Quote:
Originally posted by taxwonk
Did I say they weren't? Once again, MY COMPLAINT IS THAT THE ONLY ONES WHO GOT THE TAX BREAK WERE THE WEALTHY, I AM NOT COMPLAINING ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE WEALTHY GOT THE TAX BREAK!!!
|
You got a tax break, they got a tax break. The percentage of taxes (in comparison to the old system) was higher for the wealthy. I do not believe that this accurately reflects your conclusion of "THE ONLY ONES WHO GOT THE TAX BREAK WERE THE WEALTHY", as (almost) everyone got a tax break. Thus, your complaint uses the terms "wealthy" and "tax break" relatively.
In other words, by the same logic, if people making 100K paid 40K in taxes, and people making 50K paid 10K in taxes, your logic would support the same conclusion if the people making 100K had taxes reduced by 4500 and people making 50K had taxes reduced by only 1000. Specifically, the upper-bracket would have received a greater reduction in both absolute terms and in terms relative to what they would have paid under the old system --4500 and >10% reduction, while the lower bracked would have only received 1000 and 10% flat. Thus, it appears your logic would still hold, though the wealthy were still paying far more in percentage and absolute terms.
Which is absurd. Almost everyone got a break compared to the old system. The wealthy still pay a far higher proportion of their income as taxes. Sure, the wealthy got a better break in absolute terms and relative to the old system.
But hey, some people who paid no taxes either way didn't get a bigger welfare check either. Where's the fairness in that? Huh? Its like they are giving their money to the wealthy.
