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: Srexley who wrote (542756)	2/19/2004 2:45:17 PM
From: Kenneth E. Phillipps	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769667

They are not paying 36% of the tax bill. They may be paying 36% of the income tax but they are paying 36% of total taxes. Big difference.

To: Srexley who wrote (542756)	2/19/2004 3:06:54 PM
From: Steve Dietrich	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

<<If they are using social security to pay for defense, someone in Washington is breaking the rules, aren't they?>> Are you really this ignorant about your own government's finances? <<And how does your point relate to the others feeling that 36% is not enough of the Fed tax bill for the top 1%.>> If we had a flat income tax, the top 1% would pay as much in taxes as they take in income. So if they earn 36% of the income, they should pay 36% of the taxes. That would be a true flat tax. So you're saying a flat tax would be too high, that the top one percent should have a lower rate than the middle class. I think it should go by wealth. The top 1% own about 40% of the nation's wealth, they should pay 40% of the federal taxes. But they don't. They pay less especially when you consider payroll taxes which, since you don't seem to know, go directly in to the general fund. Steve Dietrich