One problem with your statement, they did not receive their share of income, they earned it. Learn the difference between receive and earned and you will know what I am talking about.

Your statement says it all.

__________________
www.politibyte.com
Check out the new Video section.

The main problem I think is that the lowering taxes solution is a long term solution to this problem. I say problem because as it stands we owe $1,000,000,000,000 to the Chinese. We'll get over it sure, but we'll need to raise taxes to get rid of this. With this huge debt on our economy we'll be hard pressed to encourage foreign investment. A huge debt adds skepticism to the health of an economy. Sure, after we balance the books (by raising taxes for the short term) then we can think about lowering them.

What I'm saying is that increase for the short term, but rationality points to lowering our taxes to encourage growth after we have paid off our outstanding debts.

__________________
'May no obstacles arise on the path of enlightenment!
May the enlightened intention of Those Gone to Bliss, past, present and future, be realised,
May I neither be bewildered in migratory existence
Nor I lulled by the solitary quiescence [of nirvana]!
But may I liberate beings throughout the expanse of space!'

- Tibetan Book of the Dead by Padmasambhava

NOOOOOO!!!!

But...but....but...I thought it was those mean 'ole evil RICH people!! Excuse me, while I go off in the corner, put my fingers in my ears, and go "la-la-la-la."

Payroll Taxes.

Looks like my work here is done.

Ixtellor

P.S. I wonder what tax rate Warren Buffet pays? Stupid poor people and their tax scams.

__________________
_______________________________________
George W. Bush "I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building"

Blasphemy is a victimless crime.

Did you even read my post? EVERYWHERE else in that post I used "earned".

Lordy.

__________________
Man up.

As Ixtellor notes... that's income taxes. Which only makes sense; you can't squeeze blood from a turnip, and poverty-fighting programs like the earned-income credit end up giving tax money to the really poor.

But they still pay through the wazoo in payroll taxes -- a much higher percentage of their income than the wealthy pay, thanks to income caps on payroll taxes.

Plus they're harder hit by property taxes, sales taxes, fees for things like car registration and drivers' licenses, etc.

If you really believe the poor are lucky because they don't pay much income tax, you're delusional.

__________________
Man up.

33% of $1,000,000 is $333,333... does the average person pay that in his life?

__________________
So your logic is that if we are not there, the number will go down... That makes perfect sense... not.

Agreed.

Disagree. For 2008, SS taxes are 6.2% on earnings up to $102,000. For Medicare taxes, there is NO CAP---so it's 1.45% of ALL earnings. BOTH hit the higher income earners harder as far as dollars they pay in. And don't forget more than 6 million low-income earners pay ZERO in federal income taxes. In fact, because of the Earned Income Tax Credit, many receive money back while paying ZERO in.

By using the word "receive" you act as if they don't work hard for it. As if they don't deserve what they earn. It's NOT given to them; they earn it.

And they should be appreciated for it; not demonized for it.

Care to count the expenses these top income earners have spent on education, investments in their careers, and planning for their futures? It doesn't happen by accident in most cases.

Why is it Dems insist on mixing in payroll and state taxes during a discussion of federal income taxes?

A real John Edwards "two Americas" attitude. And you see how far THAT view took him TWICE. Nowhere. That's because MOST Americans, IMHO, do not buy into it. As I've said on this board many times before, I've been poor and I've been rich and I did NOT resent the rich when I wasn't one of them. I KNOW first-hand how much money the rich pay into the system. Most work very hard and very long hours for what they eventually have. Most of the rich are NOT the Teddy Kennedy trust fund babies of the world.

__________________
"This is a time for a national imperative not to fail in Iraq." Condoleeza Rice, January 11, 2007

btw, i dunno how creditable this site is.

__________________
So your logic is that if we are not there, the number will go down... That makes perfect sense... not.

But that changes the discussion. It's all very different kinds of taxes. The so-called rich are going to pay more into the Medicare system too!! That's because there is no cap. And I would argue that it's the poor who will most likely use that system the most. So, once again.....let's give the so-called rich some credit here, for heaven's sakes!

It's not about "sympathy for wealthy taxpayers." It's about fairness and respect. Why do Democrats have to continue to demonize success by acting as if they don't pay their fair share----when we ALL know that's not true.

I believe the poor are lucky to live in a country where they CAN do better. The opportunities are there.

__________________
"This is a time for a national imperative not to fail in Iraq." Condoleeza Rice, January 11, 2007