Bush Men Can't Relate to Everyday living

So basically, you're fine with these tax-cuts mainly targeting the rich folk.

So, you're back to chanting the same old propaganda when presented with the basics of economical theory without politics? You know, I've presented my view based on economic studies applying the principles of the discipline without political influence. If thats still your opinion, I guess I have to concede that I can't argue it. So, congrats.

I don't consider myself a "Bush Man" as I'm in the opposing party. I do think wealthy people have a hard time relating to the average Joe but it seems liberal wealthy are excluded from this theory when in fact some of them are the most detached. I agree Bush has never known what its like to be a person like myself but I'm supposed to believe the likes of Ted Kennedy does?

I do think a lot of the original tax cut would have helped the upper class, but I think fear of political reprisal played a hand in getting most of that cut from the plan. This article we are discussing gave prudent explainations of the areas this plan will target. It also gave a few quotes by people against it, I admit, but they're comments didn't seem congruent with the plan as I understand it. Maybe its the media twisting the quotes or maybe these were quotes relating to the original plan. I think both sides can claim victory from this as the Cons. got their tax cut but the Dems swayed it more for the working class. I know this didn't get any extra for the welfare class but its a separate issue that I feel Former President Clinton's reform has already dealt with.

"Under the legislation, the top tax rate on dividends and capital gains would fall to 15 percent this year. Low-income taxpayers would pay 5 percent, falling to zero in 2008. Barring further congressional action, today's higher rates would return the following year. "

So doesn't that mean that the dividend tax and capital gains tax are both being reduced? Which mainly helps the rich?

I understand what you're trying to say, I'm just thinking that it still sounds like this tax cut is overly helpful to the rich. But that's just my opinion. Perhaps 50% of the cut going to the super-rich is acceptable because they pay more tax overall anyway. Again that's really down to opinion.

The facts of the matter are that cutting dividend tax and capital gains tax will mainly help the rich, because they're the major owners of shares, and the main people selling shares/companies/etc.. Whether or not this is fair or not fair is based on opinion.

I think we just have differing opinions, which is usual, and acceptable.

Actually, the dividends tax will let some seniors retire by reducing taxes an their retirements which are tax-sheltered until they are drawn out and may help reduce the brunt of any losses as a result of the recent economic downturn. Most people receiving divident payments are the same seniors who we worry about prescription drugs for. Most stock holders in companies, we are finding, are the employees themselves. Look at Enron again. We found out who the fat cats were that lost when it went under. Wasn't the type most thought it would be. Just your everyday working stiff. There are some rich who will benefit but the money staying with government does no more noble good. At least the stock holders receiving dividends have had to take a risk and put up something to lose.

Capital Gains is probably the most helpul of the cuts. It in no way does away with it but lowering it to 15%. Lets say a guy works all his life building a business which he intends to sell, put his kid through school and retire from? He's built no other retirment because all his money has went into the business. Now, he sells it and realizes the government wants 40%! Why do they deserve it? To redistribute it to people who will never know the hard work that went into building it? I think 15% is quite fair. Whether it is or not, can we afford a future where no one will put that kind of effort into a business? Where would any of our revenue come from if no one thought it worth the effort? Its all well and good to have the idea of everyone living at the same level but my point is it takes the same level of effort which is where we lose people.

slate.msn.com...

"Liberals don't dispute that half the beneficiaries of a dividend tax repeal would be old folks. They simply note that the bulk of these old folks also happen to be well-off. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that under Bush's plan "nearly 40 percent of the benefits of the tax cut that would accrue to elderly individuals would flow to the 2.5 percent of elderly people with incomes exceeding $200,000. Nearly three-quarters of the benefits that would go to the elderly would flow to the 19 percent of elderly with incomes above $75,000." Citizens for Tax Justice calculates that most of the benefits received by old folks would go to those making more than $200,000."

I just remembered coming across this in the morning.

Anyway, enough said, I think we just sit on different sides of this particular fence.

Agreed, whats done is done. We will see if it helps or hurts, old friend.