Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (132196)	3/16/2001 4:18:35 PM
From: Srexley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

I actually do not think 33% is reasonable. I only frame it that way because the dems are screaming about how "unfair" it is to the poor to reduce the highest rate from 39% to 33%. They use misleading statistics to swing public opinion their way. All the crap about how much the 1% of the wealthiest will "recieve" in tax breaks is propoganda aimed at the less educated. I believe the leaders (like Gore) know that, and therefore feel that they are dishonest in their methods. Otherwise they would frame the tax cut for wealthiest for what it is. Reducing it from 39% to 33%. It's hard to justify keeping such an outrageous tax rate, and they know it. Haven't had much luck getting any dems to respond to the real issue, which is: how high should the top bracket be for them to be happy? How much of someone else's blood and sweat should they be able to spend? Scott