Democrats are constantly squawking about how unfair it is that we don't have a compulsory draft to share the burden of military service equally. Of course we've pointed out the benefits of an all volunteer service and the quality of recruits but they persist.
They also whine about how unfair it is that our allies in this "unilateral" Bush's war are not doing more.
So we wonder then why there is no consistency when it comes to the shared burden and sacrifice of keeping ALL this nation's promises to protect the health, welfare and safety of it's citizens through the funding of government by compulsory taxation?
Why is it that they fail to embrace that same concept of fairness when it comes to who pays and who benefits from taxes?
Who Pays
2004 IRS data:
Top 1% making more than $328,049 pay 36.89% of Federal personal income taxes.
Top 5% "" $137,056 pay 57.13%
Top 10% "" $99,112 pay 68.19%
Top 25% "" $60,041 pay 84.86%
Top 50% "" $30,122 pay 96.70%
Bottom 50% making less than $30,122 pay 3.30%
Who Benefits
A study by the Tax Foundation reveals that "Those in the lowest quintile received $14.76 in federal spending for every dollar they paid in federal taxes; for middle earners, it was $1.29; top earners, just 32 cents. In total-dollar terms, low-income families netted over $31,000 each from government taxes and spending, while high-income households lost roughly $48,000."
And if you thought the $25 billion in pork barrel spending Neville Nancy used to buy votes for her surrender in Iraq bill was something, it's microscopic compared to the $ONE TRILLION smackeroos the Tax Foundation study reveals is being used to keep Democrat voters fat, lazy and stupid.
Tax Cuts for Who?
And then there's the perennial debate over tax cuts. Democrats now in control of Congress have threatened to repeal the Bush tax cuts and push for a wave of new spending and taxes.
And like they do every time these issues come up they begin squawking like a gaggle of demented parrots "tax cuts for the rich. tax cuts for the rich...AWK.... Halliburton, Halliburton!!!"
The Bush tax cuts were signed into law on March 28, 2003. Let's assume, perhaps incorrectly, that when Democrats say "the rich" they're talking about that top 1% of wage earners who take home more than $328,049.
If you look at the rate for that top 1% under Bush's plan in 2004 it's higher than all but one of the last five years and higher than the Clinton year of 1999.
You'll also notice that the 50% of taxpayers in the bottom tax bracket have decreased their contribution from a high of 4% in 1999 to 3.3% in 2004 under Bush's plan.
Another key factor that you can't help notice is that ALL income levels have been rising dramatically. Remember that old Reagan proverb: "A rising tide lifts all boats?"
And just what is making all that new wealth possible?
No comments:
Post a Comment