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: cnyndwllr who wrote (443113)	8/14/2003 6:09:45 PM
From: Bald Eagle	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Your understanding of math is very poor. Even if I pay more of a % of the total, if the total is reduced enough, I am paying less tax.

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (443113)	8/14/2003 6:40:55 PM
From: Srexley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

"for middle income Americans in the 28k to 337k " That's a pretty big middle class. Are you sure that is an accurate portrayal of the middle class in America. Looks like it covers just about everybody except the bottom few percent and the top 1%. That said, I'll make some comments about your prejudicial and misleading article. "will leave middle-income taxpayers paying a greater share of all federal taxes by the end of the decade" So what? This says nothing of the size of this group. If the group grows, they will be paying more. It also is a such a wide range that it is meaningless. I think ALL WORKING AMERICANS should pay taxes. My guess is that the guys (and gals) making over $337,000 pay upwards of 20% of all Fed taxes (the top 10% of wage earners PAY 60%!), and therefore pay their share. I know bloodsuckers like the writer of this article want more of their money, but we are not a socialist country. Sorry. Move to France if you don't like it. "low-income taxpayers will also enjoy a disproportionately lighter tax burden" Isn't that good from your pov? George W. Bush is a compassionate man, that's for sure. "The findings, by two groups that have been critical of the Bush administration's tax policies" Funny that the only two groups that "found" this are groups that have been critical of Bush's policies. "The result may be a surprise to both sides: By the end of the decade, the middle class will be picking up a greater share of the government's tab" A) There is no support for this other than the people writing it down. B) Who cares? The super rich pay more than their share, and the super poor can get some breaks to help them better themselves. C) The greedy, bloodsucking, condescending, unappreciative creatons like yourself who think that they should determine how much of someone else's wealth they should be able to take give me the creeps. Again, the top 10% pay 60% of the bill, and the top 1% pay 30%. I know you want more, and you have great disdain for these evil people that don't want to give more than 35% of their earnings away for the Feds to waste, but that is tough crap. Your silly convoluted arguments about how this tax break is really a tax increase is laughable and lame. Like I said, you are either not too smart, or you are comfortable using dishonest tactics to extract more money from the succesful folks for the Feds to waste.