Prague Twin

Wednesday, May 10, 2006

Tax Cuts

Blognonymous has a post up about the new GOP tax cut plan.

It reminded me that XDA had a post up the other day that was trying to debunk the myth of anti-progressive taxes. You could see what he was doing there, trying to make something look like it favored the rich when in fact it was a flat tax cut (when measured as a percentage reduction of tax burden vs. income as in the Blognonymous post).

As you can see on Blognonymous, the GOP plan would make the tax code less progressive (unlike the hypothetical example put forth on the conservative blog).

As usual, hypothetical examples are no match for crunching real numbers that have real consequences for real people. Really.

Technorati Tags: ,

5 Comments:

  • Yes, but a less progressive tax is better, fairer, more American--less socialistic. The rich will pay more than the poor, but why make them pay at a higher rate?

    By Blogger Roger Fraley, at 1:18 AM  

  • Hey thanks for linking my post and spreading the information.

    I added you to my blogroll this evening.

    By Blogger Kvatch, at 5:48 AM  

  • Roger, I think you know I am not a utopian socialist. However, a tax code needs to be somewhat progressive in my opinion.

    Are you saying that you don't agree with the standard deduction, the post progressive of all tax measures?

    Are you a flat tax supporter?

    Kvatch,

    No problem. Your timing was impeccable on this one. And thanks for the link!

    PT

    By Blogger Praguetwin, at 8:40 AM  

  • The GOP plans on attacking any Dem who voted against the tax cut extensions as tax and spend liberals who want to take Americans hard-earned pay from them so they can expand welfare and food stamps programs for deadbeats.

    They've been using this argument for decades now and it still works. Pumpkinhead Russert said to Nancy Pelosi on Sunday, "Are you for tax increases," when she said she was agianst the tax cut extensions. She said no, she was for fiscal prudence and pay as you go fiscal policies. Russert framed it as "tax hikes."

    At what point do people stop getting fooled by the bullshit propaganda? These tax cuts certainly rob the US treasury of money and add to the already huge budget deficit. They seem inordinately aimed at the investor class as kvatch's post proved. Yet Joe and Jane Sixpack who make $43,000 between them will receive $45 bucks back and smile and say, "That's why I vote Republican!"

    I'm not for tax hikes. I just think tax cut extensions on capital gains and dividend taxes while we're fighting two overseas wars is a bad idea.

    I've said this before, I'm sure I'll say it again - it's like adolescents are running the country and pre-adolescents are voting.

    By Blogger reality-based educator, at 12:32 PM  

  • Unfortunately we are stuck with the hikes.

    Any raising will turn this baby around so fast and then you want to see deficits. No, the sad thing is, economically the US is now addicted to this lower rate. It is a cocaine economy, and the comedown is going to be a bummer.

    But that is just my view. Revenues are surging becuase of all the profits, but when the economy slows down, wow, the defict will really soar, when they start taking such a low rate when the economy is sluggish, I shudder to think. Then they will have to raise taxes which will futher the cycle downward.

    This rate of growth is too fast. The corrections will devestate people. I like 2% for developed nations. The US growing at 3.7% is insane in my view.

    But what do I know?

    By Blogger Praguetwin, at 10:28 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home