $20,000.00 per year gets taxed at exactly the same percentage rate. No loopholes. Keep the tax system simple. Reduce the size of the IRS, because a more simple tax system means there is not as much of a need for a huge government agency/beauracracy to oversee it.
432375
Normally I'd bring in sources, but have decided to merely shoot from the hip on this one. Income inequality is a dicey term. If referring specifically to the idea that some people make millions, and others make so little, then the answer is you cannot necessarily do away with that in a mostly capitalistic society. However, the way to adjust for this problem is through taxes. The rich may not like it, but the amount of money they make every year is more than most of this country will see in their entire lives. Therefore, we must re-instill the wealthy with a sense of patriotism, and institute a truly progressive taxation system. A man making a million dollars a year could easily afford to provide the government with 50-75% of their income in taxes. 90% of the population makes under $100,000 per year, so I believe that the wealthy citizen could manage with $250,000.\nNow, the argument against this is that the rich earned their money, and so they deserve it. However, those people are merely materialistic sheep. They do not understand that money isn't everything, and so they'd rather be measured by what they own and not who they are as people. Consequently, the point is not whether or not they deserve the money, the question pertains to whether or not they are compassionate human beings who understand that we're all on this planet together. If the human race would stop being so selfish, and merely put in some effort to bringing everyone up, the world would be a much better place.\nIn sumation, since the wealthy have a tendancy to be unconcerned with the plight of the poor, it is imperative for the government to provide. And, as stated, the way to provide is to tax. Everyone hates taxes, but without them there would be no government. No government means no laws, and no police or firemen. Therefore, the country would descend into chaos, and we would all lose.
1050014
Employers are supposed to withhold taxes from employees if there is a certain amount paid out, and are supposed to pay their own share.\n\nHowever, even when the poor  pay all applicable taxes, they are still subsidized, particularly in education and health care, by the middle class and wealthier taxpayers.  That is why poor immigrant numbers are limited to all countries where services are subsidized.  That is why coming in above the legal rate of immigration is stealing education and health care from our citizens.\n\nThe real facts are available including what illegals pay in to the system.  This is not a novel point, although it is a valid off-set.  Look it up through your browser.
459670
You have two different sides, touting two very biased sources... the facts are that some do pay taxes... some do not... it's silly to compare it to the European immigration because America was accepting so many immigrants then, compared to the small number now... \nAnd just because something is a law, doesn't nescisarily make it a good law... that the law in that one city that ducks have to wear pants...\nWho is benifiting most, American employers who abuse the labor from immigrants... \nwho is being hurt, probably the taxpayers to some degree... but it's probably the least of America's problems when it comes to overspending... \nI would rather give it to the illegal immigrants than in tax cuts and grants to the oil companies... those guys are much bigger crooks than any immigrants, and they are doing it "legally"... hahaha
267635
I was forced to sell my home after 23 years. I could not pay the taxes. $2000 per year. I don't have kids in school and I refuse to pay for your kids to get Golf and Tennis lessons free. I also refuse to pay for your kids sports. In Ohio they took $40 million from public schools and gave it to private schools. The Neocons call it vouchers. In fact it's redistribution of my wealth. I will never pay school tax again in my lifetime. My property Taxes went up 5 times over 10 years under Republicans in the State.