SI
SI
discoversearch

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 (542807)2/19/2004 8:22:00 PM
From: Steve Dietrich  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 769667
 
<<Like so many lefty arguers, you are leaving out a pretty significant fact. I understand that you have to do this to make your argument "make sense", but it is a dishonest tactic. You are leaving out the lower class.>>

Ah it is you who are being dishonest.

I haven't left out the lower income workers. I've been talking about payroll taxes from the beginning. 75% of workers pay more in payroll taxes than they do in income taxes. How can we not talk about them when talking about taxes?

It's people like you who refuse to talk about the lower income workers when you pretend they pay no taxes. They're getting reamed, and of all of us they can least afford it.

Why don't Republicans ever talk about cutting taxes for them?

<<Maybe my math is screwy, but all those paying 0% Fed tax (30% to 40% of the people), now go to 10% flat tax too (ouch!). Mr. compassionate. I assume this is why dems avoid the idea like the plague. But I like it.>>

Again you leave out payroll taxes which are regressive and are paid by every worker no matter how near the bottom he is.

And the bottom 40% own less than 1% of the nation's wealth so they wouldn't be paying a lot of taxes with a flat wealth tax.

The top 20% who own 83% of the nation's wealth would have to pay a lot more. The middle class who are getting screwed would pay less. And the bottom would be about the same.

Steve Dietich