Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Missouri Young Republicans?

[Jonathan King <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 09:05:04 -0700, F Vernon Green <EMAIL:PROTECTED> wrote:
> I need to jump in here.
> 
> Raising taxes on the top 1% of earners in this country, how many do you
> think there are? How much money do you have to make to be ni the top 1%? How
> much of the tax burden do these people already pay? How much do you think
> they should pay?
> 
> I have the numbers for 2001 to answer those questions. The top 1% of
> taxpayers make over 292,000 per year. They pay 33.89% of the tax bill alone.

BZZT!  But thank you for playing. I believe that's their share of
federal income taxes.  Not payroll taxes, and no state or local taxes
including sales taxes.
The fact that people with higher (and in some cases very, very, very
high incomes) pay most of the taxes in a system with a progressive 
tax rate is so unsurprising that I don't see why you would bother
bringing it up.

[snip]

> Now I don't know about you guys, but my family income last year put me at a
> point in the top 50%. I am in no way rich either, I live pay check to pay
> check and I do not drive a new car or have a lot of bills to pay. 

You also pay a higher rate of payroll taxes than the top 1%, and your
payroll taxes plus income taxes have gone up in an absolute sense
since 1983.  If you want tax relief, vote for candidates who favor
cuts to payroll taxes or something.

But also note quite clearly that Bush did NOT cut taxes.  He only
shifted them into the future.  (This is easy to see: we now have a
large structural deficit that is being financed, and the money that
will pay the interest and principal on that in the future will come
from taxes.  Taxes were not cut, that we were only shifted into the
future.  Moreover, if interest rates are higher than the growth in GDP
in the interim, then the eventual tax rate will actually increase. 
This nauseatingly fiscally irresponsible action was brought to you by
an alleged Republican.)

> I got a
> benefit from Bush's tax cut, I got the $800 per child back this last year,
> so I know that I benefited from the tax cuts. How the democrats can say the
> cuts only helped the top 1% is beyond me.

First, note that the original proposed cut didn't provide this
benefit, and, second, what the claim is is not that the cuts only
helped the top 1%, but that they primarily beneifted the top 1%, which
they emphatically did.  There is really no argument to be had there,
since you can look it up.

Bush has shifted the tax burden into the future, onto you and onto
your children.  This is an easy matter of accounting.j

jking
_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion