It is always odd how Republican press releases on taxes always seem to be about alleged tax hits that will be taken by middle class families. They never want to talk about what will happen the greedy rich, who have gotten a free ride in this country for the last eight years. They lie about everything. The biggest lie is that these were "tax cuts". They simply were not, they are tax give-aways financed by borrowed money that our children and grandchildren will have to pay, and the whole strategy was to transfer the wealth of the American Middle Class, which will eventually pay the bill, to them.
The biggest outrage is the capital gains tax vs the income tax. Taxes on working people's income are around 30%. If a person earns $300 a week, a $90 goes to Uncle Sam. Yet if the same amount of income is derived from not working, interest from bonds, stock gains, etc, the person pays only $30 in taxes for the same amount of income. Why is that? They are both earning income, and if anything those who earn it by the sweat of their brows are the ones who should pay the lower rate. At the very least, they should be equalized. The rich never mention this in their propaganda that eminates from their Culture of Deception. They have no real interest in the tax burdens of working families, their only real interest is scamming you to vote against your own best interests by bullshitting you into voting for their disguised tax rip-off.
Another thing they don't want you to know is that this "tax cut" rip-off scheme is a major factor in the massive rise in energy prices. Bush and his Mafia have given us a debt burden of what will be 10 trillion dollars by the time he leaves office. It is five times the debt he inherited, in other words, it took our government 224 years to run up 2 trillion dollars in debt, and it took Bush only eight years to not just double it, but to increase it five-fold. It has resulted in a world awash in US Debt instruments, and given Bush's regime trillions to essentially export out of this country for foreign wars. The result is the same you would suffer if you took on more debt than you had income to handle- your credit worthiness will decline. People in the rest of the world don't want dollars anymore, because they are back by debt instead of wealth, in a country whose economy, built on debt, could collapse at the drop of the next oil embargo. They now want Euros, issued by governments that actually pay their bills with cash instead of a credit card.
All of these economic policies have been a disaster, and sooner or later we will have to pay the price - taxes need to come in line with actual expenditures, or spending must be cut. Money that is being shit on the sand of Iraq needs to be put to work in America to reestablish some kind of productive industrial base. The rich, who became rich because of our governments guaranteal of a free-enterprise system, need to pay for the privilege instead of getting a free ride while we pay the bills. The article above is simply falsehoods. It is the Democratic Party's position that wage - earner taxes need to be cut, not raised, and that the tax burden then be spread more equitably among the rich and the corporations, both of whom have earned record profits and incomes, while most average working people have seen their standard of living decrease. It is time to stop falling for their scams and rip-offs disguised as something else.
You are so full of shit. Note, that obviously, math is not your strong point but you think bullshit is. If you want credibility, at least try to make your BS believable.
1st. Bolded Point:
30%, eh? Such a crock. A man earning $300 per week and single will pay a total of $1,170 in federal income tax AND Social Insecurity tax. That's 7.5%, NOT 30%. If he happens to be married, he'll pay nothing until he makes around $20,000 and if he has kids, he gets back $300 per child. HE SHOULD BE PAYING NOTHING but you liberals wouldn't have it that way.
Now, if this same sap was making $300 on the previous tax scale, you know, the one in place when Clinton left office, He would pay $1,898 in federal and SS taxes, 12.2% of his income instead of 7.5%. Plus, he'd had no $300 per child tax credit, either.
Your continual claims the tax cuts didn't help the working man are unfounded. Furthermore, I don't think the tax cuts on the working class went far enough.
Your second bullshit point is saying it took 224 years to run up the first 2 trillion. WRONG! There was no debt to speak of until the '60's. So if you back track, for good measure, to, say, 1940 when the national debt became a blip on the radar screen, when FDR had war taxes slapped on everyone, that's still only 68 years, NOT 224. Perhaps our spend thrift government (That's both party affiliates) would do better if they took a look back at how things were run 100 years ago. You seem to forget that money owed to Social Security is the largest portion of the debt.
Now, the debt figure you so eloquently throw out there is also wrong. When Bush I left office and Clinton took over the national debt was approx. $4.2 trillion. When Clinton left office 8 years later, that debt had gone up to approx. $5.8 trillion, NOT the $2 trillion you claim it was. You seem to have lost 3.8 trillion in your figures, somewhere, dude. Presently, the national debt is $8.8 trillion, an increase of $3 trillion dollars or 50% increase on the beginning debt amount when Bush II took office. The national debt increased 40% during Clinton's 8 years. If you were to subtract the $544,000,000,000 the Iraq war alone has cost, the debt increase would be AT THE SAME PERCENTAGE PACE as it was during Clinton's term. As government bloats, so does the expense in running it, so government growth is continuing at the same rapid pace as the last 16 or so years.
So, as evidenced by these actual figures, BOTH
parties are equally responsible for the mess we're in. Your attempts to lay it all at the feet of Republicans while giving your own party a free pass is complete horse shit. Nothing is going to change until the culture of corruption in Washington is changed. McCain won't change it and neither will Obama.