One of the reasons corporate taxes are "so high"

[Bubba]

Originally Posted by Army_of_One

If they (Dems) roll back the Bush tax cuts you will pay more. Unless you make virtually NO money you will pay more taxes. If you were in the 15% before the Bush tax cuts you pay 10% now. If you were in the 28% you now pay 15%, if you were in the 31% under Clinton you now pay 25%. If these are "rolled back" tell me how your taxes won't increase?

If thinking that way helps you sleep at night then go on ahead with that thinking. In reality, the Bush tax cuts were for the corporations and the rich, it did very little, if anything to the taxes of the middle class and the poor.

[Army_of_One]

Originally Posted by Bubba

If thinking that way helps you sleep at night then go on ahead with that thinking. In reality, the Bush tax cuts were for the corporations and the rich, it did very little, if anything to the taxes of the middle class and the poor.

So you didn't get a tax cut? Do you invest at all?

[Bubba]

We've went through this before. I invest in a 401k and roth IRA that have no tax consequences while they are growing. I am not in the class of the rich that can put money in stocks. After my 401k and IRA investments and my regular savings account, all the rest of my income is needed for bills, food, and daily living expenses.

[Army_of_One]

Originally Posted by Bubba

We've went through this before. I invest in a 401k and roth IRA that have no tax consequences while they are growing. I am not in the class of the rich that can put money in stocks. After my 401k and IRA investments and my regular savings account, all the rest of my income is needed for bills, food, and daily living expenses.

Stocks are not only for the wealthy. Middle class can buy stocks too. SOme stocks can be bought a share at a time...It's called DRIP investing.

You buy into the class warfare rich vs poor stuff.

Fool.com: What Are Dividend Reinvestment Plans (DRPs)?

[Bubba]

Maybe you missed this part of my reply....


"After my 401k and IRA investments and my regular savings account, all the rest of my income is needed for bills, food, and daily living expenses."

[Army_of_One]

Originally Posted by Bubba

If thinking that way helps you sleep at night then go on ahead with that thinking. In reality, the Bush tax cuts were for the corporations and the rich, it did very little, if anything to the taxes of the middle class and the poor.

I disagree but that's ok.

Ten Myths About the Bush Tax Cuts

Myth #10: The Bush tax cuts were tilted toward the rich.
Fact: The rich are now shouldering even more of the income tax burden.

Popular mythology also suggests that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts shifted more of the tax burden toward the poor. While high-income households did save more in actual dollars than low-income households, they did so because low-income house*holds pay so little in income taxes in the first place. The same 1 percent tax cut will save more dollars for a millionaire than it will for a middle-class worker simply because the millionaire paid more taxes before the tax cut.

In 2000, the top 60 percent of taxpayers paid 100 percent of all income taxes. The bottom 40 percent collectively paid no income taxes. Lawmakers writing the 2001 tax cuts faced quite a challenge in giving the bulk of the income tax savings to a population that was already paying no income taxes.

Rather than exclude these Americans, lawmak*ers used the tax code to subsidize them. (Some economists would say this made that group's col*lective tax burden negative.)First, lawmakers low*ered the initial tax brackets from 15 percent to 10 percent and then expanded the refundable child tax credit, which, along with the refundable earned income tax credit (EITC), reduced the typical low-income tax burden to well below zero. As a result, the U.S. Treasury now mails tax "refunds" to a large proportion of these Americans that exceed the amounts of tax that they actually paid. All in all, the number of tax filers with zero or negative income tax liability rose from 30 million to 40 million, or about 30 percent of all tax filers.[17] The remaining 70 percent of tax filers received lower income tax rates, lower investment taxes, and lower estate taxes from the 2001 legislation.

Consequently, from 2000 to 2004, the share of all individual income taxes paid by the bottom 40 per*cent dropped from zero percent to –4 percent, mean*ing that the average family in those quintiles received a subsidy from the IRS. (See Chart 6.) By contrast, the share paid by the top quintile of households (by income) increased from 81 percent to 85 percent.

Expanding the data to include all federal taxes, the share paid by the top quintile edged up from 66.6 percent in 2000 to 67.1 percent in 2004, while the bottom 40 percent's share dipped from 5.9 per*cent to 5.4 percent. Clearly, the tax cuts have led to the rich shouldering more of the income tax burden and the poor shouldering less.[18]


AND...even if you are right and the rich got a bigger cut they are the ones that make things happen. As a poor, lower middle class bastard when was the last time I created a job or anything like that?

[Army_of_One]

Originally Posted by Bubba

Maybe you missed this part of my reply....


"After my 401k and IRA investments and my regular savings account, all the rest of my income is needed for bills, food, and daily living expenses."

Real Debt Help - Get out of debt with Dave Ramsey's Total Money Makeover Plan.

This might help?

[Bubba]

Unlike others I have no credit cards. The only big debt I have is my mortgage. I drive a '98 Caddy with no payments, I invest almost the maximum allowed in my 401k/IRA. I think I'm sitting pretty good, just don't have the money to put into stocks.

[Army_of_One]

Originally Posted by Bubba

Unlike others I have no credit cards. The only big debt I have is my mortgage. I drive a '98 Caddy with no payments, I invest almost the maximum allowed in my 401k/IRA. I think I'm sitting pretty good, just don't have the money to put into stocks.

Dave would be very, VERY proud of you.

[Bubba]

Who's Dave?