are you aware that the following can happen:
person X makes more money than person Y.
After taxes, person Y has more money than person X
If a tax break corrects that, is that one of those "tax cuts for the "rich"?
Notice i did not use numbers so some of you can say, "he's not rich , so your question is unanswerable"
2006-12-14 06:40:29 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Are you aware that tax deductions are rarely-except for the mortgage interest deduction-used by the middle class-because they can't take advantage? Are you aware that a $500,000 gross income can be reduced to a $38000 taxable income-simply though tax credits and tax deductions? As a former financial planner, I've seen this. At the $150,000 to 200,000 level, tax deductions become really useful. Virtually, no one at that level is paying paying the stated tax rate, but uses deductions and tax credits to lower taxable income to a much lower rate because they can afford to hire expensive accountants and tax attorneys.
2006-12-14 07:23:39 · answer #1 · answered by Middleclassandnotquiet 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
What this questioner doesn't get is that the tax cuts don't have an economic impact unless they are coupled with spending cuts.
Under Bush the taxes were cut but spending rose dramatically. Use the Yahoo search engine and type in "CATO Bush Mother of all big spenders." Departments of Education and Labor saw massive spending increases in Bush's first two years.
Then came the prescription drug bill (estmated cost $500 billion in its first ten years). Conservative columnist George WIll reported that the drug bill was more dangerously underfunded than Social Security.
Then there was the transportation bill (close to $300 billion).
And what is especially horrible about that spending was it came AFTER the war started. A war that the Bush adminkistration contended came with a price tag that was impossible to calculate.
2006-12-14 14:50:45 · answer #2 · answered by Timothy B 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Liberals who hate the "tax cuts for the rich" forget that the wealthy pay far more in taxes than anybody else. The people in the top 5% of wealth categories pay 63% of all taxes.
And they're not taxed heavily enough? Gimme a break!
I've heard it said that "a communist was somebody who had nothing, and wanted to share it with everyone." Sounds a lot like today's liberals, doesn't it. "You have money, so give it to me."
2006-12-14 14:45:30 · answer #3 · answered by Dave_Stark 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Makes sense. However, if we based taxes on a lump sum percentage as opposed to based on how much one makes, then person X would still have more than person Y, but neither would have dramatically more or less. That's my proposed solution.
2006-12-14 14:45:16 · answer #4 · answered by Huey Freeman 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you're not on some sort of government assistance (and thus statistically more likely to vote for liberals) you must be rich.
Give it up until you need one of the fine programs we have designed to 'help' you.
2006-12-14 14:50:21 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is the same old argument used by people who simply do not understand the system.
Clueless.
And stating that the top 5% pay 63% of taxes is a useless statistic if you do not include the percentage of the TOTAL (passive and active) income they make.
2006-12-14 14:45:24 · answer #6 · answered by boredperv 6 · 0⤊ 4⤋
I am overwhelmed with the persuasiveness of your towering intellectual argument.
2006-12-14 14:44:19 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Please refrain from confusing the communists with factual demonstrations. They only get upset and use more drugs.
2006-12-14 14:43:18 · answer #8 · answered by pedohunter1488 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋