DIYbanter - View Single Post

(Doug Miller) wrote in message ...
In article , (Nate Perkins) wrote:

You spend a lot of time noticing that the rich pay more taxes than the
poor do ... and yet you don't understand that a tax cut for the rich
costs has more deficit impact than does a tax cut for the poor.

A tax cut applied to those who pay little or no tax, obviously has little or
no impact of any kind, on the deficit or on anything else.

Sigh. One more time.

When you give a tax cut to people who have little money on hand, they
tend to turn around and spend it. That's a stimulative tax cut. It
can have a large impact on pulling the economy out of a recession.

When you give a tax cut to rich folks, sometimes they spend a portion
of it and sometimes they save or invest it ... possibly stimulative in
the long run, depending on how much you believe in trickle down
economics. Certainly not very immediately stimulative in a recession.
It can actually be detrimental if it is coming at a large enough
expense to the debt.

Everyone will agree that the rich pay a lot more taxes than do the
poor. Therefore, a tax cut for the rich has a greater impact on the
overall deficit than does a tax cut for the middle class and poor.

Now the subjective part comes in when you suggest that everyone could
have lower taxes if we just cut government so that the "evil 'gubmint
doesn't get any more of my money." Most people agree that a leaner,
more efficient government would be a good thing. The main problem is
that the same leader that the conservatives look to (Bush) has just
expanded entitlements more than any president in the last 40 years.
As a moderate, this makes me think he's just irresponsible and lacks
credibility. So if you talk about smaller government and "getting
government off the people's backs" at the same time you are growing it
by leaps and bounds, do you really have credibility? Is Bush your
true conservative?