Why Bush will win

[00tim]

Why Bush will win... Especially if Dean is the nominee, because of the "repeal of Bushes' tax cuts. Nice wording for a tax increase. I'm not in total agreement with how Bush cut taxes but the lowest income people saw there tax burden decreased by 33% while the richest people saw there tax burden decreased by 9% So who is getting the shaft by Deans' economic policy's? I don't think the wealthy in this country were in need of having their taxes reduced but Dean is proposing having the poorest people in this country have there taxes raised the most. Now I hear about Dean considering a tax cut for the middle and lower class. Does that mean that they will have their taxes reduced further or is it Dean speak for a smaller increase than 33%?

[00tim]

The poor saw their taxes cut by 33% and the rich only by 9%? Ah, but you forget about payroll taxes, the taxes for Social Security and Medicare that come out of your paycheck before you even see it. Most Americans pay a majority of their taxes in payroll taxes, and payroll taxes only apply to the first $60,000 of income! And Bush has not cut payroll taxes at all, of course. These are a much bigger burden on the poor than on the rich.
On the one hand, you say tax cuts for the wealthy are a good thing, then on the other, you say that's not really what Bush is doing! Which is it?

And what about luxury taxes, estate taxes, capital gains? how about taxes on the interest in bank accounts?
my argument against Dean does not include the tax structure. But the wealthy pay the highest percentage no matter how you look at it, actually I'm happy about that. If Dean is elected President a vast majority of people will see their taxes raised by a higher percentage than those who are in the highest tax bracket who will be recieving the lowest percentage tax hike. In the end the economy is only going to do good if the lower and middle income is better off. Wealthy people are going to spend money and make money regardless of the economic situation. raising taxes on the midle class would likely balance the budget twice as fast as only increasing taxes for the wealthy because there are so few perecentage wise who fall into this wealthiest catagory. Does anyonee really think that raising taxes only on the wealthy helps. That is why taxes have always been raised on the middle class the hardest percentagewise.  regardless of who is president , you want to raise taxes fine, I want to see something for my increased sacrifice, not the politicians have more money to throw around come election time.

[00tim]

My taxes went up and I'm not wealthy. But you are correct when you say that Clinton raised taxes mostly on the wealthy. He did still raise taxes on middle income people. I have never given presidential administrations alot of the credit for economic situations good or bad. There are too many outside influences out of the control of the administrations. The federal reserve has the most influence as far as government goes. We had an economic recovery during the Reagan administration and taxes went down for everyone and the federal deficit grew. We had a recession under GHW Bush when he raised taxes and was not as supply sided as his predecessor. Along came Clinton who raised taxes considerably and we had the largest economic expansion in U.S. history. Clinton and Reagan benefited under conditions with low fuel prices and lowering of the interest rates. Neither had anything or atleast much to do with these influences.
Now along comes Dean who was calling for the "repeal" of the Bush tax cuts. =tax hikes. It has been proved and we are currently in an economic upturn with low taxes combined with low interest rates and atleast for the time stable fuel prices. Yes there is a deficit which must be addressed but it was also proven that the deficit was turned into a surplus not by Clintons tax hikes (it did help some) but primarily by the good economy which brought in enormus revenue for the gov't.
The problem with people like Dean is they care more about the imediate gov't budget and how much money they can spend right now.
NO, there is not as much fiscal responisbility with the Bush administration as there should be and Taxes need not be lowered for people in the wealthiest percentile but raising taxes on the middle and lower income people simply for the benefit of Lowering the federal deficit when it has been proven that
A. You can have good economic times with one
B. the federal deficit goes down predominently from good revenue which only can be achieved under economic upturns is not a policy that is best for the people.

[00tim]

This is really off topic, but would it be allright for those of you who are independents to have a signature that tells us what kind of independents you are? There are two independents from NY, and I keep mixing you up! It's easier to understand the points if I can distiguish between green independents and libertarian ones. You don't have to, if you don't want to, of course, but I would appreciate it, anyway.

No problem. I am a fiscally conservative morally moderate independant. By fiscally conservative I mean not entirely a supply sider but that the people's money comes first before the gov't and I feel that we as a society are taxed enough. budget cuts should come first and if there is a tax raise I think the gov't should provide something with it not just more money for the gov't. As for moral issues I feel that this country needs to continue to explore alternatives and to seek ground that is good for as much of the majority as practical. However, I feel that recently those on the liberal side have gone too far with moral issues and in an attempt to "not offend" anyone we are starting to lose individuality. I think we should welcome people of faith to be able to dislpay and share their beliefs, just as we should with any and all cultures so long as the practices and rituals are not defammatory or injurious in nature, of course. I think that people should be able to say Merry Christmas without worrying about others rights. I think Children should be able to participate in voluntary prayer and the schools should welcome this because it is "voluntary" We should continue to strive for culteral diversity and freedom, not take it all away.
Lately I have ben siding more with Republicans although I have some serious issues with the party. If GW Bush wins fine what I'm more concerned with right now is that I feel that the democratic party is teetering on implosion and that will leave the Republicans with too much control. For all of these reasons and various others I am an independant.   Although I often score on a libertarian side with the ploitical identity polls I don't really consider myself one.