Kerry to unfurl plan to halt Bush tax cuts

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

[Sam's Army]

Folks,

We have won. For the first time in recent memory, the argument is not whether there SHOULD be tax cuts or not from the Dems, but where they should come from and how much they should be.

[blackdog]

Payroll taxes are still taxes. Someone earning $25,000 per year still pays taxes for god's sake. This is a good sign at this stage. Let's hope the rat campaign race for 2004 becomes a tax reduction fight of mounting proportion by election time. Maybe by 2004, they will be giving away toasters, cheese, mufflers, and cutting the payroll tax and cutting marginal rates. How about cutting them all to 10%, eliminating mortgage interest, killing the 401K/IRA exemptions, and everyone just pays 10% of gross earnings.

[Attillathehon]

proposal for a one-year rebate of some of the payroll taxes that workers now provide to support the Social Security and Medicare systems.

This is a one-time rebate, not a permanent reduction in the payroll tax. Kerry can stuff it! I prefer a permanent reduction of tax rates. Even the Bush plan is only for ten years, but that's a lot better than Kerry's proposal.

[N. Theknow]

Kerry is in the wealthiest 1% of taxpayers. Perhaps he should tell how Bush's tax cuts helped him and hurt everybody else.

[goodnesswins]

"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."

Citizens for Tax Justice? Tax Justice would mean they would refund the taxes to those WHO PAID THEM. Is this a joke?

[sleeper-has-awakened]

"Because there is political danger in doing something that could be seen as jeopardizing the stability of the Social Security trust fund, the proponents of a payroll tax cut favor a mechanism of providing relief in the form of a rebate, which would be distributed via the federal income tax system. Under such accounting, payroll taxes would still flow into the Social Security and Medicare trust funds at the current rate, but the rebates would come from the general treasury account where taxes are paid and overpayments refunded."

So let me see if I get this, let's call it a payroll tax cut but use the money from the general fund where Americans that pay income tax pay their taxes. Sounds like an end run to give people who don't pay tax our money....again.
Am I wrong???

[TLBSHOW]

Is this guy a loser or what? LOL

[Mr. Mojo]

Sounds to me like Kerry wants to raise income taxes.

Sounds to me like Kerry wants to be the next Walter Mondale, winning the Democrat nomination and then losing 49 of 50 states in the general election.

[On the Road to Serfdom]

Exactly, where are the old people screameing about this? He is proposing cutting Social Security taxes, i.e. reducing the money available to pay benefits to seniors. For all the talk about Lock Boxes what ever they are this is a direct assault on Seniors. Why can the democrats get away with it?

[Karsus]

Is there something wrong with that statement? It looks like a statement of fact to me. What is wrong with facts?

[fabriclady]

PLEASE, how can we get this man off the evening news.
He is disgusting.
I spent 8 years with my remote in my hand so I cold escape bill clinton, now this.

[winner3000]

Note that Kerry's tax cut does nothing to the marginal tax rates (he actually increases them as he wants to freeze the Bush tax cut). Since only decreases in the marginal tax rates help the economy, the net effect would be a worse economy.

Funny how those "tax watchgroups" never mention what percentage of the income tax revenues they pay vs how much of the GDP they earn (hint: it's way more).

[fabriclady]

The demoncrats are not getting away with it.
That is one way they lost the election. They think seniors are stupid and will fall for their lies. Seniors can't be fooled over and over. I am a senior, for years I have heard the tired old scare tactics. Never once did I fall for their lies. Of course, I am a Right Wing Conservative.
Born on, still one.

[goodnesswins]

NO....nothing wrong with the "statement".....but the statement sounds like an attack on the 1% who pay the 52% in taxes and would benefit most. Maybe I read it wrong.

[Finny]

Here's a copy of the letter I just fired off to the author of this article:

Dear Mr. Johnson:

Your article was very interesting, but a bit incomplete.

>>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. >>

In the interests of accuracy and good reporting, you should follow this sentence up with another that tells how large a percentage of overall taxes are paid by the wealthiest 1 percent of taxpayers. Otherwise, the sentence is as misleading as it is useless, because it lacks a vital context.

Sincerely, (etc)

[expatpat]

Bush should say:
Keep you hands out of the Social Security lock-box!

[Mr. Mojo]

Better get your facts straight before spewing leftist garbage around these parts, amigo. Try on these facts for size (and I do mean facts): The top 1% of wage earners pay one-third of total income taxes; The top 5% pay 55%, the top 10% pay over two-thirds, and the top 50% of wage earners paid 92.98% of the total income tax!

And incidentally, the least wealthy 50% pay only 4%! We live in a socialist nation ......You should like it.

[Mr. K]

EVERYONE SHHHHH!!!!!!! LET HIM KEEP TALKING LIKE THIS!!

Ummm... HEY Kerry that sure is a REALLLL good idea, yessirree...

BTW- didn't you guys kill some innocent vietnamese villagers when you were over there...?

[Moonman62]

How about tax credits for expensive haircuts?

[goodnesswins]

Thanks.....your statistics correct mine.