except that you are forgetting that they increased the wage caps for the 10% and 15% tax categories. Married filing Jointly the 15% tax rate ends at $56,800. It then jumps to 25%. So for some in the lower Middle income bracket it amounts to a 10% decrease... That is the largest cut for them all.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Nick McClure" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 10:48 AM Subject: RE: What the Bush tax cut could have paid for Unless you didn't lower the percentage of the higher bracket. The highest tax bracket got a larger percentage break, it came down from 38.6 to 35, all of the rest only came down 2%. > -----Original Message----- > From: Andy Ousterhout [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 1:31 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: What the Bush tax cut could have paid for > > That has always been the rich versus poor argument: The poor get a bigger > percentage pay cut, but because of their income, get much less back. > > I don't see how if you believe that net dollars is the correct measurement > that you could ever justify tax cuts. By definition, all tax cuts will > always benefit the rich versus the poor. > > -----Original Message----- > From: John Stanley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 12:09 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: What the Bush tax cut could have paid for > > > it seemed from the link provided on this thread that people following > happened: > > Single, age 60 30k annual income..............11.5% savings > Unmarried HOH one child 30k...................27.9% > Married 2 children 50K........................42.3% > Single 0 Children 50k.........................4.2% > Married 2 kids 100k...........................19.3% > Single 0 kids 100k............................8.03% > Married 2 kids 300k...........................9.94% > > > It seems like those with 2 kids and making 50k a year get the most savings > percentage wise. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 12:58 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: What the Bush tax cut could have paid for > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: John Stanley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 12:48 PM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: RE: What the Bush tax cut could have paid for > > > > so am I wrong? > > > > Are most of the workers in this country employed by the wealthy > minority? > > I > > know in my company that is true... > > Wrong about what? Your statement or your implication? > > The statement "most people are employed buy the wealthy" is absolutely > true. > > The implication that those people then deserve a largest tax break is > questionable at best. > > Jim Davis > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
