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: rich4eagle who wrote (276502)	7/17/2002 2:13:21 PM
From: Dan B.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Re: "Well Danny, two things for starters, the bulk of taxes do not come from the little guy, they pay very little in taxes" Frankly, I'm not looking up the numbers(in dispute anyway), but you may be right that the top 10% pay more than half the taxes. But I do feel sure that tax revenue depends a great deal upon monies from those falling below the top say, 10%, or as I equated, "the little guy." Flat Rate Taxes are clearly emminently fair, IMO. Currently, though the "rich" pay, as you seem to recognize, more than their fair Flat Rate share, we would have to wipe the rich out altogether(and then some, I think) to replace what is taken from the vast masses below them- not a good idea. As the old Ten Years After song put it(sarcastically, I like to think) "tax the rich, feed the poor, 'til there are no rich no more." Re: "Thus either cut spending if you insist on cutting taxes or raise taxes if you insist on raising spending." The problem with this is on the higher taxes/higher spending side. Anytime a population itself loses influence on an economy due to a Government spending the money instead of masses of individuals(hence altering the very nature of the jobs the individuals with-in society do throughout their lives) , the world is, as I'll apply the pharse, "dummed down" to the detrimate of us all. A few minds in Government will never make better overall decisions with the money individuals must earn, than the individuals who earned it. IMO, it is you who have a lot to learn about Economics. And just as the market rose the very day you foolishly predicted it would suffer a great fall in a post to me recently, you have to be sheerly contrary to dismiss what the Economy is actually doing, in favor of your one-sided and un-realistic doomsday scenario. Sure, there is evidence to make your case, but there is a wealth of evidence that this Economy has been turning around, too. The fall, it seems to me, undeniably started prior to Bush, and the turn-around is likely happening under him- right now- like it or not. Dan B