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 : PRES GEORGE BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: geode00 who wrote (762)	4/12/2004 2:56:57 AM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 944

We are not even having major combat with a country 1/10th our size. Then why is the left screaming about the end of the world? . Remember, these are the lowest rates in 40 years and, unless the economy absolutely tanks, are more likely to go up than down. Yup. And all of us better pray the economy can take it. And I'm not betting on it. This looks like more clumsy interference with the market by the gov't. You're equating government spending and investing with trickle down bs. Apply it directly. We did. LBJ called it The Great Society. An abysmal failure. So, you think we're in recession? We were. Low interest rates, tax cuts, and deficit spending pulled us out. Good Liberal Keynesian in action. I never was fond of Keynes. The question has to be asked "But what happens when the gov't STOPS supporting the economy?" I still don't get your position on deficits. Come now. "THESE ARE THE LARGEST DEFICITS IN US HISTORY!!!!!!!" the left screams. True, in absolute $. BUT as a percent of GDP or or US revenue, they are not exceptional at all. THe liberals would have not take account of minor matters like GSP growth, population growth, and inflation. OF COURSE the absolute size of a surplus or deficits becomes larger with those in operation. The tax cuts are completely misleading. Local and state governments have shortfalls and raise property taxes, fees, etc. We get nickled and dimed to death so we end up paying anyway. "Local and state governments have shortfalls and raise property taxes, fees, etc. " They don't have to raise taxes, fees, etc. They can cut spending. Lots are doing just that. AND why should a state or county gov't receive one thin penny of federal gov't funds? Let the federal gov't support itself and the local gov'ts support themselves. This is precisely the way gov't was financed before "revenue sharing", so it can in fact work. The reason "revenue sharing" was shoved down the people's throats is beacause DC is a long way away and much harder to control, whereas local gov't is right at hand and its spending can be controlled by local citizenry. Was there really a tax cut for most Americans? Look at that graph and the figures behind it. The answer is yes. Remember, the AMT kicks in as well and wipes out a huge chunk. Ah, yes, the dear AMT, another liberal plot. Apparently a tax gone haywire but you really have to wonder. It was originally intended to catch about 50 families using dodges to avoid taxes- -bit it was not indexed. Now wasn't that cute? So as inflation continued and salaries were pushed by it, more and more people got snagged by AMT. When all is said and done, are the great majority of Americans actually paying MORE in taxes one way or another? If they are, the libs take the hit on this one. It was your idea. While only 19,000 people owed the AMT in 1970, 2.6 million are paying it now, according to the IRS. ........................................................... You should definitely run the numbers if your gross income is above $75,000 and you have write-offs for personal exemptions, taxes and home-equity loan interest. Ditto if you exercised incentive stock options during the year, or if you own a business, rental properties, partnership interests or S corporation stock. If you earn more than $100,000, run the numbers for that reason alone. smartmoney.com BUT In CA, possibly the state with highest income (NY or CT might be higher) in the best paid county (Ventura), the median family income was $59,666- -BELOW the level needed to trigger AMT. losangelesalmanac.com What wa that you were saying? Just for the record, nationwide the average family income was about $45,000. aspe.os.dhhs.gov "...By 2010, when (and if) the Bush tax reductions are fully in place, an astonishing 52 percent of the total tax cuts will go to the richest one percent—whose average 2010 income will be $1.5 million. Their tax-cut windfall in that year alone will average $85,000 each. Put another way, of the estimated $234 billion in tax cuts scheduled for the year 2010, $121 billion will go just 1.4 million taxpayers. Although the rich have already received a hefty down payment on their Bush tax cuts—averaging just under $12,000 each this year—80 percent of their windfall is scheduled to come from tax changes that won’t take effect until after this year, mostly from items that phase in after 2005. In contrast, the vast majority of taxpayers have already received most of their tax cuts from the 2001 legislation...." All of which assumes the tax law law has not been changed by 2010. I give a snowball in Hell a better chance.