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.

Pastimes : My House -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bald Eagle who wrote (2086)	10/4/2002 11:03:11 AM
From: Poet	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 7689

Did you ever consider that giving millions and millions of dollars in tax cuts to multi-millionaires means millions and millions of dollars less for things like infrastructure support? Of course you did, and I considered the facts when I came up with my opinion about Bush's tax cuts for the super-wealthy. We disagree.

To: Bald Eagle who wrote (2086)	10/4/2002 11:32:02 AM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 7689

the highest income people pay most taxes Guess who got fooled again. The rich pay a lower proportion of their income as tax than all but the very poorest, with the super-rich coming off best. It's those in the 20%-60% bands who pay out most. Presumably you're in that top 5%. In which case, the only thing to stop you being smug must be the knowledge that your children are likely to have a lower standard of living than you, and your grandchildren still worse. BTW, it's facile to cut taxes on the poorest. End tax exemptions, reduce sales taxes on non-luxury goods, and increase taxes on luxuries. Meanwhile, since the richest 5% (or 10%, I forget) have ~40% of the wealth, isn't it right that they should pay ~40% of the tax?