Well, it's tax day and I thought you'd be interested in some quick facts...
Gregory Mankiw, an economist at Harvard, conducted a study about the 'cost' of a tax decrease. If his figures are looked at from another perspective, you can also get the 'cost' of a tax increase...
According to his figures, if Congress would forego 50 cents of revenue, the economy would grow and people would have $2 more income. I think we'd all like the extra $2 and isn't that a small price for the government to pay?
Additionally, the cost of providing the government with an extra $1 tax increase on dividends only nets the Treasury 50 cents, but costs you and me $2 in lost incomee - in addition to the 50 cents in tax. Again - who would be better off with this money - the government or you and me?
And then there was this wonderful study by the Congressional Budget Office which details who is paying what in terms of taxes.
Did you know that people who make more than $43,200 fall into the top 40% of earners and pay 99.1% of all income taxes?
Did you know that people who made more than $87,300 in 2004 (which is easy to do in Toledo with a 2-income household and a decent union wage), are in the top 10% of earners? Did you know that they paid 70.8% of all income taxes and that this was an increase over the 48.1% that such earners paid in 1979?
The 'super rich' (top 1% of earners) in 2004 made 16.3% of the country's income but they pay 36.7% of the income tax. The middle class makes 13.9% of the country's income but pays 4.7% of the income tax. In 1979, the 'super rich' paid 18.3% and the middle class paid 10.7% of the country's income tax.
Basically, because of our form of government, 60% of the people (those who don't pay taxes) can force 40% to pay all the bills. And remember that that 40% starts with earnings of $43,200!
It's redistribution of wealth - the main premise of socialism - in America. What's wrong with this picture?