his point is that it is a bad thing when the government has a tax cut and 90% of it goes into the pockets of the rich
Then maybe you should not have a system of taxation that confiscates 90% of total tax burden from the top income earners.
Ok, I can see that you obviously have no clue how our current Marxist system works but the fact is that you pay disproportionately to how much you earn. If you rent a video at Blockbuster and get a rebate of 1 free rental for every 10 times you rent, who is going to get more rebates, the person who never rents a video or the person who rents 100 videos within a month?
The "rich" pay FAR more on taxes, so if the govt were to refund everyone 10% of what they paid in taxes who would recieve the most in that refund, the person who paid nothing or the person who paid 200k in taxes alone?
And 200,000/year may or may not be "rich" depending on where you live. In the Bay Area (where the average home costs $650k), it's only slightly upper middle class. In Alabama, you could have the governor waxing your car
Congradulations, you just figuered out another reason why our Marxist system is putrid, cause it does not take into account your cost of living, which I notice cause I live in one of the highest cost areas of the country, but do I get a tax-break cause I have to pay FAR more than what someone in Alabama pays to live? No.
What about the amount of time you put into earning your living? Is the guy who worked 90 hours a week taxed less than the guy who works 30 hours a week if they both earn 100k/year? No, all that matters is their income, regardless of what they've sacrificed to achieve it.
The point is that it is morally bankrupt in the middle of the worst economic collapse since 1929 to give most of the money to people who already have all the disposable income they need, while the majority of Americans are feeling real pain.
Ok, so what's the real issue here, is it the fact that there is too high a tax burden on the "middle class" or is it that the wealthy get more from the tax break than the "middle class"? If taxes are cut accross the board by 10% the "middle class" will benefit from that tax cut, so why would you be opposed to helping the middle class out with that tax cut?
I tihnk Melvin Udall said it best, "It;s not that you had it bad, it's that you're that pissed that so many others had it good". Nothing more than jealously and envy is what your philosophy is based on.
That big fat tax cut Bush handed to your boss was paid for with borrowed money.
True, cause the govt is spending far more than it's taking in. No problem, I've got a giant cleaver that I'll pu to the Federal Budget, would you like to join me in where we'll begin hacking so that spending will be lower that revenues?
Rich people should quit bitching about paying taxes and be glad they are rich.
So I assume from that beautiful women should not compain about being raped?
It does not automatically mean they should receive more tax cut
Wake up, they pay disproportionately more, why shouldn't they get more back?
if they are not the ones who need it
Need? To be defined by whom and by what criteria?
and (more importantly) are not the ones who would pump it straight back into disposable goods and cause actual economic growth.
So a "rich" person who buys another car is not causing economic growth? Tell that to the factory line worker at Ford who gets laid off cause they're cutting a shift due to that evil rich person having less disposable income cause the govt stole it from him. Well, I guess you're creating work for some govt parasite who now gets to oversee some useless/destructive program created with the fruits of the rich's labor. Bravo!!!
