 | | Re: Tax relief?
|
| (...) No I checked the latest bill pretty thoroughly, and all brackets recieve relief, actually if the original plan for marriage penalty relief was still in force I would pay almost no federal income tax at all. (...) Exactly, which is why I want (...) (21 years ago, 19-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Tax relief?
|
| In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Costello writes: <snip> (...) The real problem with a flat tax is that lower income lose out the most. To a person making $20,000 a year, 10% means a lot more than it would to a person making $200,000 a year. I (...) (21 years ago, 19-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Tax relief?
|
| (...) Well, you could always exempt earnings below a subsistence level income -- that's one solution still easily understood and uncomplicated. Another, probably better, solution would be a federal sales tax on non-perishables/luxury type items. But (...) (21 years ago, 19-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Tax relief?
|
| (...) I am not sure that they are at all related, but I'd rather pursue programs and measures that might actually increase security instead of merely depriving citizens of their constitutional rights or engaging in a frivolous war. "Thousands of (...) (21 years ago, 19-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Tax relief?
|
| (...) I definately agree with your last statement, I tend to vote more for Republicans because they often seem to talk like small government types, but rarely act that way when they get into office. True the Democrats give us better social welfare (...) (21 years ago, 19-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Tax relief?
|
| (...) But what happened to all of that money in the meanwhile? This is why I despise the republicans. To be honest, we might actually get somewhere with someone if voters could for just once focus on the money -- in a way, all the president should (...) (21 years ago, 19-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
