Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

usafacts.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 359 posts

Re: USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

#121

Post by rqebmm »

Cshelton wrote: post #106

I'm seeing many things (if this data is accurate, which assuming it is as it's from all government sources) and trends that go against a large percentage of what the media on both sides are perpetuating. That is my first takeaway at a glance. My second takeaway at a glance is the giant problem that is Social Security. It's been said over and over, and the aggregation of more data into charts comes to the same conclus…

> Despite all the different changes in the income tax rate/other progressive taxes. This supports an overhaul to the tax code to a more simple, flat tax system. From another data source outside this report, I'd have to find it, but historically, no matter the top bracket tax rate, the Federal government collects about 15-17 % income tax. Including when the top rate was 90%+.

Even assuming that is true, it wouldn't change the regressive nature of a flat tax.

Re: USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

#122

Post by [deleted] »

adventured wrote: post #84

$12,536 - "paid in taxes by the average single parent in 2015" Noticed that on the front page. That's about as silly as referencing the average household net worth in the US, or the average income - both of which are astronomical due to how well off the top 1/3 are. Show me the median taxes paid.

[deleted]

Re: USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

#123

Post by danso »

It's a nice effort, but I'm disheartened at the lack of labeling for sourcing, as if the source (nevermind the methodology of collection) is subordinate or ancillary to the data itself. There is a massive difference between stats (and taxonomy) collected by local jurisdictions and, say, by the FBI. I know it's a beta, but it's not as if source labels are some optional feature when it comes to the integrity of data.

edit: Exhibit A: Firearms licenses

http://imgur.com/a/IggVx

Where did this data come from? What kind of firearms? What kind of licenses? This data is absolutely useless without context.

Re: USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

#124

Post by lloydde »

tommynicholas wrote: post #58
lloydde wrote: post #30

"USAFacts was inspired by a conversation Steve Ballmer had with his wife. She wanted him to get more involved in philanthropic work. He thought it made sense to first find out what government does with the money it raises." Had anyone made the comic strip version? Wife: it breaks my heart to hear about the many suffering Americans. We can't take our money with us when we die, let's help our fellow Americans? Steve: t…

I also like this joke in a way except it implies Steve didn't also increase his funding and participation in his wife's philanthropic work, which he has said in multiple interviews where he's shared this anecdote that he has.

But not said on http://usafacts.org/about

Re: USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

#125

Post by Joeri »

rqebmm wrote: post #121
Cshelton wrote: post #106

I'm seeing many things (if this data is accurate, which assuming it is as it's from all government sources) and trends that go against a large percentage of what the media on both sides are perpetuating. That is my first takeaway at a glance. My second takeaway at a glance is the giant problem that is Social Security. It's been said over and over, and the aggregation of more data into charts comes to the same conclus…

> Despite all the different changes in the income tax rate/other progressive taxes. This supports an overhaul to the tax code to a more simple, flat tax system. From another data source outside this report, I'd have to find it, but historically, no matter the top bracket tax rate, the Federal government collects about 15-17 % income tax. Including when the top rate was 90%+. Even assuming that is true, it wouldn't ch…

In practice a 20% flat tax on all people and corporations without exceptions and deductions would be more progressive than the current system. The wealthy pay very little taxes.

Re: USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

#127

Post by shmageggy »

Cshelton wrote: post #106

I'm seeing many things (if this data is accurate, which assuming it is as it's from all government sources) and trends that go against a large percentage of what the media on both sides are perpetuating. That is my first takeaway at a glance. My second takeaway at a glance is the giant problem that is Social Security. It's been said over and over, and the aggregation of more data into charts comes to the same conclus…

> Lastly, it seems that Government revenue for Federal and State/Local has actually increased pretty linearly with the population. Despite all the different changes in the income tax rate/other progressive taxes. This supports an overhaul to the tax code to a more simple, flat tax system. From another data source outside this report, I'd have to find it, but historically, no matter the top bracket tax rate, the Federal government collects about 15-17 % income tax. Including when the top rate was 90%+.

This seems like a pretty poor argument for a flat tax and in fact could be seen as an argument against it. If raising top end bracket taxes didn't increase overall income, then it must be the case that it reduced the tax burden on lower incomes -- which is the entire point of progressive taxes. So progressive taxes work, let's keep them!

I view this as mostly orthogonal to the issue of tax simplification, however, which I think is probably a good idea.

Re: USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

#128

Post by Cshelton »

rqebmm wrote: post #121
Cshelton wrote: post #106

I'm seeing many things (if this data is accurate, which assuming it is as it's from all government sources) and trends that go against a large percentage of what the media on both sides are perpetuating. That is my first takeaway at a glance. My second takeaway at a glance is the giant problem that is Social Security. It's been said over and over, and the aggregation of more data into charts comes to the same conclus…

> Despite all the different changes in the income tax rate/other progressive taxes. This supports an overhaul to the tax code to a more simple, flat tax system. From another data source outside this report, I'd have to find it, but historically, no matter the top bracket tax rate, the Federal government collects about 15-17 % income tax. Including when the top rate was 90%+. Even assuming that is true, it wouldn't ch…

Please explain how flat tax rate across any income level, while removing the current tax code, would be considered regressive? I have not heard that argument before.

The proportion of tax paid is the same at any income level. Anything that would counteract any "regressive" tax system would have to happen on the personal income side. Which means better education, opportunities, etc., to increase income levels.

I'd support a rule though that said if you make less than the poverty line (around 32k I believe?), you pay no income tax at the federal level.

Re: USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

#129

Post by danielvf »

Joeri wrote: post #125
rqebmm wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Despite all the different changes in the income tax rate/other progressive taxes. This supports an overhaul to the tax code to a more simple, flat tax system. From another data source outside this report, I'd have to find it, but historically, no matter the top bracket tax rate, the Federal government collects about 15-17 % income tax. Including when the top rate was 90%+. Even assuming that is true, it wouldn't ch…

In practice a 20% flat tax on all people and corporations without exceptions and deductions would be more progressive than the current system. The wealthy pay very little taxes.

In 2015, the top 20% paid 84% of collected income tax. That would hardly qualify as little taxes.

Re: USA Facts – Federal, state, and local data from government sources

#130

Post by Cshelton »

shmageggy wrote: post #127
Cshelton wrote: post #106

I'm seeing many things (if this data is accurate, which assuming it is as it's from all government sources) and trends that go against a large percentage of what the media on both sides are perpetuating. That is my first takeaway at a glance. My second takeaway at a glance is the giant problem that is Social Security. It's been said over and over, and the aggregation of more data into charts comes to the same conclus…

> Lastly, it seems that Government revenue for Federal and State/Local has actually increased pretty linearly with the population. Despite all the different changes in the income tax rate/other progressive taxes. This supports an overhaul to the tax code to a more simple, flat tax system. From another data source outside this report, I'd have to find it, but historically, no matter the top bracket tax rate, the Feder…

I think you would have to look at the reasons why the government tax revenue did not increase when rates were higher. The rich are have mobility. They can move money around the world and at high tax rate levels, they'd be content on neither earning nor bringing back any of the money they make elsewhere. Let's take an example of Apple's $200 B sitting offshore. I know that's a corporate tax, but same principal.

I don't believe the tax burden on the lower classes in the US has ever been lessened by increased rates at the top levels.

Post reply on HN