Metadish, Fresh from NYC

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

The New York Times released a study showing what anyone with any common sense already knew. Bush’s tax cut on investments was the real goal behind his first two tax cuts. Well, now the republicans are trying to make sure that those big fat tax cuts for the rich stay permanent.

An analysis of Internal Revenue Service data by The New York Times found that the benefit of the lower taxes on investments was far more concentrated on the very wealthiest Americans than the benefits of Mr. Bush’s two previous tax cuts: on wages and other noninvestment income.

During last week’s debate on whether to restore limits on the alternative minimum tax or make permanent the cuts in investment income taxes, House leaders chose as their spokesman Representative David L. Camp, a Michigan Republican. He said Republicans favored continuing investment tax cuts because that would help more people and would especially benefit those making less than $100,000.

“Nearly 60 percent of the taxpayers with incomes less than $100,000 had income from capital gains and dividends,” he said on the House floor.

But I.R.S. data show that among the 90 percent of all taxpayers who made less than $100,000, dividend tax reductions benefited just one in seven and capital gains reductions one in 20.

Mr. Camp, who had said in an interview that his figures were correct, said Monday through a spokesman that he had been misinformed by the staff of the House Ways and Means Committee. But his office said he supported making the investment tax cuts permanent because cutting these rates was “good policy and good for our economy.”

President Bush, in his budget, urged Congress to make permanent the reduced taxes on investment income. He also proposed limiting the effects of the alternative minimum tax through next year, saying a permanent solution “is best addressed within the context of fundamental tax reform.”

So basically it’s welcome back to the trickle down economics of the 80’s. Why can’t you thick headed poor people get it through your head. The more money the government takes from you and gives to the rich, the better it is for you because then they’ll give you a job and you can work to earn it all back. And while Bush is seeking to make the investment tax permanent, he wants to limit the alternative minimum tax, well basically because that one doesn’t help rich people as much.

They’ve already basically managed to do away with the estate tax, which purely benefits the rich. Hopefully we’ll just stand by and do nothing while they again change the laws to screw over the average worker and benefit themselves and their friends.

Big Gain for Rich Seen in Tax Cuts for Investments [NYT]

Share This