Is Bush tax plan really tax just:
"According to estimates by Citizens for Tax Justice, a liberal research group in Washington, a complete accounting shows that the wealthiest 1 percent of taxpayers earned about 18 percent of all income in 2001 and paid about 25 percent of all federal taxes. "It's a little progressive, but we're not talking about communism here," said Robert S. McIntyre, director of the group.
What nobody disputes is that President Bush's plan would provide by far the biggest benefits to the very rich.
The administration estimates that about 40 percent of the tax cuts under its overall plan would flow to people with incomes above $200,000 a year � fewer than 5 percent of all taxpayers."
I'd much rather have no SS tax and no Social Security, instead of the current SS tax and no Social Security. Of course, I don't believe that no Social Security is the ideal system;
How about keep paying the tax and no Social Security. Somebody has to pay the current retirees.
And it's been obvious, watching the news that one strategy the Dems. in Congress are using is to create extreme infighting and opposition in order to prolong any decision or conclusion and add pressure to see things their way or cause excessive delays as they seam to want Bush to fail. True they are no longer in majority, but they are enough to have quite a bit of power and they are using all they can. They are fighting a political battle and have made it more important than what the supposed goal is.
My heart whent out to the students when reading Michael's post. But I happen to agree with your response. Huge corrections are needed in the education system and until they are made throwing more money at it does not help.
Public schools are so bad here in So. CA that I advise anyone who can afford it to put their kids in private school or home school them. True that each child that is taken out of the public school causes them to lose money because of the way the system is set up, but in the meantime, who want's to sacrafice their child's future to keep the system going the way it is?
Just adding, Bush did talk of also reducing spending in areas other than what's necessary for the war and I believe he included education as an exception if my memory serves me. He's not just talking about tax cuts and benefits, he's also talking about cuts in Gov. spending. But it doesn't make for good arguement to admit he brings up both and it's being overlooked by the Democrats who seam to think they are obligated to go against him no matter what he does.
Not long ago, he made the decision to hire from outside Unionized Fed. employees to do some Fed. jobs. A lot of what he says gets put aside by opposing Democrats or even the media just to keep up an arguement and confuse those listening.
Comparison only with "western" countries seems a bit narrow. If one were to look at the world's population, and compare that with the population in countries providing for capital punishment, believe you would find the U.S. with the majority.
But, since it should not be a majority/minority issue, the above is an unnecessary counter-argument to a weak argument.
One important reason the U.S. retains capital punishment is our overall view of the value of human life; e.g., a particularly heinous and premeditated crime, such as certain instances of murder, demands the forfeiture of the criminal's life. The criminal must know that in advance. The result should be certain.
When our laws are misused by unscrupulous U.S. or state executives, the legal system is made more arbitrary and capricious. That undermines the authority and effectiveness of the state and further endangers those who would otherwise be protected by the laws.
You make good points here Michael.
If the total $674M ten year tax cut package proposed by the Repubs is passed, that would represent roughly three percent of current taxes. If fuel taxes, postal fees, national park entry fees, etc. were included, the proportional reduction in spending is less.
While Repubs are in the majority, compromise with the Dems, with their $136M package, is almost inevitable. It makes little sense to start from a weak position, knowing compromise is probable. So it is likely any final tax cuts will be substantially less than the $674M.
A final package with $3-$400M in cuts seems plausible, probably with the dividend cuts greatly modified. This latter is conjecture, but major compromise looks probable.
Michael, the VA personal property tax, which most paid only on their cars, was hated so broadly it was almost an issue in itself. Gilmore was reacting to strong voter input.
One block who strongly supported tax removal was car dealers. Still remember VA neighborhoods where the typical car of the well-to-do was an maintained 12 year old because the owner did not want to pay exorbitant taxes each year on a newer car.
Where fewer dollars are available, programs tend to receive closer control. You may come to see politicians are unworthy of your fear of excessive tax cuts.
Apparently the investigation of his activities as former Sec of State has already resulted in over 50 convictions on various corruption and bribery charges, and it is expected Ryan may soon be swept into that net.
He also reportedly worked with a group of overzealous left-wing lawyers at the Chicago area's Northwestern Univ to smear prosecutors, policemen, and the state's legal system in general, showing them as dishonest and out to lethally inject innocent defendents.
Truly not a good time for the American justice system.
Why DiBs if execution, Capital Punishment as we like to 'spin' it, is so justifiable are we the only Western Country practicing it.
What is it that DiBs and Co. know that those Western Countries
Representative Governments don't.
Ryan commuted the death sentences for 167. He fully pardoned four more on death row based on defendent claims the confessions to their murders were coerced, even though the allegations were extensively reviewed through various appeal processes and found to have no merit.
Based on a Betsy Hart Scripps Howard News Service story today, some 100 people have been released from various death rows since 1976, typically for technical reasons unrelated to guilt or innocense. More than 800 have been executed in that time, and not one of those executed has later been shown to be innocent though death penalty opponents have looked long and hard for just such a case.
If not executed, there is ALWAYS the possibility of release and, given past experience, most releases will not be due to innocence.