Saturday, July 31, 2010

Obama versus Bush tax cuts

Almost missed this one. Those wacky liberals at the Wall Street Journal provided some context to the Bush tax cuts spin. The chart says it all.

Via Bob Cesca who points out "it appears as if keeping the Bush tax cuts in place would force people earning $60-150,000 to pay slightly more." I'm guessing that's about the top range of income of most of the tea party protesters. Not they'll ever comprehend it, or believe it unless they see it on Fox. Which they won't.

[More posts daily at the Detroit News.]

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share


Blogger Capt. Fogg said...

Coincidentally, my in-box was stuffed with copies of an article about OBAMA AND THE BIGGEST TAX INCREASE IN HISTORY today.

I seem to remember that the Bush cuts had term limits imposed by the Republican congress, but we're talking about America's selective memory here. Somehow, every president I can remember has made the biggest increase in history whether he raised or cut or cut and raised like Reagan. But we're talking about America's selective gullibility here.

Yes, it's a big cut if you have an adjusted gross of over a million and a bad accountant, so there will be a few less extra bucks to buy another house and put into another hedge fund or numbered account in Luxembourg so it can trickle up to Wall Street.

Let me sum it up, with a nod to Ann Coulter: "Rich Republicans go WAH. They go WAH WAH WAH."

Fuck 'em if they can't stand a tax increase.

11:06:00 AM  
Blogger Libby Spencer said...

Of course no one WANTS to pay more taxes but looking at the numbers it doesn't seem that alarming a raise that would put anyone in the poor house. What I can't figure is if you were really rich, your income must depend on some level on having a vibrant middle class to buy your goods. It seems counterproductive to insist on policies that enrich you most in the short when the long term results would lead to losses.

11:25:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home