That's income.....it doesn't begin to address their assets.
That's true but the income is what becomes their assets. If their income is going down their assets are probably not increaseing as fast. Also in many cases their assets went down more then their income as the stock market bubble burst in the last few years.
That is normal. Assets do not stay fixed. However, its their assets that make them really rich. And while those assets may fluctuate in value over the years, their grip on American assets remains steadfast.......the top 10% in this country control the vast majority of our assets. Its a shameful statistic.
" In fact, since the top in 2000, individual tax receipts have fallen by over 23% -- and there sure hasn't been any 23% tax cut in effect since 2000. And Social Security tax receipts continue to rise, indicating that it's not a matter of overall unemployment."
No
Why no? All of that is true.
That's just one metric. Besides, there's the matter of Bush and the GOP spending like there's no tomorrow. And Iraq is a prime recipient.
True but its the biggest one.
No, it isn't. Nearly a third of the deficit next year is due to Bush's spending in Iraq.
There you have it.......the rich aren't paying their fair share!
1 - The rich pay the majority of all taxes.
2 - ". But Bartlett calculates that, in fact, the top 1% paid a slightly higher tax rate on their diminished income than they had paid on their higher income the year before (27.50% in 2001 to 27.45% in 2000)."
I never thought I would post this statement but the American rich need to pay more.........they are getting off too easily. I need look no further than the Hilton legacy, Nicky and Paris, or the Bush daughters to know that they don't deserve to have so much money. They are an abomination/parasites on the land.
There should be a cap on inherited $$$ with the rest going into the national treasury.
ted |
