News Obama's Speech: Dysfunctional Three Ring Circus

[WhoWee]

You're so cute.

 

[mheslep]

Apparently a study was done and it's true.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/08/washington/08tax.html

I don't know how to search the CBO, there are a number of papers I found that reference the tax cuts.

Since multiple sources say that the CBO study found the largest cuts applied to the wealthy, I will risk assuming their isn't some conspiracy amongst the various news organizations.

Also, do not forget that the wealthy are never going to pay the tax rates on as much of their income as middle and low income people. (unless they're insane)

This was actually shown in an older thread about taxes. While the wealthy might pay a higher percent of tax, they pay it on a smaller percent of income. This reduces the actual percent of taxes they pay compared to middle and low income tax payers.

Here you are chasing some kind of rate percentage or individual cut inequality which is a red herring in discussions on balancing the budget. Tax revenue and budget crisis do not come about from an individual rate cut or increase, but rather the rate cut times the millions of tax payers who received it.

Senator Merkley is apparently sending out mail to constituents stating that the deficit is caused 'largely' by tax cuts going to the wealthiest

...that our recent annual deficits are largely the result of massive tax cuts on the wealthiest among us

i.e. that the majority (at least) of the revenue from the Bush tax cuts went to the wealthy as a group, as opposed to everyone else as a group. That's grossly false. If the 'wealthy' today are those making $250,000 and up, then the total wealthy/not revenue split for the tax extension in 2010 is shown here:

...Following is a breakdown on some of the key measures and their costs, based on revenue estimates from the Joint Committee on Taxation, unless otherwise noted.

Bush tax cuts: $544.3 billion. The package would extend the Bush tax cuts for everyone for two years.

The bulk of that cost -- $463 billion -- is for the extension of cuts for families making less than $250,000, including two years of relief for 2010 and 2011 for the middle class from the Alternative Minimum Tax.

The rest -- $81.5 billion -- is attributable to the extension of cuts that apply to the highest income families.

The estimates for the split over ten years have similar ratios.

The consequence of such cynical output by Merkley is that it encourages the mistaken belief that the US deficit problem could be quickly resolved if taxes were raised on the 'wealthy'.

 

[dlgoff]

The consequence of such cynical output by Merkley is that it encourages the mistaken belief that the US deficit problem could be quickly resolved if taxes were raised on the 'wealthy'.

Sure wouldn't hurt would it? You aught to come to rural Kansas and see us rich folks.