Didn't think so.

Pretty much everyone making $35,000 or less WILL PAY NO FEDERAL TAXES.
http://www.georgebush.com/issues/taxes.html

Now open your mouth and say something stupid.

*is really pissed off at the misinformation abound in here*

------------------
"President Bush. It's fun saying that. Go ahead, you try." - M. Lucinsky, Spectrum Editor

"Being a liberal is one of the most gutless choices you can make. It doesn't require you to think, it only requires you to feel." - Rush Limbaugh

As opposed to those who listen to conservative twits like Limbaugh?

------------------
Star Trek Gamma Quadrant
Average Rated 6.27 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux (with four eps posted)
***
"Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!"
-Forum Member Who Shall Be Nameless. 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001

Dear Kettle;

Description enclosed.

Black.

- Signed, Pot.

------------------
"...screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!" - Omega.

Irony ensues.

------------------
"President Bush. It's fun saying that. Go ahead, you try." - M. Lucinsky, Spectrum Editor

------------------
Star Trek Gamma Quadrant
Average Rated 6.27 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux (with four eps posted)
***
"Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!"
-Forum Member Who Shall Be Nameless. 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001

quote:

---

Pretty much everyone making $35,000 or less WILL PAY NO FEDERAL TAXES.

---

Wow! That means that the Feds are going to drop the excise tax off of gas and a whole slew of things like that. And FICA and all that is gone then. Excellent!!

That's so nice of the Feds.

It's conservative intellectual dishonesty at it's best. Got to love it.

------------------
Star Trek Gamma Quadrant
Average Rated 6.27 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux (with four eps posted)
***
"Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!"
-Forum Member Who Shall Be Nameless. 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001

Still, Limbaugh represents any number of conservative twinkies spouting about how great it is to make sure the wealthy stay that way.

Get over it.

------------------
"There's no such thing as legacies. At least, there is a legacy, but I'll never see it."
~ George W. Bush, Deer-In-The-Headlights of the United States

quote:

---

When properly measured, the Bush tax cut costs at least $2.1 trillion over ten years, rather than the often-cited $1.6 trillion figure. The primary reason for the larger estimate is that it accounts for the extra federal interest costs automatically generated by the tax cut. If the full effect of the rate cuts are accelerated forward to this year and are not offset by reductions in the remainder of the tax package, the costs would increase an additional several hundred billion dollars over 10 years. A tax cut of more than $2 trillion would exceed the surplus that is likely to be available outside Social Security and Medicare when realistic budget assumptions are used.

---

quote:

---

How are the Benefits of the Bush Tax Plan Distributed?

The package of tax cuts President Bush has proposed are heavily skewed toward those at the top of the income spectrum. The broad middle class would receive substantially less relief.

• The one percent of the population with the highest incomes would receive between 36 percent and 43 percent of the tax cut, depending on the calculation used. The bottom 80 percent of the population would receive 29 percent of the tax cut.

• The Bush plan will deliver an average tax reduction of at least $39,000 to the top one percent of the population. This is 24 times the tax cut of $1,600 that the Administration claims the typical family of four would receive. Moreover, the Administration's family is hardly typical. Citizens for Tax Justice has found that nine out of ten households would receive a tax cut of less than $1,600.

• The Treasury Department has reported that the top one percent of the population pays 20 percent of all federal taxes under current law. Under the Bush plan, the share of the tax cut that would go to the top one percent � 36 percent to 43 percent � is about double the share of the federal taxes they pay.

• The proposal would repeal the estate tax, even though IRS data show that the estate tax is levied only on two percent of all estates and that in 1997 half of all estate taxes were paid by the 2,400 largest taxable estates. If the estate tax had been repealed in 1997, these 2,400 estates would have received an average tax cut of about $3.5 million apiece. In addition, of those estates that are subject to tax, very few include family-owned farms or businesses.

  Of the approximately 2.3 million people who died in 1998, only 47,482 (or two percent) left estates subject to any estate tax. Only 1,418 of the estates that were taxable � or three percent of them � were estates in which family-owned businesses or farms formed the majority of the estate. This means that only six of every 10,000 people who died in 1998 left an estate that was taxable and consisted primarily of a family-owned farm or business. A Treasury analysis found that these estates paid less than one percent of
  all estate taxes. Estate tax relief can be directed at these estates at a small fraction of the cost of repealing the estate tax.

• White House officials have claimed that lower-income families would receive the largest percentage tax reductions. Such claims focus only on income taxes. Low- and moderate-income families pay more in other federal taxes � principally payroll taxes � than in income taxes. It is possible to eliminate a large percentage of the small income tax liability that many moderate-income families incur and register only a small impact on the total federal taxes that such families pay.
  

For example, a two-parent family of four with income of $26,000 would indeed have its income taxes eliminated under the Bush plan, which is being portrayed as a 100 percent reduction in taxes. The family, however, owes only $20 in income taxes under current law. As a percentage of all taxes paid (considering only the effects of income and payroll taxes and counting the benefits the family would receive from the Earned Income Tax Credit), the family would have its taxes reduced by less than one percent. Its net tax bill would still exceed $2,680.(1)

Figures that the Bush campaign issued, which showed the top one percent receiving a smaller share of the tax cut than the share of taxes this group pays, reflected only federal income taxes. Those figures omitted payroll, estate, and other taxes. As a result, the figures provided an incomplete picture. Leaving payroll taxes out of the analysis makes the share of taxes that the top one percent pays look larger, while leaving out the estate tax makes the share of the tax cut they will receive appear smaller.

---

From the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

------------------
"There's no such thing as legacies. At least, there is a legacy, but I'll never see it."
~ George W. Bush, Deer-In-The-Headlights of the United States

Another thing to, Bush is acting like the Federal income tax is the only tax that exists. What about State income tax, Sales tax, Franchise tax, Social Security Tax, Gas Taxes, not to mention all those other taxes that target people who own there own property (Property tax), and are self-imployed (self-employment taxes). These are all of the taxes I could think of off hand, but I know there are plenty more.

Also, here's a little fun fact for you. When you switch around the E and A's position in the word TAXES you get TEXAS!

------------------
If anyone has a Star wars action fleet E-wing starfighter or Tie defender toy they want to sell, please E-mail me at [email protected]

[This message has been edited by MIB (edited February 12, 2001).]

But of course, this whole idea will go through one ear and out the other, and you will insult me because I listen to Rush Limbaugh, and therefore cannot have anything intelligent to say, etc etc. Why do you think I don't post in the flameboard that much any more? It's like slapping one's head into a brick wall, and you'll never get it.

------------------
"President Bush. It's fun saying that. Go ahead, you try." - M. Lucinsky, Spectrum Editor

Um, hate to break this to you, but you started it. I brought up Rush in response to YOUR post. And, if Rush doesn't take himself seriously (like you said he doesn't), why should you (or myself) take him any more seriously? The answer: no one should take him seriously, because if Rush doesn't take himself seriously, it's because he knows he's full of hot air. Thank you!

Now, the wealthy 1% pay 20% of Federal taxes, but people think that giving them 43% of the tax cut is FAIR? Please explain this to me -- and don't give me the "they can hire more people!" bullshit. Please give me a good, rational reason. Couldn't someone not making as much use it to buy more products from these rich businessmen, allowing them to then hire more people and purchase new machinery? Couldn't they use it to put their kid through school or make sure they've got food on the table? Or, god forbid, get new tires for their car? The wealthy don't need it, and I'm not that interested in them "reinvesting" it -- give the tax cut to people who NEED it. The top 1% need a tax cut about as much as I need another credit card.

------------------
Star Trek Gamma Quadrant
Average Rated 6.27 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux (with four eps posted)
***
"Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!"
-Forum Member Who Shall Be Nameless. 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001

Yes. If they're the only ones paying any significant taxes to begin with, how else do you suggest we get a tax cut?

Under any circumstances, that's only in pure dollar amount, which makes sense. If you go by how much of their current tax burden is being removed, the numbers go the other way. The poor get the greatest percentage tax cut, mainly because they won't pay income taxes at all.

Couldn't someone not making as much use it to buy more products from these rich businessmen, allowing them to then hire more people and purchase new machinery? Couldn't they use it to put their kid through school or make sure they've got food on the table? Or, god forbid, get new tires for their car?

Jeff, you're just not getting it. You CAN'T save the poor enough money to do those things with a tax cut. They're not paying enough taxes to do that in the first place!

give the tax cut to people who NEED it

Exactly what we're proposing. EVERYONE gets a tax cut, with the poor getting the biggest one, in the most relevant terms.

And again, what do you think the rich are going to do with their porportionally smaller tax cut? Buy another Jaguar?