I Believe In Paying Taxes...

[hsifeng]

...but I am curious when the Republican Party became so interested in us all doing so as well? Aren't they the party of 'low taxes'? I am sure the reason that they are having to revert from their prior party line is because of the spending deficit left over from some big-spending Democratic administration...

Um...

Wait...

From rwfranz

Here's the way their proposals break down - in terms of AVERAGE TAX RATE:

Income range:	Obama	McCain
0 - 18,981	-0.7%	4.4%
18982 - 37,595	7.5%	10.2%
37596 - 66,354	14.7%	16.2%
66354 - 111,645	18.4%	18.7%
11646 +	27.3%	23.9%

In the top quintile (the top 20% of tax units), there is further subdivision:

Income range:	Obama	McCain
111,645 - 160,972	21.1%	20.8%
160,973 - 226,918	23.0%	22.1%
226,919 - 603,402	26.5%	24.0%
603,403 - 2,871,682	34.5%	27.0%
2,871,683+	37.4%	28.1%

Which means, in terms of TAX DOLLARS OWED (sample income levels):

Income	Obama	McCain
10,000	-70	440
30,000	750	1020
50,000	7,350	8100
100,000	18,400	18,700
150,000	31,150	31,200
200,000	46,000	44,200
500,000	132,500	120,000
1,000,000	345,000	270,000
5,000,000	374,000	281,000

Comments

for the rich

[shadowd1.livejournal.com]

the GOP is the party of lower taxes for the rich.

duh.

Re: for the rich

[hsifeng.livejournal.com]

That is a recent development: They used to be the party of fiscal responcibility for *everyone*. That meant they didn't tax you, me or Frank unless they had to. Not anymore...(and not for awhile)

Re: for the rich

[shadowd1.livejournal.com]

in my life, the national debt has increased with republicans, save Nixon, and maintained or decreased with democrats; however, social services have been cut with republicans and added with democrats. and, for the past 8 years our current president has decided to pay for a war by giving tax cuts to the rich. i'm not sure how to best define "recent" when looking at the GOP; however, i think their fiscal irresponsibility has been going on for a while, and is now more apparent due to lack of a solid apparent "bad guy" previously used to distract the majority of the population.

i never understood how a party could claim to be fiscally conservative, while leaving a larger debt and cutting programs. i guess that's one of the reasons why i left the republican party to become undeclared.

Re: for the rich

[hsifeng.livejournal.com]

Of course, I am talking about a tradition (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_conservatism) that the Republican Party still espouses - even though it hasn't demonstrated it since Nixon (http://thepoliticsofdebt.com/?p=177 /). )

Re: for the rich

[shadowd1.livejournal.com]

you know... i'm a closet Nixon fan...

Re: for the rich

[hsifeng.livejournal.com]

I thought you didn't like closets...*grin*

Re: for the rich

[shadowd1.livejournal.com]

well, they are good for hiding things... like bodies.

Re: for the rich

[hsifeng.livejournal.com]

*chuckle*

[sstormwatch.livejournal.com]

NeoConservatives. Completely different ball of wax from the old fashioned Conservatives. Different agenda, different beliefs, different everything, but because they have coopted the term "conservative", the old fashioned ones have little means to do anything about their "party".

[hsifeng.livejournal.com]

I think this is why you see such a ground swell in the Independent movement.

[sstormwatch.livejournal.com]

Both Independents and Libertarians.