Don't know where you are on the subject of the expiring Bush Tax cuts of 2001. And why, if it was such a great idea didn't they make them permanent? And why didn't they cut spending at the same time? Anyway - assumptions are: If you're below the $250,000 threshold - "Great."; If you're above that threshold - "Wait a minute!" Things like this quickly turn into a clash of philosophy/ideology, so I hope to avoid that, but don't expect to.
The problem is unless Congress cuts the programs we've - as a population - supported like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, National Defense by a lot - a LOT 33%, taxes have to go up. Democrats won't cut these things. Republicans won't either.
So what is "rich?" Some say if you're in the top 2% of incomes (over $250,000/yr), then you are rich. There's been a lot of buzz over a post (since taken down) of just such a household, and its complaint. http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/09/todd-henderson-we-are-the-super-rich.html The fact of the matter is most of us are doing OK - but not great - on much less than $250,000. Really dude - boo f***ing hoo.
I find it hard to feel bad for someone who is about to be taxed at 39% as opposed to 31% on income over this threshold. This is what we get for 2 Bush terms. The party of small government was not such. 2 wars (necessity is another subject) that were off budget - payed for with "supplemental spending" - unfunded expansion of Medicare Part D. GOP just piled on the debt - and NOW they're worried about it. Not so worried they'll cut spending, or allow taxes (taxes they passed as temporary when they had majorities) to rise.
http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/09/in-which-mr-deling-responds-to-someone-who-might-be-professor-todd-henderson.html
I don't know the solution. I am certain that a return to the policies that put us in this mess is not the correct one.
No comments:
Post a Comment