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.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (157482)	5/29/2003 3:07:03 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

don't ya feel bad stealing from the nation's future? not even a little? You're starting to sound like GST. we spend more than we pay. that's stealing b/c someone will have to pay it. you can make a glib statement all ya want, but ya can't change the facts. the answer is... you don't care. not even a little. that's fine, but be HONEST. Did ya know that in 2003, 91 million taxpayers will receive, on average, a tax cut of $1,126 under the Jobs and Growth Act of 2003? averages are used to lie. how much of a break does steve forbes get? what is that divided by $1,126? that's the number of folks who get NOTHING and it all average out, right? "jobs and growth act" is a joke. my post of warren buffet's analysis shows that. it is the welfare for the elit rich where folks like buffet can reduce their tax rate 90%... w/o creating a single marginal job. Did ya know that in 2003, taxpayers with incomes over $100k will pay 73.3% of all income taxes, up almost 1% as a result of the act? if this is true, which i'm skeptical, it is only b/c the dems got their hands in and spoiled bush's plan - for at least one year, anyway... Did ya know that in 2001, taxpayers in the over $100k group accounted for 8.5% of all returns and 40.5% of all adjusted gross income, yet they pay close to 3/4 of all income taxes and the new "cuts" raise their share by a point? they own nearly 3/4 of america's wealth. you didn't mention that, though. paying about 3/4 of the taxes when you own about 3/4 of the wealth seems fair, right? if not, why not? you FAIL to address this point while spinning your other points. Doesn't exactly support your "tax-cuts-for-the-rich" mantra does it? read buffet's article... it absolutely does. i'm not necessarily criticizing the legislation that actually passed - b/c that wasn't what bush wanted to do. i was railing against what bush wanted to do. this act ain't it. i need to learn what, exactly, is in the act as passed. Do you even know the breakdown of the 2003 aggregate tax breaks between the dividend/cap gains cuts and all the other cuts? I don't think so. Would you like to know? Here: Accelerated 10-Percent Bracket Expansion: $5 B Accelerated Reduction in Income Tax Rates: $29 B Accelerated Reduction of Marriage Penalty: $19 B Accelerated Increase in Child Tax Credit: $16 B Total Relief from Ordinary Rate Cuts: $69 Billion Reduction in Tax Rates on Dividends and Capital Gains: $8 Billion come on, you think people are stupid. that assumes "all else beign equal." of course, "all else ain't equal." people change their behavior. buffet could set up a system where he gets a 90% tax cut to 3%. you seem to be sayign that isn't a tax break. maybe not on pluto, but on arth, it is. Increase in Small Business Expensing for New Investment: $3 B Increase in First-Year Bonus Depreciation: $20 B Total Relief from Business Tax Breaks: $23 Billion AMT Hold-Harmless Relief: $9 B Total 2003 Tax Relief: $109 B So, dividend and cap gains cuts account for less than 8% of the tax breaks this year. Again, your mantra isn't supported by the evidence. i never railed against this particular tax cut plan which is far, far, far different than bush's original plan that i did rail against. again, i need to learn more about this act - which is much different than what i originally railed against. i might even like this act - or large parts of it. you see, rd, i'm not against tax cuts per se. Perhaps you should do a little research next time - see if you can do better than GST's typical "in-depth analysis". rd, perhaps you ought to be honest instead of dishonest. the plan passed wasn't even on the table when i railed against bush's plan - WHICH WAS NEVER PASSED. treasury.gov treasury.gov treasury.gov you proved nothing but ya can dishonestly spin opposition to A into opposition for B. proud?