So....Bush Tax Cuts included the rich AND middle class?????????

[Article 15]

I still think that that tax cut should disappear ... not just for Elvis but for everyone else who got a tax cut on China's dime 7 years ago. Time to pay the piper, America.

 

[elvis]

I still think that that tax cut should disappear ... not just for Elvis but for everyone else who got a tax cut on China's dime 7 years ago. Time to pay the piper, America.

and we can discuss that...the deficit is huge. but I get tired of hearing that only the rich got the cuts.

 

[mudwhistle]

For 10 years we've heard that Bush simply cut taxes for the rich.

But now, we hear that if the Bush Tax Cuts are not extended, that taxes on the middle class will also go up January 1st.

How is that so? I thought Bush only cut taxes for the rich? If so, then why are taxes going up on the middle class on January 1? The Dem's keep saying they are willing to renew the middle class portion of it, but not for the rich? But.......I thought the cuts included ONLY the rich, according the left wings rants over the last decade?

So Bush's crime wasn't cutting taxes for the rich. The crime was merely including the rich into his tax cuts that applied to everyone who wasn't on government welfare already?

I'm confused. So....basically, Bush cut everyones taxes? But his inclusion of rich people in that tax break is what made him so hated by the left?

It's like a wayward girlfriend claiming she's been monogamous then having to admit she's 3 months pregnant when you haven't seen her in 6.

You're a victim of Availability Cascades.

Repeat the lie "Tax-cuts for the Rich" often enough and it becomes common knowledge.

This huge lie reveals the insidious nature of the left.

 

[Article 15]

I still think that that tax cut should disappear ... not just for Elvis but for everyone else who got a tax cut on China's dime 7 years ago. Time to pay the piper, America.

and we can discuss that...the deficit is huge. but I get tired of hearing that only the rich got the cuts.

They weren't the only one to get a tax cut, this is true, but they certainly got the largest tax cut. The two lowest brackets went unchanged and the next tier (which most of us fall under) got a 2% cut while the highest bracket got nearly twice that cut at 3.8%. The cuts favored the wealthy, IMO.

 

[jillian]

I still think that that tax cut should disappear ... not just for Elvis but for everyone else who got a tax cut on China's dime 7 years ago. Time to pay the piper, America.

and we can discuss that...the deficit is huge. but I get tired of hearing that only the rich got the cuts.

Technically, everyone got some benefit. But the benefit to the middle class was negligible... a few hundred a year. The benefits to the top echelon were huge.. and the costs to us aren't even comparable.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

For 10 years we've heard that Bush simply cut taxes for the rich.

But now, we hear that if the Bush Tax Cuts are not extended, that taxes on the middle class will also go up January 1st.

How is that so? I thought Bush only cut taxes for the rich?

You thought wrong.

Try to CATCH-UP......

​

 

[mudwhistle]

I still think that that tax cut should disappear ... not just for Elvis but for everyone else who got a tax cut on China's dime 7 years ago. Time to pay the piper, America.

and we can discuss that...the deficit is huge. but I get tired of hearing that only the rich got the cuts.

The weren't the only one to get a tax cut, this is true, but they certainly got the largest tax cut. The two lowest brackets went unchanged and the next tier (which most of us fall under) got a 2% cut while the highest bracket got nearly twice that cut at 3.8%. The cuts favored the wealthy, IMO.

That is a total falsehood.

Most of the very rich rarely pay their fair share. They move their assets out of the country or use tax loop-holes that allow them to shelter their earnings.

The rest of us get the largest burden if you want to compare percentages. Paying 24% when you only earn $50k is worst then paying 17% when you make millions or billions. And I'm only talking about what they declare and is taxable in this country....not their actual earnings. Paying $2 million in taxes when you made over $100 million is small change...so who really got screwed. Allowing the tax-cuts to expire isn't going to change that. If you attempt to do that guess what happens to all of that money the rich makes in this country?

 

[Article 15]

and we can discuss that...the deficit is huge. but I get tired of hearing that only the rich got the cuts.

The weren't the only one to get a tax cut, this is true, but they certainly got the largest tax cut. The two lowest brackets went unchanged and the next tier (which most of us fall under) got a 2% cut while the highest bracket got nearly twice that cut at 3.8%. The cuts favored the wealthy, IMO.

That is a total falsehood.

Most of the very rich rarely pay their fair share. They move their assets out of the country or use tax loop-holes that allow them to shelter their earnings.

The rest of us get the largest burden if you want to compare percentages. Paying 24% when you only earn $50k is worst then paying 17% when you make millions or billions.

I agree that the rich rarely pay their fair share. Perhaps you could point out specifically what was "false" in my post.

 

[elvis]

I still think that that tax cut should disappear ... not just for Elvis but for everyone else who got a tax cut on China's dime 7 years ago. Time to pay the piper, America.

and we can discuss that...the deficit is huge. but I get tired of hearing that only the rich got the cuts.

The weren't the only one to get a tax cut, this is true, but they certainly got the largest tax cut. The two lowest brackets went unchanged and the next tier (which most of us fall under) got a 2% cut while the highest bracket got nearly twice that cut at 3.8%. The cuts favored the wealthy, IMO.

check out 2000 vs. 2010.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/fed_individual_rate_history-20100923.swf
after my deductions, we fell into the 15 percent bracket, where in 2000, we were in the 28 percent bracket.
while the top bracket went from 38 to 35.
I gotta go make pancakes...

 

[Micky G. Jagger]

For 10 years we've heard that Bush simply cut taxes for the rich.

According to Google, you're the only one who has ever said, "Bush simply cut taxes for the rich."

http://www.google.com/search?client...y+cut+taxes+for+the+rich."&btnG=Google+Search

 

[elvis]

For 10 years we've heard that Bush simply cut taxes for the rich.

But now, we hear that if the Bush Tax Cuts are not extended, that taxes on the middle class will also go up January 1st.

How is that so? I thought Bush only cut taxes for the rich? If so, then why are taxes going up on the middle class on January 1? The Dem's keep saying they are willing to renew the middle class portion of it, but not for the rich? But.......I thought the cuts included ONLY the rich, according the left wings rants over the last decade?

So Bush's crime wasn't cutting taxes for the rich. The crime was merely including the rich into his tax cuts that applied to everyone who wasn't on government welfare already?

I'm confused. So....basically, Bush cut everyones taxes? But his inclusion of rich people in that tax break is what made him so hated by the left?

The Bush tax cuts saved me at least $2600 a year the past eight years. I'm not rich.

You should have spent some-o'-that on proper-punctuation classes.

*

I fixed it. Are you pleased?

 

[Article 15]

and we can discuss that...the deficit is huge. but I get tired of hearing that only the rich got the cuts.

The weren't the only one to get a tax cut, this is true, but they certainly got the largest tax cut. The two lowest brackets went unchanged and the next tier (which most of us fall under) got a 2% cut while the highest bracket got nearly twice that cut at 3.8%. The cuts favored the wealthy, IMO.

check out 2000 vs. 2010.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/fed_individual_rate_history-20100923.swf
after my deductions, we fell into the 15 percent bracket, where in 2000, we were in the 28 percent bracket.
while the top bracket went from 38 to 35.
I gotta go make pancakes...

There were two different tax cuts during that time and our debt ballooned ... no such thing as a free lunch.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

all you have to do is look at the IRS tax brackets for say last year vs. 2000. That will tell the tale of the tax cuts.

ooooooooooooooooooooooo.....the tale of the tax cuts!!!

That's supposed to be an actual-explanation for something????

Try this, Skippy.......​

"If there's one thing that Republican politicians agree on, it's that slashing taxes brings the government more money. "You cut taxes, and the tax revenues increase," President Bush said in a speech last year. Keeping taxes low, Vice President Dick Cheney explained in a recent interview, "does produce more revenue for the Federal Government." Presidential candidate John McCain declared in March that "tax cuts ... as we all know, increase revenues." His rival Rudy Giuliani couldn't agree more. "I know that reducing taxes produces more revenues," he intones in a new TV ad.

If there's one thing that economists agree on, it's that these claims are false. We're not talking just ivory-tower lefties. Virtually every economics Ph.D. who has worked in a prominent role in the Bush Administration acknowledges that the tax cuts enacted during the past six years have not paid for themselves--and were never intended to. Harvard professor Greg Mankiw, chairman of Bush's Council of Economic Advisers from 2003 to 2005, even devotes a section of his best-selling economics textbook to debunking the claim that tax cuts increase revenues."

THAT'S what we really need, presently....while we're spending $2 BILLION A WEEK, in Afghanistan....LESS INCOME!!!!!

 

[Article 15]

The thing is there were two different tax cuts. One in 2001 and the other in 2003. The ones which are set to expire are the 2003 cuts which favor the wealthy.

 

[DaGoose]

For 10 years we've heard that Bush simply cut taxes for the rich.

But now, we hear that if the Bush Tax Cuts are not extended, that taxes on the middle class will also go up January 1st.

How is that so? I thought Bush only cut taxes for the rich? If so, then why are taxes going up on the middle class on January 1? The Dem's keep saying they are willing to renew the middle class portion of it, but not for the rich? But.......I thought the cuts included ONLY the rich, according the left wings rants over the last decade?

So Bush's crime wasn't cutting taxes for the rich. The crime was merely including the rich into his tax cuts that applied to everyone who wasn't on government welfare already?

I'm confused. So....basically, Bush cut everyones taxes? But his inclusion of rich people in that tax break is what made him so hated by the left?

bush tax cuts saved me at least $2600 a year the past eight years. and I'm not rich.

Yeah, I'm not rich either, and the Bush cuts saved me a few thousand dollars too. I spent that money. Some on bills, some on just buying stuff I have wanted for a while but couldnt' afford yet, some on a new truck I needed.

But I was very confused. Because for 10 years, the left wing has ranted on how Bush just "cut taxes for the rich" and did nothing else.

If that were true, then only the rich's taxes would go up Jan 1, but they are all saying if these cuts aren't extended, everyone's are going up. How so? Does that mean Bush included the middle class in his tax cuts? It sure seems like it.

So....either the left wing is lying about Bush......or......they are lying in saying that Jan 1 the middle class will see higher taxes if the Bush cuts expire. Which is it?

If you tell the same lie enough times, people will believe it......

For 10 years we've heard that Bush simply cut taxes for the rich.

According to Google, you're the only one who has ever said, "Bush simply cut taxes for the rich."

"Bush simply cut taxes for the rich." - Google Search

Getting back to the OP we see that Elvis was right!! If you tell the same lie enough times (such as someone said that Bush only cut taxes for the rich) then people will start to believe it.

So now we know that nobody ever said that except for the OP.

 

[AmericanFirst]

No Libels in this thread?

I guess the Libels do not like the title, the title to a thread is more important to the Libels than the content,

Libels want all message boards dominated by the Libel message. It does not matter what the content is inside, its simply repeat the message over and over until the idiots believe its true.

Six tax threads.

Liberals run and hide from the truth. When their lips are moving they are lying. If you do see a liberal on here spouting off you know he will be lying.

 

[AmericanFirst]

If you tell the same lie enough times, people will believe it......

Another example of the first quote in my sig!

It is a CON$ervative lie that Libs said there were NO tax cuts for people who weren't rich! Libs said MOST of the tax cuts went to the rich. MOST is not ALL!!!!!! A small percent of the tax cuts went to the middle class and below.

What CON$ did to make it appear that the tax cuts were spread across the whole spectrum of tax payers was to average the big tax cuts the rich got with the small tax cuts the middle class got. Not only that, they didn't include the 25% who didn't get a tax cut in the average to make the average as deliberately misleading as possible, it was an average only of people who got cuts. Bush claimed an AVERAGE tax cut of $1,586.00. If you average ALL tax payers whether they got a refund or not, it was $1,217.00. To get a tax cut of $1,586.00 you need an income of over $75,000.00.

A more HONEST representation of the tax cuts is the MEDIAN tax cut of $407.00, or about $9.00 per week. That means 50% of tax payers got less than $407 and 50% got more.

For someone to average a $2,600.00 tax cut for 8 years they would need an average income of over $100,000.00 for the 8 years. Maybe that's not rich, but it certainly is well above the median income most Americans earn.

Wrong. I didn't make 100k a year. Sorry.

See I told you, a brave libturt lying.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

For 10 years we've heard that Bush simply cut taxes for the rich.

But now, we hear that if the Bush Tax Cuts are not extended, that taxes on the middle class will also go up January 1st.

How is that so? I thought Bush only cut taxes for the rich? If so, then why are taxes going up on the middle class on January 1? The Dem's keep saying they are willing to renew the middle class portion of it, but not for the rich? But.......I thought the cuts included ONLY the rich, according the left wings rants over the last decade?

So Bush's crime wasn't cutting taxes for the rich. The crime was merely including the rich into his tax cuts that applied to everyone who wasn't on government welfare already?

I'm confused. So....basically, Bush cut everyones taxes? But his inclusion of rich people in that tax break is what made him so hated by the left?

bush tax cuts saved me at least $2600 a year the past eight years. and I'm not rich.

Yeah, I'm not rich either, and the Bush cuts saved me a few thousand dollars too. I spent that money. Some on bills, some on just buying stuff I have wanted for a while but couldnt' afford yet, some on a new truck I needed.

But I was very confused. Because for 10 years, the left wing has ranted on how Bush just "cut taxes for the rich" and did nothing else.

Ya' got THAT one wrong, as well!!!!

It's the tax-rates....for everyone....that're in-question; the BUSH-rates (that give-away the entire store, to the RICH)....

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wDdWJcpJj0[/ame]

....as-opposed-to dropping-back to the CLINTON-rates....that're MORE-than-fair....and, have PROVEN TO WORK!!!!!!!!​

"Not only was the entire national deficit eliminated after raising taxes on the wealthy in 1993, but the economy grew so fast for the remainder of the decade that many conservative economists thought that the Fed should raise the prime interest rate in order to slow it down."

 

[DaGoose]

No Libels in this thread?

I guess the Libels do not like the title, the title to a thread is more important to the Libels than the content,

Libels want all message boards dominated by the Libel message. It does not matter what the content is inside, its simply repeat the message over and over until the idiots believe its true.

Six tax threads.

Liberals run and hide from the truth. When their lips are moving they are lying. If you do see a liberal on here spouting off you know he will be lying.

I really love the fact that you posted these words in a thread (started by a Con) that was based on a lie.

Do you want to entertain us with any more brilliance?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Ok. So basically......Bush did cut taxes for the rich....AND the middle class.

This is actually news....to you????

Don't you find that the least-bit embarrassing? ​