Tax cuts for the Rich

“Violin, your link that shows which states paid the most federal taxes and got the least back in return renewed by faith that there is justice. By and large, the states that got shafted the biggest went into the Gore column in the last Presidential election.”

“Teton County Is US Wealthiest
JACKSON, Wyo. (AP) - For the fourth time in six years, Teton County - gateway to Yellowstone National Park and home to the likes of Vice President Dick Cheney - is the wealthiest in America. Teton's average adjusted household gross income in 2002, the latest year for which data is available, was $107,694, or 2 percent higher than runner-up Fairfield County, Conn., according to the Internal Revenue Service. Other high-income counties were Marin, Calif., Somerset, N.J., and Morris, N.J. In Colorado, Clear Creek and Douglas counties ranked sixth and seventh, respectively. Rounding out the top 10 were Hunterdon, N.J., Westchester, N.Y., and New York, N.Y.”

“That’s exactly my point prosecutor – the notion of Republicans as rugged individualists is a myth – they are the biggest welfare queens in history.”

“Oh... and they seem to have trouble with the 6th and 7th commandments as well.”

“Stick....I think you're a nice, decent, hardworking guy. Likewise, I understand and applaud your pride in your state, region, family, etc. I know and love southerners.....some that would say that you aren't truly a southerner because you're from KY. LOL huh?

It's just that I've seen you post here in the past about the northern-southern, conservative-liberal contrast and it just rubs me the wrong way. Those assumptions from either side are baseless and wrong.

My parents were probably liberal in their politics and they are the salt of the earth....the best you could find. Good to their kids, community, yadda yadda. Men in my family have served their country bravely, some in actual combat.

Y'all don't have a monopoly on virtue. Period. To think otherwise is to live in a fantasy world.

You mentioned here awhile back that you wouldn't vote for Kerry because he was a northerner. If you don't like his postions that's one thing. But to not vote for him because he's from the north...that's just plain stupid.”

“I'd vote for that damn yankee in a heartbeat, LOL”

“JO I was baiting people with the remark about Kerry and Dean being from the north. I intentionally said that to get a rise, and evidently it worked if it stuck with you this long. As far as I know, that was the only time I mentioned north and south in regards to politics. I can't remember the thread it was on, but I think I explained that I only said it to fan the flames some, which I don't make a habit. I can't find the thread, I wish someone else would have better luck.
I don't have anything personal against someone whose politics are "liberal." Violin and Phaedrus...and Tilt (when he isn't posting obscure lyrics), are some of my favorites to read on the political threads. I have not said anywhere in this thread that Southerners or conservatives are better people than NE liberals. In fact I didn't mention conservative vs. liberal until someone incorrectly claimed that my pay was linked to "those awful NE Libs" to put it in your words, and even then I didn't make that the thrust of my posts.
If the conservative/liberal contrast rubs you the wrong way, you are probably upset with 99% of those who post on the political topics. I don't know what else to say, I'm glad you think I'm a nice guy I guess, and I hope you don't actually think I'm stupid enough to base my politics on geographical location. I'd like to think that isn't my reputation around here. I suppose everyone has someone on here that rubs them the wrong way. No hard feelings on my end.”

“Riiiight... that whole north/south routine was just flamebait.

Why do you choose to run away from your convictions when someone calls you on them?”

“You like to dig up old threads. Dig it up and see what I said (or ignore it since it doesn't say what you want it to).

Show me where I base my politics on geography. Oh and who was it that was bringing up the comparison between New Jersey and Kentucky?”

“Yeah Stick.....you're right. Most of the political posts here disgust me. However, I have to agree with Violin. You did equate your "good parents" with being "Southern Conservatives". Don't run from your convictions. Stand up and explain that stuff.”

“It was in response to the NE Liberal stuff someone else (you) brought up. What part of "Someone else brought up" confuses you all? Speaking of running from convictions, your conviction that I base politics on north/south has yet to be proved.”

“Stick....you still haven't stood up and explained your comment (conviction). What are you afraid of? Looking like a bigot?

So what. Yes, I did bring up the NE Liberal stuff and I'm glad I did. You took the bait and it gave you an opportunity to show yourself.

Your aw shucks, gee whiz disavowal is weak. Instead of changing the subject by pointing the finger at who brought it up, why don't you just stand by your beliefs.

Either intelligently explain how it is that NE Liberals aren't good parents or be a good southern gentleman and apologize. I'm puzzled by this.”

“Well gee whiz and aw shucks Stick....”

“[Bush's tax cuts are] "tilted toward the rich... I've got way more money in my pocket because of the tax change and I don't think it's a good idea."

-- Warren Buffet (world's second-richest man)”

“maybe he should spend some of it then, buy a new yacht, a lamborgini, or buy some property and hire someone to clear it, build on it, furnish the house, landscape the grounds, etc.

That way people who want to work for his money can get it.”

“Where does the tax cuts force Warren to keep the money ?

He is free to do what he wants with his money, if it is a problem in his pocket, give it away.”

“I doubt it is in his pocket. Its somewhere gaining interest. As a matter of fact, I think I might have just borrowed some of it in my search for a new car.”

“"Faith-based economics".”

“Axtually Buffet has such faith in Bush's mismanagement of the economy that he's put most of his money in foreign currencies over the last 2 years.”

“He's made out like a bandit, then.”

“Excerpt from: Bush campaign holds rally in Va.

Bush criticized Kerry's plan to eliminate the tax cuts for those making more than $200,000 a year, saying that the "the rich in America happen to be the small business owners" who put people to work.

Bush also said high taxes on the rich are a failed strategy because "the really rich people figure out how to dodge taxes anyway."”

“Yeah.... They vote for him, LOL”

“Maybe it's because of #&%!$ like this:



Tech Company Settled Tax Case Without an Audit

By DAVID CAY JOHNSTON

Remy Welling is a senior auditor for the Internal Revenue Service with 22 years' experience. But when she was handed the file on a company suspected of underpaying its taxes, it contained something she had never seen before in such a case: an agreement to close the audit before it had even begun.

Instead of being given tax returns to examine, Ms. Welling was asked to sign off on a secret deal worked out by other officials at the I.R.S. The deal, she ultimately calculated, would allow a Silicon Valley company and its top executives to escape at least $51 million in additional taxes that she was convinced they should have paid.

Moreover, the agreement required the I.R.S. to cooperate with the company, a relatively small semiconductor maker named Micrel, in keeping its shareholders uninformed on some basic terms of its stock-option plan, which Ms. Welling said enriched the four top executives by as much as $20 million in total.

For I.R.S. agents, nothing is more sacred than the privacy of a tax return. Revealing information about an audit can open an agent to criminal prosecution.

But Ms. Welling has decided to discuss what happened to her in this case, she said in an interview, because she believes that it represents a particularly striking example of how outside influence and internal obsequiousness is corrupting the integrity of the tax system.

She is willing to risk going to jail, Ms. Welling said, to bring the issue to public attention.

"Someone has to tell the public about what is going on inside the I.R.S.,'' Ms. Welling said, adding that she is about to be fired for going outside the agency by taking her complaint to the F.B.I. and the Securities and Exchange Commission.

I.R.S. officials, citing privacy concerns, declined to discuss any aspects of Ms. Welling's case or the agreement with Micrel Inc. of San Jose, Calif., which had revenue last year of $241 million.
continued...”

“Close the loopholes. Whne the rich folks and the companies begin to complain, just say...."If you don't like it here, you can move." (1)















(1) Rush Limbaugh”

“Do you really think a person who has worked hard and become successful should pay a higher percentage of tax than the normal person.. Brilliant lets penalize the productive and successful..then cross our fingers and hope the economy continues to grow...”

“1. Why are people that are monetarily wealthy no considered normal?

2. Let's assume that when you say a "normal person", you are talking about people in the middle class.
* Do they not work as hard as wealthier class folks?
* Is all success measured on the money somebody makes?

3. We have crossed our fingers and hoped the economy grows by giving tax cuts to the wealthy, and this, again, has proven to be a complete failure. The exact opposite has happened. When you pump money into the great majority of people, history has shown the economy booms.

4. The middle and lower class actually pays a higher percentage of taxes than rich folks.

Example:

Person #1, earns $100,000 per year, pays 35% in income taxes. That is $35,000 per year in income taxes.

Person #2, earns $50,000 per year, pays 30% in income taxes. That is $15,000 in taxes.

Lets assume that both of these people are single and drive the same amount each year. Let's also assume that gas prices are constant, and the tax is .20 per gallon. Furthermore, lets assume that each uses 1,000 gallons of gas per year for thier car.

Now:
Person #1 is paying - $35,200 p/y in taxes. The percentage of taxes paid is now 35.2% of thier discrecionary income.

Person #2 is paying - $15,200 p/y in taxes. The percentage of taxes paid is now 30.4% of thier discretionary income.

That means, the person making $50,000 pays .2% more in taxes than the person making $100,000.

If Person A paid $5,000 more per year in sales and other "common" taxes, they would be paying 40% of thier discretionary income in taxes. If person B paid $5,000 more per year in sales and "common" taxes, they would be paying 40% of thier discretionary income in taxes.

This is how the middle class pay more percentage of discretionary income in taxes that upper class. They work just as hard, and in many cases even harder than the upper class, yet yield less discretionary income.

Another thing that you should take into consideration are things that everybody, by law, must have. If you own an automobile, the law requires that you pay car insurance. The rates are the same for similar cars, this has the same effect.

This, ultimately, is what makes the rich, richer, and creates a much larger tax burden on the middle class.

In addition to the above, lets say that, in order to keep your communities school functional, you need to pass a levy that would add $200 per year on your house payment for person 2, and $500 for person 1. If person 1 passes the tax in thier community, thier schools thrive, and thier home value goes up. If person 2 can't afford the increase due thier finacial status, thier schools suffer, and thier property values go down, creating more wealth for person #1.

Furthermore, lets say that person #1 gets free health insurance, which is the case for the majority of people making over $100,000. And that person #2 has to pay the "industry standard" (HC Consultant) 20% toward insurance. For arguement's sake, the premiums are $400 per month. HC increases 25% this year. Person 1 pays $0. Person #2, in addition to the $960 per year they pay, they will have a $240 per year increase in thier HC costs.

Who is being burdened here, the upper class or the middle class?”

“I grew up in a lower middle class, immigrant family. My dad was an auto mechanic and my mom was a substitute teacher.

America helped me out with college grants and loans. I worked hard. My fiance and I are now earning, according to US Census records, salaries at the top of what it means to be middle class.

The money that helped me go to college came from someone else's pocket through taxation. But it was a good deal because I will pay many times more in taxes during my career than I would have without the education.

It's a classic case of investment. A small amount was spent that generated large amounts of cash later.

And I will have no problem paying taxes at a higher rate because I'm darn happy to be earning a good living. And I know that someone else out there will also be a good investment for society.

Successful people don't exist in a vacuum.

God Bless America!”

“I don't usually post too much personal info, but RL's example above has prompted me.

I grew up in Southwestern PA at a time when all the steel mills and coal mines were closing down (watch "The Deer Hunter" w DeNiro... GREAT flick & very, very accuarte of the people & the times). Unemployment was rampant, and in general it was an incredibly depressed (and depressing) area. Many of the kids I grew up with "aspired" to a job in the coal mines, or, if you were really lucky, in construction. This was the "peak" of their dreams... very low to say the least, but that's all most of us knew.

I lost a very good friend at 16 to a cave-in at a local mine, he was a really great guy, I think of him often. I had numerous conversations w my high school classmates about Viet Nam, after all, this was the late '60's & the draft was on all of our minds. A few "older brothers" of some of us had already been lost.

I decided that none of that was for me... no early death in the coal mnes, and I would get an education at an institution of higher learning vs. an education in rifle maintenance in Southeast Asia. I left that small town & went to college in Pittsburgh. I had a student deferment when I was 18, and when I turned 19 the lottery was introduced, and by luck, my birthday fell on day 320 or some rediculously high #, so I knew I wasn't headed to Viet Nam. Whew. A lot of my friends are still there, in the ground somewhere, and their names are on the wall in Wash DC.

Here's the point... I came from nothing, basically knew nothing, except that I wanted more than was available to me in that litle corner of PA. I had no parental or professional guidance, and many thought I was nuts to strike out on my own as I did. I took out loans, and worked up to 16 hours a day at times to pay my way thru school.

THAT's why I believe so much in "the American Dream". That's also why I don't believe in someone taking my $$ to give to someone else who is capable of getting a job. Because I saw a lot of very negative situations, I also strongly believe in a basic "safety net", so I'm not a right-wing Republican "radical". BUT, I see an America turning away from self-relience & self-responsibility to a "gimme, gimmee" mentality, as if we "owe" people something beyond the opportunity to succeed.

If I was able to climb out of my situation, then ANYONE can. I am not brilliant, I have no special talent or expertise, but I work hard and believe in achievement and the benefits of always doing your best, and of taking responsibility for whatever and wherever you are in life.

We all control our own destiny, no one else does, and to blame others, to me, seems to be the "excuse" of a weak person.

I believe in conservative principles, because they bring out the best in people. I disagree with socialism and income re-distribution, because that seems to bring out the worst in people.”

“Wanderer,

I'll bet if we went out for beers, we'd have a good time.

And I think that we probably aren't as opposed to each other as the above posts would suggest.

I guess I kind of feel like the financial advisor who talks about "good debt" and "bad debt." Good debt is the mortgage and the college loan. It helps to generate wealth over the long-term. Bad debt is the credit card balance.

Government assistance is kind of like that. The government gives money to support innovative research in health care, alternative batteries, etc, with the idea that it will return value to the country over the long term.

The government supports freeways with the idea that the commerce transported over the road will generate wealth and revenue several times more than the cost of pavement.

And I think that one of the best revenue generators in government spending is the money spent on sending people to college. It generates revenue over the long term.

I also think that the ability to attend college has become more difficult in recent years. Costs are higher. I knew many people who worked two jobs and still ended up accrueing large amounts of debt.

Of course, like credit card debt, there is also bad government spending. Programs that engender dependency are bad.”

“Maybe we should have a card to identify what your tax bracket is and have the wealthy pay more for gas. Lets just do that for every product out there. Stop your whining!”

“WASHINGTON (AP) - Administration officials on Wednesday denied that President Bush is considering a national sales tax, a day after the Republican incumbent created a stir by calling such a tax "an interesting idea that we ought to explore seriously."
<snip>

kansascity.com”

“This line from your post just blows me away:

"We have crossed our fingers and hoped the economy grows by giving tax cuts to the wealthy, and this, again, has proven to be a complete failure."

What are you talking about? The economic growth in this country is, well ... ”

“messed up the html - click the underline in above post”

“Gee Rev, ya mean Bush flip-flopped?”

“And it wasn't when he was a 19-year-old kid, but just yesterday???”

“Explore seriously doesn't mean consider implementing. It seems reasonable to explore lots of things.”

“Is it true? Well if you pick the right three quarters -- the first quarter of this year and the second half of last year, to be exact -- it is technically true. Over these three quarters the economy grew by 5.4 percent, which is faster than any other 9-month period in the past 20 years. But not by much. For the last 9 months of 1999, for example, the economy grew by 5.1 percent.

But why take 9 months? If we look at the last year, it's not any record at all. Similarly for the last two years. And since the recession ended in the last quarter of 2001, the economy has grown by 3.6 percent. This not bad, but not particularly strong growth for a recovery from a recession -- when the economy usually grows at a much faster than normal rate.

In the same speech Mr. Bush also bragged about the 1.5 million jobs created since last August. This impressive-sounding number also depends on a careful selection of time period. If we look at Mr. Bush's whole presidential term, the economy is still down more than a million jobs. Even the 1.5 million jobs created during Mr. Bush's selected ten months are a weak performance, barely enough to keep pace with the growth of the labor force.

The economy from here on will have to do better than even Mr. Bush's "brag period," just for him to avoid the record achievement of being the first president since the Great Depression to preside over a net loss of jobs for the country.

Perhaps the worst part of the "job-loss" recovery for most people has been that real wages -- adjusted for inflation -- have actually fallen over the last year. This means that most Americans are literally not getting anything out of our "record" growth.

The Bush administration does have some real 20-year record-breaking numbers but they are not the kind that it would like to advertise. Here's the gold medal: our Federal budget deficit of $639 billion for 2004 is 5.6 percent of GDP, the highest since 1983, and second highest since World War II. Of course this figure from the Congressional Budget Office counts the borrowing from the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds -- which any good accountant would tell you should be counted, because it will have to be paid back.

This knocks the wind out of another of President Bush's recent economic boasts: that the tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003 were a sound economic policy that ought to be continued. It is true that the tax cuts provided some modest stimulus to the economy, as opposed to doing nothing at all. But doing nothing was never the only practical alternative, and most economists would see these tax cuts as terribly irresponsible.

That's because the tax cuts build a huge structural deficit into our federal budget, for years and even decades to come, until they are reversed. Another record: federal tax revenues are at their lowest in more than 50 years, as a percentage of our economy.

For a small fraction of the trillions of dollars of deficit spending that the tax cuts have created over the next decade, we could have gotten the same or greater stimulus to the economy from a temporary rebate aimed at the majority of households -- and not so concentrated on the "haves and the have-mores."

About 24 percent of the Bush tax cuts have gone to the highest income one-percent of taxpayers. These are people who had already increased their after-tax income by 139 percent from 1979 to 2001 -- more than a $400,000 increase after inflation.

The Bush Administration decided that these were the folks who most needed more tax breaks: on capital gains, dividends, and inheritances. Now there's another record we could break: for inequality of income and wealth in America.

Center for Economic and Policy Research”

“For an article that bad mouths picking and choosing, it sure does do a lot of picking and choosing.”

“I hear everyday on this board from the Repubs that everything is fine and growing.

I see and hear everyday on the radio, in the classroom and on the streets that things are bad.

Whose *right*?”

“In real life laqtis, is it that bad? Do you personally know people who are so bad off?

If so, please describe their situation. I'd be interested in hearing it since I personally don't know anybody that bad off.”

“Come on up to Northern CA...we have loggers and Mill workers laid off to name a few, they closed the paper Mill too....most of the available jobs are at WalMart, fast food chains and retail in the malls..all paying minimum wage. Hospitals are closing in the surrounding area and they just closed the mental health hospital in Redding.

If you need a job around here, it's going to take two to keep a roof over your head, food in the fridge and gas in your car.”

“Go online. According to Monster.com, California LEADS the nation in online job availability.

I don't believe that it is that bad. We are at full employment (5.5%), and CA leads in online availability.

I'm sorry, I don't buy it.

These loggers and mill workers need to find another skill. That's how it works. The world is becoming more high-tech. Skilled labor is forced to find other means of making income. If they don't do anything to learn a new skill, then yes, they have to work at WalMart. It's up to them. Not George Bush. To blame him for that situation is self-defeating.”

“Are you better off now than you were when Jimmy Carter was President?”

“MUCH!!! I remember those dark days.”

“The voters will decide who's better off.”

“Macgyver, easy to say, from your chair, that someone should just "get a new skill". In order to get a new skill, it takes education. Are you going to deny that the costs of education are as through the roof as everything else? And, if some of those folks can't pick up a job that pays a living wage, just how easy is it for the general populace to pick up this new skill you callously refer to. Not that easy, is it? But, I guess if you are sitting where you are, it's easy to make blanket statements like that...”

“treebeard

I did it.

I was in sales. In the 1990s commissions started to plummet. I learned computers and now am a programmer.

So yes, from my chair, it is easy to say that.”

“Yes, you did it! You should feel good about yourself. Nothing wrong with that. Still doesn't address what I said.

Hey, man. I am not trying to just bust your balls here. But, if it were that cut 'n' dried, everyone in the country would be competing for the same jobs and society would have much more balance. But, reality sets in and we know it isn't that way...”

“Tell me Treebeard.

What specifically is preventing somebody you know from doing what I did?”

“Money is one thing. education is through the roof and it could prevent someone from getting the education needed to switch gears. If a person has been a laborer for 15-20 years and really doesn't have the skills to move forward technologically, it may be rough to do it without the formal education. He/she may have kids that they are providing for and can't go to work and go to school full time. It's much easier for a person to concentrate on an education when they don't have 1,200 mitigating factors in their lives to deal with.

The scenarios are actuallt plentiful. That's just one that comes to mind, as long as you asked...”