English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

the biggest benefit will go to the highest income bracket: their tax rate will be cut from 38.6 percent to 35 percent, a drop of 3.6 percent. The middle income tax brackets will be cut only 2 percent (from 27, 30 and 35 percent to 25, 28 and 33 percent). The lowest income tax brackets, 10 and 15 percent, will not be reduced at all.


So those rich people only pay 35% of their income

while the middle class pays 25-33 %

and the lower class has to pay a whopping 10-15%


Geeez how dare they only make the rich pay 3 times higher percentage of tax than the poor!!!!!

2006-10-11 04:08:04 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

----------

ahh,,, casandra is a socialist. she wants to take away someones money because they have more of it.

2006-10-11 04:12:13 · update #1

cliff,, so noone bought your 3 books, and you want to blame Bush?

2006-10-11 04:14:09 · update #2

map,, the poor ALREADY HAS A 20% TAX CUT!

2006-10-11 04:19:37 · update #3

TOM, you are a liar!

2006-10-11 04:20:13 · update #4

kevin, nice info

2006-10-11 04:21:02 · update #5

21 answers

A sales tax would be far more effective than an income tax. Here is why:
1) Stores are already set up to collect the tax via their point of sales systems. It is a simple upgrade to add another sales tax line in the system. This cuts out the IRS completely for doing income tax.

2) As it has been pointed out the guy making $10,000,000 has more spending cash than the guy making $10,000. At $10,000 the person would pay no sales tax because they would get a rebate from the government for sales tax collected. The guy making $10 Million would pay sales tax on everything they purchase (food, clothes, cars, houses, etc.). So lets say the sales tax is 20%, they pay $2 million in sales tax. There are no mortgage deductions, etc. It is simply a straight tax.

3) By eliminating the income tax, you gain $10 Billion or so which is the budget for the IRS enforcement each year for the income tax piece. So you end up coming out ahead. So you have $10 Billion extra for the politicians to deal with.

An income tax is a stupid way to collect taxes. It was designed in the 1860's to pay for the civil war. So here we are 146 years later using something that was not designed for today's society. So talk about being inefficient.

2006-10-11 04:38:12 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

This question should be under economics. It is an economics question and I HATE economics because 99% of the American people do not understand it. Economically we are too much about our own personal bottome line and we do not see the big picture. The claim is that by cutting the taxes for the extremely rich (usually large business owners) they will in turn be able to reinvest that money in their business and offer more jobs. Unfortunately, if you follow business at all you know that this has not been the case. The companies and individuals reaping the benefits of these tax cuts are simply padding their own wallets more. The businesses that have experienced this failed policy of tax cuts for the rich and business owners have in fact CUT jobs and caused a greater rift between lower classes and upper classes. The gap between the wealthy and the poor is larger than ever and the middle class is disappearing. Increasingly, if you read the information instead of the opinions of the information, you see middle class families falling into the lower class more often thanmoving up to the upper classes. This can be attributed in part to the tax cuts for businesses. As companies like Ford, GM, Microsoft, and Intel SLASH their work forces by 20,000 to 50,000 jobs, we will continue to see this gap grow. When a company states they are cutting jobs by offering early retirement and buy outs they are really hurting our economy. Someone who is retired early will not be given enough money to last until they are old enough to draw their pension and social security. So they will be forced to accept a job elsewhere for minimum wage or slightly more thereby decreasing their income and position in society.

2006-10-11 04:37:01 · answer #2 · answered by ThinkingMan2006 4 · 0 0

Don't forget that there are personal exemptions and also that the tax schedule doesn't even start until you've made thousands of dollars already.

The poor and the middle class pay far less of their income in federal income taxes than you mentioned.

Would it shock you to learn that the top 25% of income earners paid 85% of the federal income taxes? That's up from 80% in 1986. So not only do the rich pay the most taxes, their "share" has increased! The bottom 50%'s share went from 6.5% in 1986 to 3.3% in 2004. The poor and middle class are paying less in income taxes than ever before. I'm not making this up, see the official IRS data below.

Gaspode - you obviously didn't read my answer, because IRS data proves the rich pay far more in taxes than anyone else. Check it out yourself.

2006-10-11 04:19:38 · answer #3 · answered by Uncle Pennybags 7 · 1 0

This is why a flat tax proposal will not work either. If you implement that proposal then the higher income will be taxed less and the lower income taxes will be increased. Unless you want everyone to pay 10%.

Thank you for pointing out another misnomer of common knowledge politics.

2006-10-11 04:27:53 · answer #4 · answered by homerbethy 2 · 0 0

When I was young my dad paid 90% in tax. It was considered excessive to make more than a certain amount without paying more. It was also a punishment for being a Capitalist Running Dog. Now it all the way down to 35%, that is before tax attornies. Now the super-rich wish to have it come down further, while those who pay 10 - 15% cannot afford to pay the taxes they have now.

2006-10-11 04:10:06 · answer #5 · answered by michaelsan 6 · 0 1

You make a common mistake, that the wealthy actually pay taxes on their income.

Good example, Lee Iacocca, the man who eliminated the middle coat of paint on your car to save money and blamed environmentalists when the paints pealed.

Good old Lee usually declares an income of less than $6000, and pays no income tax.

2006-10-11 04:24:41 · answer #6 · answered by Gaspode 7 · 0 0

I am going to repeat part of what I said in the last question you posted:

What is effect my vote is the amount (or lack thereof) in my paycheck every two weeks, and what life cost. During this administration, even though I have gained more skills, and have been more productive then I have ever been (atop of schooling and a full time job, I have written three books with accompanying blogs), my income has gone down, and my expenses have gone up. That is what the GOP means to me. Call me names, tell me I am wrong. It does not matter. The conservatives will never get my support again. The GOP had its chance to show what Compassionate Conservatism is, and what I have seen is no better then the Robber Barons of the past. As far as I am concerned you lose. You lose.

2006-10-11 04:11:59 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

Don't you know that success should be punished? Otherwise the Democrats will have no way to hold the poor down.

Don't forget to define the highest bracket. What is it now, about $150k? Who wants to give 1/3 of their earned money to the government when they work as hard or harder than those who make $100k which will contribute only 1/4 of their money.

2006-10-11 04:14:37 · answer #8 · answered by El Pistolero Negra 5 · 2 1

Where is the evidence that tax cuts are good for the economy, and therefore for the poor and middle class? I'd like you to prove that first.

2006-10-11 04:22:22 · answer #9 · answered by notme 5 · 0 0

hey the rich have money to spare. think about it if you make $100 to feed your family and have to give back $10 - 15 feels like you aren't left with much, but if you add a few zeros at the end, it dont hurt so much

2006-10-11 04:11:45 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers