If Bush Tax Cuts Expire, How Much Do My Taxes Go Up?

[Eastoff]

The Bush Tax cuts expiring will hurt the rich quite a bit more than the poor.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

The Bush Tax cuts will hurt the rich quite a bit more than the poor.

what you ment to say was "The Bush tax cuts will hurt the EMPLOYED more than the poor"

but really, ask those that you know are comfortable..they are just glad to have made it before this shit hits the fan, they will be fine..

 

[blazerboy30]

The Bush Tax cuts expiring will hurt the rich quite a bit more than the poor.

Here's the inconsistency in your thoughts. You want to raise taxes on the rich because they don't need that much money and it won't affect them. Yet now you claim tha expiring bush's tax cuts will hurt the rich. Which is it?

 

[Denny Crane]

The Bush Tax cuts expiring will hurt the rich quite a bit more than the poor.

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/08/howard-dean-overstates-cost-of-tax-cuts/

From the above link, I see that:

The rich get 20-25% of the sum of the tax cut benefits.

Two years of the tax cuts was ~$365B, or ~$182.5B per year. Lets err on the worst case as proclaimed by the left - 25%. Raising taxes on those making $250K or more would cut $45B from a $1.1T deficit. Love the disconnect. It's a fart in the breeze.

It's nothing more than jealousy or revenge or some other WORTHLESS reason.

Letting the whole tax cuts package expire gets the deficit down to still over $920B.

The sorry truth is we'd raise $45B in revenues and Obama would spend it all plus another $40B, so the deficit would actually go up!

We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

 

[ABM]

http://news.yahoo.com/paul-ryan-obama-no-mandate-213704104.html

 

[barfo]

http://news.yahoo.com/paul-ryan-obama-no-mandate-213704104.html

"We thought we had a very good chance of winning. You know, the polling and the data and all the people who are the smart people who watch this stuff-- they had a pretty optimistic view on the night," Ryan, R-Wis., said.

No Paul. The smart people knew you were going to lose. The seriously delusional people thought you were going to win.

barfo

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

No Paul. The smart people knew you were going to lose. The seriously delusional people thought you were going to win.

barfo

I stated consistently they'd lose. So, barfo, am I smart?

 

[ABM]

No Paul. The smart people knew you were going to lose. The seriously delusional people thought you were going to win.

barfo

Really? One might think it would take more than a 3mil win to make that particular boast.

 

[barfo]

Really? One might think it would take more than a 3mil win to make that particular boast.

It doesn't take a landslide, it just takes a predictable victory. Which this definitely was.

barfo

 

[barfo]

I stated consistently they'd lose. So, barfo, am I smart?

Well, I didn't say everyone who knew the R's were going to lose was smart. I said the smart people knew that the R's were going to lose. There could still be non-smart people who also knew the R's would lose.

The most we can logically conclude about you is that you are not seriously delusional, since you did not think the R's were going to win. So that's something, at least.

barfo

 

[e_blazer]

It doesn't take a landslide, it just takes a predictable victory. Which this definitely was.

barfo

Wow. Really?

Flip about 155,000 votes in just four states - Ohio, Florida, Virginia and New Hampshire - and you end up planning a Romney inaugural.

http://www.sgvtribune.com/opinions/ci_21987662/ruth-marcus-president-cant-succumb-mandate-delusion

 

[ABM]

It doesn't take a landslide, it just takes a predictable victory. Which this definitely was.

barfo

Well, of course it was. BTW, you spilled a little mustard on that armchair of yours.

 

[barfo]

Wow. Really?

Yes. There was quite a lot of polling in the swing states, and it was very clear that Obama was going to win Ohio and therefore the election.

Flip about 155,000 votes in just four states - Ohio, Florida, Virginia and New Hampshire - and you end up planning a Romney inaugural.

Yes, but Romney spent hundreds of millions of dollars and many months trying to flip those votes and could not do it. Just because the election was numerically close doesn't mean it was in doubt.

barfo

 

[magnifier661]

what you ment to say was "The Bush tax cuts will hurt the EMPLOYED more than the poor"

but really, ask those that you know are comfortable..they are just glad to have made it before this shit hits the fan, they will be fine..

100% accurate. People are forgetting the 2,000 credit per child. And many aren't even noticing that my income bracket wasn't even able to take advantage of this credit. If you make over 200,000 per year; you do not even qualify for many of the tax cuts. But hey let the liberals have their moment.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

100% accurate. People are forgetting the 2,000 credit per child. And many aren't even noticing that my income bracket wasn't even able to take advantage of this credit. If you make over 200,000 per year; you do not even qualify for many of the tax cuts. But hey let the liberals have their moment.

very good point, Mags.

This also goes much deeper, add the tax you will pay if you do not have an approved health insurance policy..or, the extra cost your current policy will have to charge you to make your plan inclusive of all the required items that they will have to provide. What? you dont need birth control pills, too bad. You dont need to have a child up to the age of 26 n your policy? too fuckin bad, someone does and you will help pay for it..tip of the fucking iceberg

 

[Eastoff]

Here's the inconsistency in your thoughts. You want to raise taxes on the rich because they don't need that much money and it won't affect them. Yet now you claim tha expiring bush's tax cuts will hurt the rich. Which is it?

I just mean to say that the bush tax cuts helped the rich more than they helped the poor. When they expire, the rich will experience a higher percentage change than the poor. I get your point though. Maybe my knowledge of the rates is off.

 

[Eastoff]

100% accurate. People are forgetting the 2,000 credit per child. And many aren't even noticing that my income bracket wasn't even able to take advantage of this credit. If you make over 200,000 per year; you do not even qualify for many of the tax cuts. But hey let the liberals have their moment.

I love it! I want to disincentivize having more kids. I say drop the tax credit for kids!

 

[Denny Crane]

I just mean to say that the bush tax cuts helped the rich more than they helped the poor. When they expire, the rich will experience a higher percentage change than the poor. I get your point though. Maybe my knowledge of the rates is off.

The rich won't experience a higher percentage change. The cuts maybe cut the highest bracket by 10% and the lowest ones by 25%. It wasn't a straight X% across the board.