View Single Post
Old 05-26-2009, 07:57 PM   #61
Dojo: Aunkai
Location: Fairfax, VA
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 429
Re: Obama's Spending vs Obama's Spending Cuts

Mary Malmros wrote: View Post
Didn't work that way. You got a one-time check from the gummint; your rate didn't change if you weren't a heavy hitter.
There were rebates, but in 01, everyone's rates dropped.

David Orange wrote:
True, but also with some misleading elements. The rate of the cut for the wealthy was a higher rate than the cut for the lowly. And the top 1% of US "earners" actually own something close to 60% of everything in America. So if we had only 100 people, one of them would own 60% of everything. So they have not only the money but the means of getting why should their taxes have been cut at all? Sure, they pay more than I do but it's like saying "I have a diesel truck with a trailer and you have a Volkswagen, but you should carry as much coal as I do so that we'll be equal."

Sure, they pay "a lot" but if you cut off on arm of an ordinary man, it's not the same as cutting off one arm of a man who has eight arms.
I have no intent to mislead here, its just what it is (its more effective to tax those that have cash than those that don't). The truly wealthy, aka the investment class (as in those who can live off investments not income) pays mostly capital gains not regular income like high wage earners (see Warren Buffet's comments with regards to tax inequities). There are reasons as to why investment income is taxed differently, and Bush did cut those rates in 2003, but any discussion of upper level income tax rates is a distraction.

On the other hand, we have all these people talking about how Obama is "raising taxes" as if everyone were getting hit. The rich gained in windfalls and tax cuts under Bush. Now the piper is calling for his due and they don't like it.

I'm worried regarding taxes being raised because I live in an area with a high cost of living. Fairfax Va is the #1or #2 richest county in the nation with an average income in excess of 100k, yet housing costs is significantly more than the national average. If I were somehow able to move elsewhere and keep the same salary I would be able to live a rather extravagant lifestyle, yet due to income level, I get lumped into what most consider the rich.

I certainly don't feel rich when housing is 35% of ones salary (I bought before the bubble so I am in better shape than many), and combined federal/state/property tax is another 35%. I could only imagine what it would be like if I had kids and a car payment.
  Reply With Quote