Tax cuts

Ronald Reagan said that Washington's approach to intervening in industries is:
If it moves, tax it; if it keeps moving, regulate it; if it stops moving, subsidize it.
 
Originally Posted by Winky
I shudder to think what the last four years would have been like with Algore instead!

Chicky sez:
Substantially the same. It really surprises me that anyone thinks differently.

It suprises me that you'd think such a thing. (not)

Although I am not suprised that you'd want everyone to believe that there is no difference between the
left and the right Hah!

Mebbe like Clit-on,
Gore would have started bombing white Christians like was done in the 'former' Yugoslavia in response to 9-11?

No wait perhaps 9-11 would nevah have happened?
Yup that's it, the total no response to so many other attacks during the Clit-on administration proves that we brought about the 9-11 fiasco merely by electing an avowed Christian to office.

Hug a tree and vote fer me!

As fer fidy hours a week WTH? work sixty them millions on welfare are depending on you Boy! And millions more are flooding over the border yearly. How are we gonna
house clothe feed edumahcate and find jobs fer them if you are all a slackin’ off and goin’ home after a measly ten hour day??? Heck you prolly want yer weekends off too doncha? Where do you think you are, France?
You think all these benefits you libs are givin’ away grow on trees? Now git to werk, we just passed a half a trillion dollar defense budget Gato's paycheck depends on ya Bud-dy :D


-------------

square-large-cat.gif
 
I don't think there is no diference between the left and the right, Wink. I think that neither Gore nor Bush are substantially either one. I also think that the left and right use substantially the same tactics to achieve waht are obviiously the same result, control. The right tells us we should be frightende of the left, the left tells us to be frightened of the right. Nether side gives a good goddamn about you and yours. What it boils down to is this: If Gore had been president instead of Bush, nothing in your life (or mine) would be any different today with the exception of what you bitch about (I'd still be bitching about the same things). That's what I mean when I say "substantially the same." Gato might have had some different experiences. Might have had exactly the same ones too.

re the fifty hours a week, that had nothing to do with our discussion, Sorry it went over your head like that. I was commiserating with Gato re the whole "tax bracket" problem.

Hug a tree and vote fer me!

:lol:
 
Ah, gee. It only took 13 paragraphs for the NY Times to point out the big picture. They're slowing down.

The people at the top of America's money pyramid have so prospered in recent years that they have pulled far ahead of the rest of the population, an analysis of tax records and other government data by The New York Times shows. They have even left behind people making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.

Call them the hyper-rich.

They are not just a few Croesus-like rarities. Draw a line under the top 0.1 percent of income earners - the top one-thousandth. Above that line are about 145,000 taxpayers, each with at least $1.6 million in income and often much more.

The average income for the top 0.1 percent was $3 million in 2002, the latest year for which averages are available. That number is two and a half times the $1.2 million, adjusted for inflation, that group reported in 1980. No other income group rose nearly as fast.

The analysis also found the following:

Under the Bush tax cuts, the 400 taxpayers with the highest incomes - a minimum of $87 million in 2000, the last year for which the government will release such data - now pay income, Medicare and Social Security taxes amounting to virtually the same percentage of their incomes as people making $50,000 to $75,000.

Those earning more than $10 million a year now pay a lesser share of their income in these taxes than those making $100,000 to $200,000.

The alternative minimum tax, created 36 years ago to make sure the very richest paid taxes, takes back a growing share of the tax cuts over time from the majority of families earning $75,000 to $1 million - thousands and even tens of thousands of dollars annually. Far fewer of the very wealthiest will be affected by this tax.
NY Times

Not once did they point out that that same group pays, in real numbers about as much tax as the bottom 50%. Let's lynch them & take their money. After all, GW knows how to spend it with the best of 'em.
 
Gonz said:
Not once did they point out that that same group pays, in real numbers about as much tax as the bottom 50%.

Doesn't it amaze you that after all this time (and these arguments have been going on as long as I've been paying attention, probably longer) that so many people still refuse to understand this?
 
Back
Top