http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/01/carville.rush.limbaugh/index.html I guess Carville is to the Dems what Rush is to the GOP....in some journalistic/media respects anyway. I don't think Obama is opposed to tax cuts for the great majority of Americans....just opposed to the greatest tax cut benefits being enjoyed by the fewest, wealthiest Americans. That has always made sense to me when talking tax cuts. I don't think the GOP likes to break it down in too much detail when promoting tax cuts and most of the time they are pretty vague in the definition of what a tax cut actually means for the average worker vs. the wealthiest worker or property owner. Using the term "tax cut" always sounds good as long as you keep it general.
Tax cuts should be across the board equally. Let the chips fall where they may. Targeted tax cuts are discriminatory. People who don't pay any taxes---- half the country and rising---- should not get a tax cut.
If you cut the lowest taxpayers by 10% and the wealthiest taxpayers by 1%, the wealthiest taxpayers would still save more money on their taxes. You just can't equate these things in total dollars. Which is what Washington likes to do, it's the same thing when raising an entitlement by 10% when in previous budgets it's been raised by 12%, it ends up being called a budget cut. I'd bet if you took the lowest taxpayers and told them they didn't have to pay any taxes at all and cut the highest taxpayers by .1% the highest taxpayers would still comeout better in total dollars and liberals would scream about taxcuts for the wealthy.
If I recall correctly, the levees in NO were build decades ago. Why during the Clinton years weren't they reinforced to prevent the city from flooding? And as I recall the NTSB determined that the reason that the bridge collapsed was not lack of maintenance (which by the way was done by the state and not the Federal government) but was becasue of a "design defect." But hey, don't let facts get in your way Carville, the delusional left whackos will buy any bilge you spout.
I think the real rub is those families somewhere in the middle....the $55,000 to $175,000 range where most families probably fall into. This is the group that could benefit the most from serious income tax relief. Most in this group do not need an estate tax cut....they need real income tax relief. I think a graduated cut from low income to high would work because it's the only way those in the middle can really see the cut they need. If you give a 35% cut to low wage earners so they can see the impact...then give 35% to the middle and 35% to the high end I can't see the Feds being able to fiscally go with that. Conversely what is the impact of 5% on low wage earners....diddly squat in reality. And estate tax cuts don't help them at all either. I could see a 35--20--10 ---5 type layering be doable and effective. These exact numbers may not be feasible but I think you see what I have in mind. I have also favored a national sales tax as a way to recoup the taxes the Fed needs to operate. If you have the money and you want to spend lavishly you pay more in taxes. If you do not have the money and you have to hoard your money and buy only essentials you pay less in taxes. It's a pretty simple equation and I think could be implemented along with an income tax cut to lessen the blow to the wealthy and not curb their spending so much.
Do you remember the Luxury tax? How's that work out, when boat yards started laying off "middle class" workers who weren't needed anymore because the wealthy weren't buying boats affected by the Luxury tax?
Terry...the percentage of a luxury tax was probably significantly higher than you would need for a national sales tax because the NST would be spread out over all sales.....not just targeted to a luxury item. Therefore a 6 or 7% tax rate would not be needed but rather a 2-3% rate would probably do the trick.
The nat'l sales tax will never be implemented by a Liberal Dem Regime. Consumption taxes are seen as impacting the poor and middle class more than the upper middle/wealthy classes.
I think that the real feeling is that a tax that everyone has to pay is unfair. Taxes were only meant to impact those that don't vote Democratic.
Tax evaders in the cabinet. Now that is change. Can we not pay taxes and then still sit in Barack's cabinet? YES WE CAN
That is hard to fathom...very. I sure didn't know all you ever had to say if you were wrong by 140k on your taxes is...."gee....I'm soooooo embarrassed.....please forgive me...." :shock:
Hey when the Secy of the Treasury blames Turbo Tax for his evading taxes you know we're getting the very best. The only question is that the best tax cheat or Secy. of the Treassury. Can we dupe these fools who voted for ObamA YES WE CAN