Was Pitts right?
in [Golf]
|
From: kenpitts on 17 Dec 2009 19:30 On Dec 17, 6:19 pm, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > kenpitts wrote, On 12/17/09 6:04 PM: > > > Why does the bottom half of tax payers pay almost nothing? And the top > > 10% pays over 70%? > > Because the top 10% makes over 70% of the income. > > This has been another episode of "Simple Answers to Silly Questions." > > cb Gee Chris. That is not correct. According to the source I cited. The top 10% brought in 48% of the total adjusted gross income. I don't want to dig through IRS data, but these charts always agree with the IRS numbers. Tax advocates can't be like global warming fanatics. They would get their legs cut out from under them in a big hurry. Climate fanatics are so arrogant they feel entitled to fudge the numbers. Also, the bottom half earned ~12% of adjusted gross income while paying 3% of the taxes. In my ideal world, if you earn 48% of the income you pay 48% of the taxes. Why are you so quick to dismiss me? For a second, I thought you were Alan Baker. Ken
From: Alan Baker on 17 Dec 2009 19:37 In article <ee2a8126-09d9-4ddb-88c2-1d86ef69a59a(a)26g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>, kenpitts <ken.ptts(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 17, 6:19�pm, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > > kenpitts wrote, On 12/17/09 6:04 PM: > > > > > Why does the bottom half of tax payers pay almost nothing? And the top > > > 10% pays over 70%? > > > > Because the top 10% makes over 70% of the income. > > > > This has been another episode of "Simple Answers to Silly Questions." > > > > cb > > Gee Chris. That is not correct. According to the source I cited. The > top 10% brought in 48% of the total adjusted gross income. I don't > want to dig through IRS data, but these charts always agree with the > IRS numbers. Tax advocates can't be like global warming fanatics. They > would get their legs cut out from under them in a big hurry. Climate > fanatics are so arrogant they feel entitled to fudge the numbers. My apologies, Ken. I didn't see your earlier post when I made my comment about providing data... > > Also, the bottom half earned ~12% of adjusted gross income while > paying 3% of the taxes. > > In my ideal world, if you earn 48% of the income you pay 48% of the > taxes. > > Why are you so quick to dismiss me? For a second, I thought you were > Alan Baker. Oh, look. Ken's whining for my attention again. -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: kenpitts on 17 Dec 2009 19:45 On Dec 17, 6:37 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > In article > <ee2a8126-09d9-4ddb-88c2-1d86ef69a...(a)26g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > kenpitts <ken.p...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On Dec 17, 6:19 pm, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > > > kenpitts wrote, On 12/17/09 6:04 PM: > > > > > Why does the bottom half of tax payers pay almost nothing? And the top > > > > 10% pays over 70%? > > > > Because the top 10% makes over 70% of the income. > > > > This has been another episode of "Simple Answers to Silly Questions." > > > > cb > > > Gee Chris. That is not correct. According to the source I cited. The > > top 10% brought in 48% of the total adjusted gross income. I don't > > want to dig through IRS data, but these charts always agree with the > > IRS numbers. Tax advocates can't be like global warming fanatics. They > > would get their legs cut out from under them in a big hurry. Climate > > fanatics are so arrogant they feel entitled to fudge the numbers. > > My apologies, Ken. I didn't see your earlier post when I made my comment > about providing data... > > > > > Also, the bottom half earned ~12% of adjusted gross income while > > paying 3% of the taxes. > > > In my ideal world, if you earn 48% of the income you pay 48% of the > > taxes. > > > Why are you so quick to dismiss me? For a second, I thought you were > > Alan Baker. > > Oh, look. Ken's whining for my attention again. > > -- > Alan Baker > Vancouver, British Columbia > <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Actually, I prefer for you to leave me alone. My bad for tweaking you. With apologies. Ken
From: Alan Baker on 17 Dec 2009 19:54 In article <8433a2fe-68ee-4c6c-af48-5b591f20c8e2(a)b2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>, kenpitts <ken.ptts(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 17, 6:37�pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > In article > > <ee2a8126-09d9-4ddb-88c2-1d86ef69a...(a)26g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > > > > > > > �kenpitts <ken.p...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Dec 17, 6:19�pm, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > > > > kenpitts wrote, On 12/17/09 6:04 PM: > > > > > > > Why does the bottom half of tax payers pay almost nothing? And the > > > > > top > > > > > 10% pays over 70%? > > > > > > Because the top 10% makes over 70% of the income. > > > > > > This has been another episode of "Simple Answers to Silly Questions." > > > > > > cb > > > > > Gee Chris. That is not correct. According to the source I cited. The > > > top 10% brought in 48% of the total adjusted gross income. I don't > > > want to dig through IRS data, but these charts always agree with the > > > IRS numbers. Tax advocates can't be like global warming fanatics. They > > > would get their legs cut out from under them in a big hurry. Climate > > > fanatics are so arrogant they feel entitled to fudge the numbers. > > > > My apologies, Ken. I didn't see your earlier post when I made my comment > > about providing data... > > > > > > > > > Also, the bottom half earned ~12% of adjusted gross income while > > > paying 3% of the taxes. > > > > > In my ideal world, if you earn 48% of the income you pay 48% of the > > > taxes. > > > > > Why are you so quick to dismiss me? For a second, I thought you were > > > Alan Baker. > > > > Oh, look. Ken's whining for my attention again. > > > > -- > > Alan Baker > > Vancouver, British Columbia > > <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>- Hide quoted > > text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > Actually, I prefer for you to leave me alone. If that were true, you wouldn't have had to write the next two sentences... >My bad for tweaking you. > With apologies. Sorry, Ken, but I no longer trust your word. You've admitted that you're willing to break it. Your actions speak far more loudly. -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: kenpitts on 17 Dec 2009 20:18
On Dec 17, 6:54 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > In article > <8433a2fe-68ee-4c6c-af48-5b591f20c...(a)b2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > kenpitts <ken.p...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On Dec 17, 6:37 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > > In article > > > <ee2a8126-09d9-4ddb-88c2-1d86ef69a...(a)26g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>, > > > > kenpitts <ken.p...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Dec 17, 6:19 pm, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > > > > > kenpitts wrote, On 12/17/09 6:04 PM: > > > > > > > Why does the bottom half of tax payers pay almost nothing? And the > > > > > > top > > > > > > 10% pays over 70%? > > > > > > Because the top 10% makes over 70% of the income. > > > > > > This has been another episode of "Simple Answers to Silly Questions." > > > > > > cb > > > > > Gee Chris. That is not correct. According to the source I cited. The > > > > top 10% brought in 48% of the total adjusted gross income. I don't > > > > want to dig through IRS data, but these charts always agree with the > > > > IRS numbers. Tax advocates can't be like global warming fanatics. They > > > > would get their legs cut out from under them in a big hurry. Climate > > > > fanatics are so arrogant they feel entitled to fudge the numbers. > > > > My apologies, Ken. I didn't see your earlier post when I made my comment > > > about providing data... > > > > > Also, the bottom half earned ~12% of adjusted gross income while > > > > paying 3% of the taxes. > > > > > In my ideal world, if you earn 48% of the income you pay 48% of the > > > > taxes. > > > > > Why are you so quick to dismiss me? For a second, I thought you were > > > > Alan Baker. > > > > Oh, look. Ken's whining for my attention again. > > > > -- > > > Alan Baker > > > Vancouver, British Columbia > > > <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>- Hide quoted > > > text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Actually, I prefer for you to leave me alone. > > If that were true, you wouldn't have had to write the next two > sentences... > > >My bad for tweaking you. > > With apologies. > > Sorry, Ken, but I no longer trust your word. You've admitted that you're > willing to break it. > > Your actions speak far more loudly. > > -- > Alan Baker > Vancouver, British Columbia > <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - OK. Whatever. I like the new regime. Believe what you will. Ken |