chum
|
posted on February 11, 2001 04:24:55 PM new
Well whoever said the cut was for the rich was very right. I got an email from a republican friend who is irate from what he discovered. He is married with 3 kids, and makes 30,000 a year, BUT he will get NOTHING from the taxcut!!! I guess its another bush lie, but hey try it yourself!!
http://www.georgewbush.com/TaxCalculator.asp
|
xellil
|
posted on February 11, 2001 04:39:01 PM new
When I put in a salary of $30,000 with 3 kids, there was no tax cut. However, there were no taxes paid in the first place, so I guess your friend is not overly burdened by taxes.
According to the chart I would get almost a 10% reduction in taxes -- I'm not sure it's right, though, because I think I paid more taxes last year than the chart said I owed.
nc
|
Linda_K
|
posted on February 11, 2001 05:58:53 PM new
Chum - Great site.
If your friend had only one child, and not three (therefore paying no taxes) this is what his tax cut would have been, according to this site.
"Here are your results
(Assume Standard Deductions)
Filing Status: Married
Number of Children: 1
Income: $30,000
Income % From 2nd Earner: 0% Current Tax Code: 1683
Bush Tax Plan: 582
Tax Cut: 1101
Percent Cut in Taxes: 65.4%"
|
HJW
|
posted on February 11, 2001 06:14:17 PM new
It's an infamous tax cut.
George W. Bush throws a bone to the poor.
And billions to the wealthy.
Helen
|
Meya
|
posted on February 11, 2001 06:20:41 PM new
How do you give a tax cut to a family who, according to that calculator, isn't paying anything anyway?
|
Linda_K
|
posted on February 11, 2001 06:21:28 PM new
xellil - I just pulled last years return out because of what you shared. On ours, our "current tax code" amount was higher than this chart stated. Maybe it's because this site said it "assumed standard deductions" and we always itemize.(?)
|
Linda_K
|
posted on February 11, 2001 06:36:09 PM new
Meya -
::joking here::
Answer?
Give two of the children to a family in a higher income tax bracket, who need the extra deductions? 
|
mybiddness
|
posted on February 11, 2001 10:26:22 PM new
Linda_K Give two of the children to a family in a higher income tax bracket, who need the extra deductions? 
Helen You said this to me in a different thread. [i]It's an infamous tax cut.
George W. Bush throws a bone to the poor.
And billions to the wealthy.[/i] Since that thread has gone a different direction and you've repeated it here, I'll just answer you here.
If this is a bone - send me da bones! I just checked on the calculator and we're gonna do fine with this plan. And, I'm far from wealthy. I don't question that the wealthy will benefit as well, but they also pay in a lot more than I do. So, as far as I'm concerned it's their money to begin with.
Not paranoid anywhere else but here!
|
Al
|
posted on February 11, 2001 10:39:54 PM new
Well,there's still plenty of time to get a real tax cut in.
http://www.prefect.com/bushclock
|
mybiddness
|
posted on February 11, 2001 10:47:55 PM new
I hope that clock has a restart button.
Not paranoid anywhere else but here!
|
xellil
|
posted on February 12, 2001 06:15:02 AM new
Linda_K maybe it's the itemizations -- I can't find my stupid returns from last year -- we don't itemize but I forgot exactly what my ebay profits were, that might be why mine came out low.
People making a decent living bear over 90% of the tax burden. I can't understand all the whining about poor people not getting breaks, when they pay little to no taxes anyway! When I was poor I didn't pay any taxes, took the earned income credit, and never paid a dime in federal income tax. In fact, I think I got money from the government that I never paid in. Now that I make more money I am happy to pay my fair share. If someone who is richer than me is getting a bigger tax break, so what?? They are paying more taxes than me in the first place.
The folks in the highest 20% of the tax bracket (people making over $132,000) pay approximately 80% of the nation's taxes -- the next highest 20% in earnings (over $53,000) pay about 16% of the nations taxes. That seems like plenty to me.
http://www.allegromedia.com/sugi/taxes/#Head-1.htm
nc
|
HJW
|
posted on February 12, 2001 06:47:46 AM new
mybiddness,
My opinion of the tax cut was not directed to
you in particular. It is there for everybody to read.
Look at the mess that Bush's tax cut left
the state of Texas with.
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/12/politics/12TEXA.html
And, mybiddness, I may post that same link
elsewhere because it is relevant.
Helen
[ edited by HJW on Feb 12, 2001 06:50 AM ]
|
chum
|
posted on February 12, 2001 08:28:47 AM new
I know one republican that wont be voting for dumbya again lol, but I told him so. I was watching C-Span this morning, and according to some the tax calculator on the net is grossly distorted. It all comes down to 3 brackets:
1.New lexus
2.New Muffler
3.Goose Egg
|
mybiddness
|
posted on February 12, 2001 08:34:08 AM new
Helen Of course you can. I just wanted you to know why I didn't respond to your post to me in the other thread. By the time I got back to it it had spread into a totally different direction.
I haven't heard the rumble yet of budget problems in Texas. We'll see what happens.
Not paranoid anywhere else but here!
|
HJW
|
posted on February 12, 2001 08:37:16 AM new
Mybiddness
I didn't miss you answer. There is a lot
going on in that thread.
And, I'm pretty clear on what I can do.
Helen
|
njrazd
|
posted on February 12, 2001 09:53:12 AM new
I hope that chart is right because that means we will see a 20% savings on our taxes and I will be more than happy to put that back into the economy.
What is not taken into consideration is the cost of living across the country. Here in San Diego County, the cost of living is very high and even double income families have trouble stretching their dollars. In our city, the real estate prices alone have risen over 19% in the past year, and that does not include the doubling/tripling of utilities. We also have some of the highest gasoline prices across the country. Meanwhile, we do not see the high wages that come with the urban areas like LA or San Francisco or New York.
So, while our combine salaries would seem like a lot of money in many parts of the country, it can be a challenge to keep up with just having a decent home and covering the necessities.
If you are not getting a big benefit from Bush's tax plan, then chances are pretty good you're not putting in too much to begin with.
|
xellil
|
posted on February 12, 2001 11:14:58 AM new
1.New lexus -- probably paying $200,000-$300,0000 in taxes each year.
2.New Muffler -- probably paying somewhere around $10-20,000 taxes each year.
3.Goose Egg -- paying nothing, getting nothing.
nc
|
chum
|
posted on February 12, 2001 01:20:19 PM new
Would you like some toast for that egg?
|
rosiebud
|
posted on February 12, 2001 01:40:08 PM new
Umm, I've just got a question for chum....... in your first post, you want us to try out the calculator for ourselves to prove that the tax cut is another bush lie........... Yet, after many people have tried it and made observations that contradict your observation..... suddenly the calculator is distorted. Why is that?
[ edited by rosiebud on Feb 12, 2001 01:42 PM ]
|
rosiebud
|
posted on February 12, 2001 01:40:49 PM new
edited cause I really hate my computer~!
[ edited by rosiebud on Feb 12, 2001 01:41 PM ]
|
njrazd
|
posted on February 12, 2001 01:42:43 PM new
chum...you need to explain it to your friend this way...
Let's say our family pays $12,000 per year in federal taxes. If we save 20%, then the government would only take $9,600 per year instead of the $12,000 they are taking now.
If your friend is only paying a minimal amount (or zero as the website shows), then he will not realize any savings. How can the government take less from zero? You must currently be paying in something in order to realize the benefits. No one is going to be sent a check for their overpaid taxes. The government will just take less.
The people with higher incomes will STILL be paying the bulk of the taxes as they always have and always will.
|
mark090
|
posted on February 13, 2001 09:17:05 AM new
When I took economics in college a few years back, we learned that the top 5% earned 90% of the total personal income(from a Wall Street Journal article we had to read). Shouldn't they pay 90% of the taxes?
|
RainyBear
|
posted on February 13, 2001 11:48:43 AM new
Thanks for the link - very interesting.
It told me my taxes would be cut by 14.8%, a big savings. I'm not wealthy -- I have a modest home and a monthly mortgage payment (after finally realizing that dream last year), a car which is almost paid off and some leftover credit card debt, too. I'm solidly middle class, and this tax cut will really help me.
|
inside
|
posted on February 13, 2001 11:53:14 AM new
I must be one of those "gasp" rich people. I will save 25%.
|
njrazd
|
posted on February 13, 2001 11:54:43 AM new
mark090...in a Socialistic society maybe that would work.
Sounds just like another punishment for success though.
|
chum
|
posted on February 13, 2001 12:00:38 PM new
I am trying to find another calculator instead of the Bush one. I see this was used during the campaign, and might be way off. When I find one I will post.
|
cin131
|
posted on February 13, 2001 01:52:38 PM new
If I pay $10 a year in takes, and get a 10% cut, I would save a dollar. If I pay $1,000 a year in taxes and get a 10% cut, I save $100. If I pay 100,000 a year in taxes, with the same cut, I would save $10,000, but I would still be paying $90,000 to the first person's $9.00. The rich pay more taxes, so in the end they will save more taxes, BUT, they will still be paying more.
Just because they make more money doesn't mean they should have to support me. I can't see how it is fair to make the rich person pay more taxes, so I can pay less. OK, I should pay 1% and they should pay 50%? does that really seem fair?
|
mark090
|
posted on February 16, 2001 10:06:20 AM new
So njrazd..
What you are saying is that because this is a Democratic society, the 90% who make only 10% of the nation's income should shoulder 90% of the nation's tax burden? Sounds more like a dictatorship to me....
|
hopefulli
|
posted on February 16, 2001 11:12:56 AM new
Anyone familiar with the concept of diminishing returns? Why would a person work his tail off to make a decent living if after all is said and done he ends up with the same amount as the person who sat on his butt?
The people who have more creativity, vision, ambition than some of the rest of us deserve to enjoy the fruits of their labor. They also happen to employ most of the rest of us.
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on February 16, 2001 11:14:31 AM new
No one is suggesting that people end up with the same income after taxes regardless of how much they earn.
|
