Kerry to unfurl plan to halt Bush tax cuts

The Boston Globe ^ | 12/03/2002 | Glen Johnson

[Wphile]

Right! That's what makes the whole thing so disingenuous. I swear the Dems are such losers when it comes to tax cuts. They try so hard to sound convincing but...

Remember Clinton's middle class tax cut? Oh yeah, it never happened.

Plus, this notion that people who don't pay any income tax didn't get anything back is bogus. Most people who earn less than $30,000 DO get money back even though they don't pay any income tax. It's called the Earned Income Tax Credit and it was designed to make up for the disparity of those who get hit so hard on the PR tax even though they don't make a lot of money.

Kerry's a dip.

He also said on MTP, that we have an obligation to our children not to "borrow" from them in the form of tax cuts today. Well, Senator, what the h*ll is this cock-a-mamie scheme if it isn't "borrowing" payroll taxes today so we can pony up even more later?

[savedbygrace]

Another way to put it is: If the Dims run him in 2004, they're committing Hairy Kerry.

[Karsus]

I would like say thank you for your well reasoned reply.

Since you appear to know so much about me, mind telling me what I would like to eat for lunch?

This quote was not about what percentage anyone pays. The quote was

"By 2010 the wealthiest 1 percent of taxpayers will receive 52 percent of the administration tax cuts, according to Citizens for Tax Justice, a watchdog group based in Washington, D.C."

Looks to me like it says that 1% of taxpayers get 52% of the tax cut.

I passed no judgement on if this was a good/bad/fair/unfair thing.

[Dems_R_Losers]

Glen Johnson is my next-door neighbor and a very good reporter, but this is sloppy. It looks like I am going to have to give him some lessons in calculating tax cuts and properly describing left-wing, union-funded organizations such as CTJ. Keep posting your correct information and I will pass it along to him.

[MrB]

let's call it a payroll tax cut but use the money from the general fund

I thought about this, too.
The truth is, it's ALL in the general fund anyway. And cutting payroll taxes would affect everyone since it's on the first X dollars of all income.
It would be cool to demagogue this back at them with "you're cutting the SS tax? Won't that destroy social security?". They would then have to admit that there is no SS fund.

[Mr. Mojo]

Since you appear to know so much about me, mind telling me what I would like to eat for lunch?

Crow

[dirtboy]

If somebody does not pay income tax, how do they get a rebate of income taxes?

Millions already do just that - ever hear of the Earned Income Tax Credit?

[dirtboy]

I don't understand why this can't be characterized as an attempt to destroy Social Security!

The hoar heads don't care as long as it's the boomers who are getting screwed.

[onedoug]

Is Kerry just a misbegotten socialist, or a real, dyed-in-the-red commie?

[Wright is right!]

"Currently, everyone who works is taxed 6.2 percent of their first $84,900 in earnings to support the Social Security retirement trust fund. They are also taxed 1.45 percent of everything they earn to support the Medicare health-care fund. Both payments are matched by employers."

The part in BOLD is the longest-running lie in the history of America. Your employer does NOT pay "his share" of your SS. YOU pay it. Because your stated "salary" is not how much you really make.

You "make" what it costs the employer to have you on the payroll. You may THINK you make $40,000 a year, but you REALLY make about $50,000. Because that's how much it costs an employer to "pay you $40,000." Doubt me? Go to your boss and ask to see "your line in the personnel budget." That line will be a dollar figure, and that dollar figure is how much you are really making.

Now. Out of that dollar figure, YOU are paying 100% of every last deduction taken out of your paycheck. You pay 100% of your SS/Mediscare, 100% of your health care, 100% of your pension/IRA/401K, 100% of your income taxes.

If you don't believe me, open up a business and hire some help. You will quickly learn how much you are REALLY paying your employees. And, if you're an employee, that's how much you're REALLY making.

Michael

[andy58-in-nh]

"By 2010 the wealthiest 1 percent of taxpayers will receive 52 percent of the administration tax cuts, according to Citizens for Tax Justice, a watchdog group based in Washington, D.C."

Two notes here:

1. In 2000, the top 1% of taxpayers paid 37.4% of all income taxes.

2. The CTJ's claim that 52% of the 2001-2010 tax cuts will go to the top 1% is false. Here's why: The top 1% of taxpayers will comprise a different group from one year to the next, so that the benefits will accrue to many individuals who in one year might only be in the top 10% or the top 25%, or anywhere else on the scale, depending on a given year's income.

Static Analysis is the Liberal policy analysts' best friend.

[Karsus]

Crow? No. As you appear to have ignored the main part of my last message I will explain it to you again.

The quote was NOT talking about what % the top x% pays. It was talking about wat % of the tax cut the top 1% pays. These are two different things.

[Mr. Mojo]

Check out the 2nd point in post #51.

[Chi-townChief]

This looks like just a disguised plan to slow down the economy by Ketchup Boy Kerry and his small friends.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

I love it when Democrats run on tax-and-spend.