rec.arts.theatre.musicals

"Ray S" wrote in message
news:$@...
> Mikey wrote:
>> "Ray S" wrote in message
>> news:$@...
>>> Mikey wrote:
>>>> "Steve Newport" wrote in message
>>>> news:17165-47B1E8AF-493@storefull-3152.bay....
>>>>
>>>> From: mail@ (Ray S)
>>>> Since the unemployment numbers have changed little, and we know people
>>>> did not all get massive pay cuts, then its clear that their real cash
>>>> flow is the same as it was before, they just feel less wealthy.
>>>> Obviously there are about a bazillion little factors all feeding in.
>>>> The
>>>> endlessly rising energy slice that is mostly a non-optional cost
>>>> ------------------------------------------
>>>> With no end in sight. But getting back to the original post, it's nice
>>>> to hear Dem candidates already selling "The Iraq war: we just can't
>>>> afford it."
>>>>
>>>> Yet Hillary Clinton voted for the war and, though she claims she will
>>>> start bringing troops home within 60 days after she is in office, she
>>>> does not specify HOW MANY troops. 60? 600? 5,000? 2? I seriously
>>>> doubt she is stupid enough to bring them all home. If she does,
>>>> Al-Qaeda will take over the country and make it their new terrorist
>>>> homefront--and it will be her fault. And she knows it. So, though she
>>>> says she will bring troops home 60 days after she enters the office,
>>>> remember this is a CLINTON we are dealing with here. Honesty is not
>>>> something these folks take too seriously. Double-speak? They EXCEL at
>>>> that!
>>> Hence the true difference between conservatives and moderates. Moderates
>>> seem unable to avoid the trap of having an 'open mind', to receive and
>>> process and alter their decisions and plans based in new information.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> But what else will President Hillary do? Her ads talk about closing tax
>>>> loopholes for big corporations, so expect the corporations to respond
>>>> by raising prices on their products (including gas) and freezing
>>>> hiring. Thus inflation and an increase in unemployment.
>>> Yes, by all means, keep the majority of the tax burden on the middle
>>> class. They will respond by buying less which will cause deflation, a
>>> freeze in hiring.......
>>>
>>>
>>
>> What are you talking about???
>> According to the CBO
>> The Top 5% of taxpayers pay 50% of all taxes
>
> It helps that you ignore that the top 5% have 90% of the wealth. It helps
> that you ignore tax burden as a percentage of income.
>
>> And according to the Tax Foundation Study of 2007:
>> Overall, we find that America's lowest-earning one-fifth of households
>> received roughly $ in government spending for each dollar of taxes
>> paid in 2004. Households with middle-incomes received $ per tax
>> dollar, and America's highest-earning households received $.
>> Government spending targeted at the lowest-earning 60 percent of .
>> households is larger than what they paid in federal, state and local
>> taxes. In 2004, between $ trillion and $ trillion was
>> redistributed downward from the two highest income quintiles to the three
>> lowest income quintiles through government taxes and spending policy.
>>
>> So not only is the "majority of the tax burden" NOT on the middle class,
>> but the majority of the US Government spending is on the middle/lower
>> class. So those paying the highest taxes are getting the least bang for
>> their buck in terms of return from the government.
>>
>
> Your point is what? That is you don't make a lot of money that you should
> not have your garbage picked up, your roads plowed, your roads paved, your
> schools open, you streets policed, your fires put out?

My point is that you were WRONG about the majority of the tax burden being
on the middle class.