Leave the middle class and poor alone. Lets go after the top 5% and make them pay their fair share.
2006-11-08 01:01:07 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
YES
2006-11-08 01:06:24 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Define "their fair share". The top 5% already pay WAY more than 5% of taxes - which I agree with, by the way - a progressive tax rate is reasonable. But confiscation isn't. Would you not be happy unless the very rich are paying 90% in taxes? What incentive does that give them to continue to create jobs for the poor and middle class?
2006-11-08 09:29:20 · answer #2 · answered by Judy 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
5% pay 85% already. I guess they are not paying their fair share, huh? BTW, check the CBO and IRS for that confimation.
The tax cuts must be renewed, so they will fade away.....and then so to will this roaring economy that we have. You see, poor people do not write pay checks. Take away money for payroll, and poor people make less and less poor people work. Kinda like making a big stink about the minimum wage...considering that uner 8% of American citizens make minimum wage.
2006-11-08 09:07:51 · answer #3 · answered by lundstroms2004 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Charlie Wrangle has already said he will keep none of the tax cuts. That means for the middle class, too. Poor don't pay taxes, they receive.
2006-11-08 09:04:47 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well, if Bush learns how to Veto, then there's not a lot that can happen. At least there is some sort of voice of dissent in Washington D.C. now.
2006-11-08 09:05:30 · answer #5 · answered by Enterrador 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
NO, why is it they have to pay their share. Why is it that people like me who work their tails off have to have 50% of our money stolen by thieves like you who want a handout. You are so un-American you have no idea. If people like me did not take the risk, people like you would not have a job. BTW, the top 10% pay half of the federal taxes. How much more do you want?
You are not worth me telling you what you really are.
2006-11-08 09:04:27 · answer #6 · answered by Chainsaw 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Probably not. Bush would probably veto any such legislation
2006-11-08 09:03:06 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! good one. i needed a good laugh today.
2006-11-08 09:13:57 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
no
2006-11-08 09:02:14 · answer #9 · answered by helllo1234 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋