Posted 8/29/2004 12:50:00 PM by Douglas

Interesting (possibly) article about Bush's tax cut, and while I don't fully understand the chart, it raises a few good questions.

First off, since the IRS taxes us proportionately, higher incomes pay higher taxes. But when these rates are lowered, those opposed to the cuts always refer to the straight dollar amount of the reduction, and not the proportionate percentages. So it's true that higher income taxpayers get a larger cut in terms of dollar amount, but considering their proportion was higher to begin with, it hardly seems unfair.

Secondly, I think both political parties are equally repugnant, but I'm sick of hearing the republican party referred to as Rich White Folk. Last time I checked, Kerry was a billionaire (with a B) and Edwards was a multi-millionaire (and a personal injury attorney, too). Not exactly a cross-section of America.

Also, who the hell in their right mind would complain about any tax cut? I don't care that I only got back an extra $300 in 2001. It's better than not getting $300, isn't it? I don't care what kind of rebate Bill Gates received.

Finally, that chart shows that everyone's tax responsibility has decreased. How is that even possible? Are we to believe that the government is operating on less money? That they've actually decreased in operating expense since 2001? Turns out that the republicans are just as good at blowing our money and "expanding government" as the democrats are.

The only solution? Don't vote. It only encourages them.