So Romney’s “47%” recording is the big news of the day over in DUmmyland…for me, I don’t see the big flippin’ deal. In essence, those in Obama’s camp will act shocked and horrified over this “revelation” (which is mostly true) and it affirms what the bulk of Romney supporters already believe anyway. In essence, everyone seems to think that saying what is basically true (that a significant portion of the country is either benefiting from, or desiring something from the government) will kill Romney’s chances for election. I think you’ll see people (even myself) admit that we’re getting perks from nanny government even as others try to justify their handouts as part of what government is supposed to do for its people. Will it sink Mitt? Don’t know. Will it change minds? Perhaps the candyasses in the venerated “middle”. In any case, I’ll try to mix in the more interesting threads, but wading into this mess, it’s dominating the first page so there won’t be as many fun links as usual.
Twitter…the wasteland of stupid
Is it hot in here or is it just me?
DUer’s know what pisses off “independents”
“Please, Mr. Muslim, don’t kill me, I’m on YOUR side!”
…and I still wouldn’t piss on him.
47% chance it was the Ronulans.
Wait, are you making a case for or against public schools?
Paging Neville Chamberlain; DUer’s prefer a nuclear Iran versus a safe Israel?
Pretend wealthy DUer pretends he’s talking to Romney
Translation: I mock Christians because I know they won’t cut off my head
Conservatives are just as bad a Muslims
Appeasement as an exit strategy…how’s that working for ya?
Romney hates children since they’re in the 47%
DUers are Constitutional scholars
Pretend Republicans always talk to strangers in doctor’s office waiting rooms
They have “Christian” in their name and they’re supporting the president, so I like what they
say
Striking a nerve there, Entitlement Baby?
…well, peanut butter IS brown, and oppressed by white bread.
Insipid–Well, That was not our max when we rec’d unemployment- That is a real number. Don’t ever assume anything. I never got medicaid and surprise– THAT is what I would get if I took the SNAP.
Class warfare is not what I am m about. I see this crap in my job every day. Do you know how easy it would be to tell people to quit busting their assess? Because the laws are what make it so easy on the people who get the entitlements at the expense of them! Lifelong takers, no stake in the game but the gas it takes to get to the bank to cash the check. You know some things but not all. I have been on the welfare side and the unemployment side and I have no reason to lie to you about what money we did or didn’t get.
And people some states are taxed on their SS income, FYI. Their state tax rates are kinda behind the feds and so inevitably most of my retired clients owe because of that.
PS…Public dole should have been separated from unemployment. Either way, pay taxes.
insipid: strawman? Quit being hypocritical, fella. Your entire argument here is a non sequitur/red herring.
Payroll taxes (FICA and Medicare) are a different subject entirely; Romney wasn’t discussing payroll taxes, and you know that full well. Anyone with 3 or more working brain cells knows Romney was referring to income taxes with his “47%” reference. It’s been well-documented and highly public knowledge for at least a year that roughly half of the US public doesn’t pay any net income taxes (the 47% figure is from last fall’s OWS debates). And it’s also common knowledge that everyone who earns wages has FICA and Medicare taxes withheld.
So: once again you were attempting – obviously, and clumsily – to change the subject. Were you merely being an ignorant fool, or were you doing this intentionally to divert attention from an inconvenient truth?
Now, let’s take a quick look at your claim regarding the military and “many don’t pay taxes”. Here’s a quick and dirty upper bound estimate on that percentage. The actual figure is likely lower. Demographic data is from Appendix B, found at http://prhome.defense.gov/RFM/MPP/ACCESSION%20POLICY/PopRep2010/download/download.html
Single military: barring alimony payments, single parentage, or home ownership, everyone in the military pays taxes if they’re single. 2010 military demographics indicate that 44% of the military is in this category. Assuming 10% are divorced personnel paying enough alimony to negate their tax liability, single parents, or have enough deductions to do the same, that yields 4.4% of the military with no tax liability.
Now, regarding the 56% of the military that’s married. A fair number of these are married to other military members, or have working spouses. Their combined incomes will almost certainly ensure they have a tax liability, due to “bracket creep” if nothing else. Let’s assume 1/3 fall into one of these two categories (I’d guess that’s a rather substantial underestimate, actually). That leaves an estimated 37.5% where the military member provides all taxable income.
Now, let’s look at the breakout of that 37.5%, using population demographics ( http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0884238.html ) for US household size.
Married, nonworking spouse, no kids: Federal income tax liability starts at $19,500 in taxable income. Population demographics indicate that 45% of US households of size >1 consist of 2 persons. Applying this fraction to married military couples, that yields about 17% of the military that would be in this category. Only E1s and E2s with <2 YOS make less than the threshold for paying taxes. This is a very small fraction of the military – I’d guess 10% of the total married couples, max, and probably lower. In round numbers, let’s call that 2% of the military total strength.
Married, nonworking spouse, 1 kid: Federal income tax liability starts at $29,500 in taxable income. Married E4s and below are in this category, as are E5s with <4 YOS. Applying this factor to the estimated 37.5% of military families where one military member provides 100% of the taxable income, that yields another 8.6% of the military who’d fall into this category. Assuming 1/2 were E4 and below or E5 with <4 YOS. Similar calculations show that this yields 7.1% of the military in this category. Federal income tax liability starts at $38,630. This includes E5&below, E6 w/less than 10 YOS, W1s, and O1s w/o prior enlisted service. Let’s assume people in these grades form 2/3 of the total; that yields 5% of the military in this category.
Married, nonworking spouse, 3 or more kids. Population demographics show these categories to total 11% of households of size >1. Applying this to the 37.5% of military families where the military member is sole source of taxable income, that yields approx 4% of the military in this category. Assuming 85% of these folks would avoid federal income tax liability (they’re more senior, so some will pay taxes regardless of family size), that adds 3.5% to the “no tax liability” segment.
Adding them up, we have
Single: 4.4%
Married, no kids: 2%
Married, 1 kid: 5%
Married, 2 kids: 5%
Married, 3+ kids: 3.5%
Total: 19.9%
Again: that’s likely an overestimate. Income thresholds for tax liability were calculated using http://www.calcxml.com/calculators/federal-income-tax-estimator
using single and “married filing jointly” filing status as appropriate. Military pay tables for 2012 are available at http://www.dfas.mil
Proportionally, that’s far better than the national average in terms of the fraction that actually pays taxes. And, again: that’s likely an overestimate.