[SandMan]

Just to show what kind of tax cuts the Bush government has in store:

If your salary is 1 000 000 you get a tax cut of 90 000.
If your salary is 45 000 you get a tax cut of 30 (yes that's right)

 

[manimal]

Originally posted by SandMan
Just to show what kind of tax cuts the Bush government has in store:

If your salary is 1 000 000 you get a tax cut of 90 000.
If your salary is 45 000 you get a tax cut of 30 (yes that's right)

thank you captain obvious!
have you ever looked at how much each one of these tax brackets pays in taxes?

the average american pays out almost 20% of their income to taxes. that's $200k for someone who makes a million. $90k is hardly a tax break.

 

[Tenchiro]

Originally posted by manimal
thank you captain obvious!
have you ever looked at how much each one of these tax brackets pays in taxes?

the average american pays out almost 20% of their income to taxes. that's $200k for someone who makes a million. $90k is hardly a tax break.

That's 45%. If I only had to pay hapf my taxes it would be a pretty big deal to me.

 

[patconnole]

Well folks, as Bush says, we don't want to punish the more successful folks for being successful, now do we?

 

[manimal]

Originally posted by patconnole
Well folks, as Bush says, we don't want to punish the more successful folks for being successful, now do we?

if i was successful, i wouldn't.


but i don't think i'll ever be successful in monetary terms

 

[BurlyShirley]

Quit being so selfish and be reasonable.

People who make more money, spend more money...the more they have to put back into the economy, the better off we'll all be.

 

[manimal]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Quit being so selfish and be reasonable.

People who make more money, spend more money...the more they have to put back into the economy, the better off we'll all be.

word.

BS, you ever wonder why we pay taxes in the military? it's kinda like paying yourself.


i pay more in taxes now that i'm out and make less money. i don't get it. i suppose it's because i was only taxed on my base pay and not on my BAH and comrats.

 

[patconnole]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Quit being so selfish and be reasonable.

People who make more money, spend more money...the more they have to put back into the economy, the better off we'll all be.

Yep, on the second part. But that's only half the equation, what about the whole "funding" of government? I guess it depends on what kind of government you want though: One that is only there to defend us from invasions and insurrection-- or all the way up to one that includes welfare systems, universal healthcare, education funding, social programs, etc, etc.... The things the "commoners" benefit from, but can't always afford.

So is that selfish, or reasonable?

 

[D_D]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Quit being so selfish and be reasonable.

People who make more money, spend more money...the more they have to put back into the economy, the better off we'll all be.

Don't poor people spend money as well? If you are going to give away a $million in tax breaks no matter who you give the money to it will end up in the economy.

I think expecting governments to sort out this sort of stuff is never going to work, they are too far removed from the people they are trying to help and their schemes all too often end up abused by the rich and too complicated or unknown to be used by the poor.

 

[manimal]

Originally posted by patconnole
.......one that includes welfare systems, universal healthcare, education funding, social programs, etc, etc.... The things the "commoners" benefit from, but can't always afford.

So is that selfish, or reasonable?

dude, just move to canada.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by D_D
Don't poor people spend money as well? If you are going to give away a $million in tax breaks no matter who you give the money to it will end up in the economy.

True....but i was thinking in more direct terms....like the stock market, banks etc...

Poor commoners like us just buy beer.

 

[DRB]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Quit being so selfish and be reasonable.

People who make more money, spend more money...the more they have to put back into the economy, the better off we'll all be.

But tax cuts to the richer portions of society have not historically made a general improvement to the economy. Especially in times of economic troubles. These folks are much more likely to take that money and stick it somewhere safe as opposed to "poor" folk that use that money to pay for everyday life. It didn't work during the Reagan era, why would it work now?

The vast majority of the economy is based on consumer and investor confidence. Right now that confidence is in the crapper. Soring oil prices, corporate accounting scandals, federal deficit spending, and probably most importantly a general mistrust of Bush's economic plan. These things have a much greater impact then any tax cuts do.

Most folks can't understand how increasing spending while decreasing income makes sense.

 

[Damn True]

I don't recall all of the details, but in an economics class I once took I read a study of tax plans going back something like 50 years. The Kennedy administration proved that by lowering the rate of taxation the revenue does in fact increase.
There may have been other contributing economic factors, but the premise is true.

Remember the effect of things like this is not immediate. It takes years for the economic moves of today to be realized.

 

[DRB]

Originally posted by Damn True
I don't recall all of the details, but in an economics class I once took I read a study of tax plans going back something like 50 years. The Kennedy administration proved that by lowering the rate of taxation the revenue does in fact increase.
There may have been other contributing economic factors, but the premise is true.

Remember the effect of things like this is not immediate. It takes years for the economic moves of today to be realized.

I'd love to see that study. But short of that how exactly would lowering your taxiation rate (hence the amount of tax you are going to collect) increase revenues. You can discount all other contributing factors if you like. However, the two don't go together. Even Reagan knew that there was trouble with his tax cuts when he couldn't get congress to reduce overall spending. However, instead of biting the bullet one way or the other they let it ride. Which left Bush Sr. holding the bag and forced into the infamous promise breaking.

Most economic moves don't take years to take hold, rarely do they take months to show an effect. There are things that do take awhile to have an impact but I can't think of any that would go to years. The reason that is that most of the time economic effects that won't take effect until the future are typically incorporated into the economy today.