----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Minette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 10:59 PM Subject: Re: Plus the NY Times Re: The Washington Post Editorial on Iraq
> > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 9:51 PM > Subject: Re: Plus the NY Times Re: The Washington Post Editorial on Iraq > > > > In 1999, 6% of federal receipts were from capitol gains. i.e. $110bil > out > > of $1.828 tril. > > > > Indeed, from 1994 to 1999, capital gains reports under Adjusted Gross > > Income more than tripled in nominal terms. > > > That's because there was a capital gains tax cut in '97. It give folks a > chance to cash in on their capital gains while paying minimal taxes. > > Now, the Cato numbers were probably from the late '90s, so I'll be happy to > agree that the average for Clinton was probably close to $40 billion in > revenue. That's a small fraction of the $300 billion deficit. I was able to obtain some government numbers at http://www.nber.org/~confer/99/TAXATION/sinai.pdf and the average from '92 to '97 was 30 billion. So, with 110 as a big year, I cannot imagine the average being over 50 billion. IIRC, the difference between the 2000 surplus and the 2003 deficit is projected to be over 500 billion. If present capital gains revenue is $0.00, that still would only be 10% of the difference. Dan M. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
