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 : John McCain for President -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (4657)	10/20/2008 9:44:16 PM
From: Dan B.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6579

Heres hoping the people rise up, not that I agree with all your points, specifically not your notion of ending "policies that transfer wealth to the top 1%." I wouldn't know what Bush policies to change that would do any good, other than opposing this "bailout" and reducing all taxes and spending to a point which neither of the two major parties would ever agree to without being beaten into submission while screaming notions of the "end of the world" if government is thus reduced. A change in the tax level on the wealthy isn't the problem. We know they pay more than their equal share by all accounts (by the policies in place still, now), even that they received the same equal percentage of their taxes cut under Bush as did the rest of us, thus continuing to pay the same higher-than-the-rest-of-us percentage share of the tax bill as they used to, by and large. So we know they continued in the main to foot a great portion of the bill. Bush's tax cuts simply didn't have such a major impact on the ratio of taxes paid by the rich vs the rest of us that they could justify being called "policies that transfer wealth to the top 1%," as if that were the source of the problems we face. Obviously, were it true I'd have a problem with it. But it isn't the root problem. Nor is the opposite the main problem (i.e the notion that the rich are taxed too much, which while it may be "factual" and a real problem, just isn't the main problem we have). At any rate, any variance we've experienced in the ratio of taxes paid by the rich vs the poor, has been of minimal impact given the tax levels as they've evolved over the last 8 years. Yes, a change in the tax level on the wealthy isn't the problem. The problem is the high total of all taxes collected from everyone. The taxes collected from us all totals a sum - a percentage of the American Pie - which amounts to an onerous drag on our economy. Whether on our personal tax bills, or built into prices of goods and paid by corporations later, taxes are a drag for the commoners and the wealthy elite at once. Here's the really important thing in terms of Economics for the common man (far more important than switching to the Fair Tax, for instance): The larger the portion of the pie government spends vs the portion the citizens have left to spend, the larger the drag on societal advancement (as much less of the diversity of the evolving thoughts and desires of the people can then be expressed in the marketplaces). This is a truism which goes hand in hand with the notion (fact, IMHO), that Freedom Works, Dan B.