You can also go here for interesting material from the same author:

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell1.asp

Jim

It highly rated and worth the read for the layman.

“The conservative side of things wants to do the SAME exact thing I have been talking about here but focus on a different income level (which begs the question, “Why is that not spreading the wealth around but when applied to the other end is?”).”

This is once again, just plain false.

What you want to do is take money from me, MORE money, in fact, than is being taken now, and give it to others.

What the so-called conservatives want to do, is let me keep $.42 of MY OWN MONEY, instead of $.40.

That is very, very different.

Jim

I don’t know why Evan, but it seems like every few generations we must learn it again. Maybe schools should require that all teachers pass a test on the constitution.

I just hope we don’t elect Chairman Mao.

Not to mention the tax hike that occurs every single year: Bracket creep.

I’m dead poor. I have hopes of remedying this. But the LAST thing I need, the ONE thing that will doom my hopes is if some idiot with a bit of power decides to sock it to the rich. To all of you do-gooders out there who want to wreck Bill Gates in order to “help” me, I say, “DON’T ^%&*&$# HELP ME!” I can’t afford your kind of help! When, oh when are the so-called “intellectuals” of this world going to get it through their thick, counterintuitive skulls that they cannot extract both beef and milk from the same cow?

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.
Are there any history teachers left?
Mike

Ummm….no.
Corporations get taxed on revenue, not unsold inventory.
And sorry…it may be “Business 101″ in your view of the world, but that’s about it.

evanjones (17:44:38) :

Tax cuts for the middle class are fine.

Tax hikes for “the richest 5%” (who already pay 60% of the taxes), would be extremely stupid:

Exactly.
Pamela has never defined what the “middle class” is in her reckoning. Btw…Obama has now moved this bar a couple of times in the last week. It started off at $250,000…then it went to $200,000. Now Biden says it’s actually $120,000.

Figuring my paycheck?…when I add in the state and local taxes that I pay, including state sales tax and state income tax, on top of medicare and social security, I’m paying roughly $.60 of every dollar I earn in taxes.

How much more would you have me pay, Pamela? I get to keep $.40 of each dollar. Forty cents.

Your analogies don’t work, your math doesn’t work, your economics don’t work, and the tax policies you subscribe to are a fairy tail, and don’t work.

Jim

Actually, I’d argue that the Kennedy/Reagan approach was far more efficient. The result of the JFK/RR policies was the padding. That way the workers-with-money and the goods were available at the same time. Welfare for the middle class mainly creates inflation.

Tax cuts are fine, but they need to be across the board.

The Laffer Curve rules. Perhaps that reflects badly on the morals of humanity. But it rules. Like it or lump it.

Tax hikes for “the richest 5%” (who already pay 60% of the taxes), would be extremely stupid: it will cost jobs and DECREASE revenues that would otherwise be collected. A tax hike “on the rich” WILL NOT INCREASE REVENUES.

I repeat: Before the bulk of the “tax cuts for the rich”, the richest 1% paid 33% of revenues. After the “tax cuts for the rich” the richest 1% paid 40%. And the revenue base went ‘WAY up.

To soak the 5% who are already paying 60% of the pile is also immoral. But I’ll go with the dude who said, “It’s worse than a crime. it’s a blunder.”

The conservative side of things wants to do the SAME exact thing I have been talking about here but focus on a different income level (which begs the question, “Why is that not spreading the wealth around but when applied to the other end is?”). There is an old saying the Bible, “A worker is worth his wages.” Just because you flip hamburgers for a living on minimum wage does not make you less worthy of a tax break than someone who owns the franchise, even given the fact that 38% of tax payers do not pay income tax. But to be clear, they pay other taxes, so they do pay taxes of some kind. The problem is that the conservative plans so far do not come with a balance of a tax increase somewhere else and instead hopes that the economy will pick up. This is too risky given our current deficit and economic down turn. I don’t think that plan = good fiscal policy.

Business 101:

You might call this basic econ 101 but your wording in “Current Event” indicates the need for a bottom up economy that always fails and reminds me of a presidential candidate in favor of such an economy. The padding just increases the national debt and usually is of short duration. We have had too many bail outs already and padding is just another bail out.