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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Bob Brinker: Market Savant & Radio Host -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chris J. Horne who wrote (14102)	5/11/2001 12:15:18 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 42834

>>The people who own 10% of the stuff pay 60% of the taxes. I think this is as it should be.<< this is incorrect. 10% of the people own about 60% of the stuff and pay about 60% of the taxes. >>However, when it comes time to reduce the taxes, those that pay the most should get the biggest reduction.<< sounds reasonable. i think the issue i have is magnitude. before cutting taxes, though, i'd argue debt reduction s/b a priority. i think the next generation would appreciate that a lot since this generation ran up all the bills. funny, i don't hear folks talking about all the services this generation stole from future generation. all i hear is people talking about what they can "get." robbing the next generation is fine as long "we" "get." >>Those that pay no taxes should not get a handout as part of the tax reduction. The benefit of tax reduction should be proportional to the amount of tax paid.<< we disagree on magnitude. my value system tells me that if given the choice between feeding children and adding a "0" to someone's account, i'd rather feed the children - even though they aren't my kids.