To: jttmab who wrote (23492 ) 11/11/2003 5:12:56 PM From: MSI Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 93284 That's a thoughtful post -- I disagree on a couple points, tho' A nobel economist just stated on the Charlie Rose show (tivo'd from last night) that the entire tax-cut benefit to the economy was from the lower-income cuts not in the original bill, but pushed for by Dems. The idea is that upper tax bracket folks are well-off which means by defninition they don't need to spend the marginal increase. Where I disagree is that our tax rates are a bargain, but only because I'm convinced gov't is 2X too large, could be providing better social-net benefits at 1/2 the price with a privatized medical system under the Swiss model, and would make the US safer with conscription and 1/2 the budget. It may take another few decades but if we survive the Bush threat of an all-powerful and suicidal gov't, we'll have sufficient technical and physical prosperity to maintain a safety net on much less of the GDP. Most Americans will pay more in SS Taxes in their lifetime than they will Federal Taxes. The heavy tax burden for the larger majority of people originates mostly at the State/Local level, through State/local income taxes, property taxes, sales tax, tax of liquor, gas etc....that's where the bigger money goes and virtually all that States are raising taxes now. And those tax increase affect lower income people more than higher income people...the sales tax...the ultimate flat tax. You can be unemployed with zero income and you're still paying sales tax. Right as rain ... but concealed from any GOP discussion, since it puts the lie to their real agenda, which is to centralize power, loot the treasury, and blame the results on anyone not in on the game.