What is your "fair share"? | Eastern North Carolina Now

    Publisher's Note: Jim Bispo's weekly column appears in the Beaufort Observer.

    We keep hearing from the anointed one and his surrogates that "the rich" need to pay their "fair share" of taxes. I suspect there are a lot of folks who believe that is something everyone should be doing. Or do you suppose applying fair share to only the "rich" is no more than the community organizer instigating class warfare?? I have not heard even one of these rhetorical midgets try to describe what would constitute a "fair share". About all we can surmise is that fair share for the top 1% of taxpayers is more than they currently pay. It would be interesting to hear a specific number.

    Before we talk about "fair share", let's take a look at where things currently stand. The chart at this link depicts the percentages of income taxes paid based on AGI. The information contained on the chart came from the National Taxpayers Union web site but originated with the IRS.

    The green line on the chart shows the percentage of taxes paid by the bottom 50% of taxpayers - averaging 3.28% over the period shown, almost nothing, and even so, clearly on a downward trend. Do you suppose these folks possibly be convinced to vote in favor of a particular party or anyone in particular?? Hmmm...

    The blue line represents the percentage of income taxes paid by the top 50% of taxpayers - averaging 96.72 % over the period shown     The purple line represents the percentage of taxes paid by the top 1% of taxpayers, averaging about 37% over the period shown. It is interesting that 1% of the taxpayers pay over 37% of the taxes and they still aren't paying their fair share. It should be noted that the taxes paid by this cohort is still higher today than when the so called "Bush Tax Cuts" were enacted (2001 and 2003). Even after being impacted by the economic downturn, they are still higher than they were when the tax cut was passed. Go figure...

    After looking at those numbers, what do you suppose comprises a "fair share" of taxes for the top one percent of taxpayers - or the top 50% for that matter. And what about the bottom 50%??

    Our Prez and a fairly large percentage of our Senators and Representatives are already in the one percent who will be impacted by higher taxes if the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire. What remains to be seen is how they will manage to exempt themselves the increase.. When it comes to things like that, they normally exhibit more innovative thinking than anyone ever thought possible. Too bad that isn't the norm when they are supposed to be looking after the taxpayers.

    The Economist Thomas Sowell has provided an interesting bit of perspective about the so called poor. In studying the economics of poverty he has discovered that most of those who are "poor" today are not the same folks who were identified as "poor" last year or who will be identified as "poor" next year. For the most part, yesterday's poor will have lifted themselves out or poverty.

    The other day I saw a Wall Street Broker being interviewed about this subject. He, as one might expect, is against additional taxes on the rich (which may or may not include him). He explained his position as clearly and succinctly as I have ever heard it explained. He said the rich are rich; the poor are poor. The country loses when we spend our efforts trying to make the rich poorer so we can make the poor richer. Better we figure out how to let the poor work their way out of the situation in which they find themselves (i.e. make the poor richer) without making the rich poorer. Got it??.

    Perhaps we should be looking at where these "new poor" identified by Thomas Sowell come from to see if we can't figure out a way to help them avoid getting into that situation or to work their way out of it even more quickly than did those who came before them; clearly a better idea than resorting to class warfare.