GOP senators draft stimulus alternative

[shortking98]

Do you really think all of those state DOTs and contractors could afford to keep their workers without work for them? Probably not. You could argue that there already is work but then you realize that if all of those people already have work then new people will have to be hired based on an increase in work. It's really the same argument you make saying people buying things will stimulate the economy. Yeah they are buying things from exisiting retailers, dealers etc. but they will have to hire more people to accomodate increased demand. My point is, if you are injecting all of this money, do you want people to just have a whole bunch of stuff that they bought or do you want something that will benefit society?

[OnePimpTiger]

You're right, it is really the same argument, just two different sides of it. I would rather be able to choose how my money is spent than let the government choose it for me.

[richloughlin]

We have neglected our roads and bridges for too long. Alot of the bridges were built in the 1950's and little has been done in the way of routine maintenance. A recent study of engineers gave an overall grade of D nationwide for bridge structure safety. We could easily have another disaster similar to the one that happened in Minnesota a couple of years ago. Infrastucture projects will create jobs and stimulate demand for durable goods.

Across the board tax cuts will mostly benefit the rich. Right now 15% of the population controls 85% of the wealth, the highest imbalance since the Great Depression (when 10% controlled 90%)

In sum, we need a bottoms up approach, not a top down one. Unless the majority of Americans participate in this recovery through a stimulus that is felt by most, not just by some, we will continue to see a shrinking middle class in the future; which will not bode well for the rich or the poor.

[OnePimpTiger]

Across the board tax cuts will mostly benefit the rich.

I disagree with that. Yes, they will keep more money than I will since they have a higher income. But keeping $20,000 to them won't mean nearly as much as me getting to keep $1,000 more. But I'm in the minority that has no problem with the rich only paying their fair share of taxes instead of the disproportionately large percentage they currently pay.

But I guess you're partially right. 40% of Americans don't pay any taxes...you have to actually pay them for a tax break to help you.

Right now 15% of the population controls 85% of the wealth, the highest imbalance since the Great Depression (when 10% controlled 90%)

Not sure what you mean by "controls X% of the wealth," but the wealthiest 25% of Americans earns 66% of the nation's income...and they also pay 85% of the nation's taxes.

[RedGoneWILD]

40% of Americans don't pay any taxes

could you at least be more precise by stating federal income tax when you refer to this stat...this is the most overblown fact i've seen posted on here

everybody pays tax! sales tax, state tax, ss tax, medicare, property tax, school tax...etc

[richloughlin]

I disagree with that. Yes, they will keep more money than I will since they have a higher income. But keeping $20,000 to them won't mean nearly as much as me getting to keep $1,000 more. But I'm in the minority that has no problem with the rich only paying their fair share of taxes instead of the disproportionately large percentage they currently pay.

That's the point. Why do they need a 20k tax cut? It is same top down approach that was used in the 1980's and this decade. It does not benefit the masses. You're forgetting that the 40% you mention pay Social Security taxes on every dime they earn. Do you know that once your wages hit $106,000, you no longer pay 7.65% in Social Security taxes. Instant tax cut! So if you're some executive making a million a year, you only pay Social Security taxes on 10% of your income. Most Americans pay Social Security taxes on 100% of their income. Is that fair?
Not sure what you mean by "controls X% of the wealth," but the wealthiest 25% of Americans earns 66% of the nation's income...and they also pay 85% of the nation's taxes.

What I mean by that is total assets, not just cash. Secondly, if the wealthiest 25% pay 85% of the nations taxes, and the rest of us are paying the remaining 15%, why is the middle class falling behind economically in this decade, despite the fact that worker productivity is up year after year, yet real wages are falling?

[RedGoneWILD]

just for clarification....social security tax is 6.2%....medicare is 1.45% and the combo of both is 7.65%...there is no cap on medicare tax as there is with SS tax

[richloughlin]

RedGoneWild:

Thanks for the correction. I've learned something in this discussion.

That still amounts to a 6.2% tax break once your wages hit $106,000 and the fact that most workers are still paying Social Security and Medicare taxes on 100% of their wages.

I also agree that the poor pay not only the above taxes, but also sales taxes and possibly state and local taxes as well. Not to mention property, school, or vehicle taxes, if they are fortunate enough to own a home or a car.

[OnePimpTiger]

could you at least be more precise by stating federal income tax when you refer to this stat...this is the most overblown fact i've seen posted on here

everybody pays tax! sales tax, state tax, ss tax, medicare, property tax, school tax...etc

I apologize. I tend to generalize taxes as income taxes. Sales tax is a given, there's little argument about that as everyone pays the same (within a certain state at least). State income tax I include in the discussion...obviously it's a different tax, but I feel the same arguments apply to both. Social Security and Medicare are different beasts altogether...

[B]That's the point. Why do they need a 20k tax cut? It is same top down approach that was used in the 1980's and this decade. It does not benefit the masses.

Why is it fair for them to pay much more than their fair share just because they've been either luckier or more successful? And that's the issue: It's not up to the wealthy to support the masses. It's not their responsibility to provide for the lower/middle class. I don't understand where the mentality that it's ok to forcefully make a certain group of people take care of another group of people came from. Apparently it's the majority opinion now, but it baffles me how we came to that point.

You're forgetting that the 40% you mention pay Social Security taxes on every dime they earn. Do you know that once your wages hit $106,000, you no longer pay 7.65% in Social Security taxes. Instant tax cut! So if you're some executive making a million a year, you only pay Social Security taxes on 10% of your income. Most Americans pay Social Security taxes on 100% of their income. Is that fair?

Yes it is. They pay the same percentage of taxes on the same amount of income. But a lot of people would prefer they pay more than their fair share on that as well. They already pay the vast majority of all taxes, why not make them pay a little more right?

[B]What I mean by that is total assets, not just cash. Secondly, if the wealthiest 25% pay 85% of the nations taxes, and the rest of us are paying the remaining 15%, why is the middle class falling behind economically in this decade, despite the fact that worker productivity is up year after year, yet real wages are falling?

The middle class isn't falling behind.

A few things from the Census Bureau:

Over the past two decades, the number of households in those brackets (households that earn between $25,000 and $75,000) decreased by 3.9%, from 48.2% to 44.3%. During the same time period, the number of households with incomes below $25,000 decreased 3.5%, from 28.7% to 25.2%, while the number of households with incomes above $75,000 increased over 7%, from 23.2% to 30.4%.

The Middle Class might be shrinking, but it's because more are moving into the Upper Class...that's not a bad thing.

The Gini Index incorporates detailed shares data into a single measure, which summarizes the dispersion of income across the entire income distribution...

...There have not been any statistically significant annual changes in the Gini Index over the past 10 years.

So looking at it statistically, the dispersion of income has not change significantly in the past decade.

The "middle class" is a term that many people, and especially politicians, use very loosely to help their arguments. But there is no generally accepted definition of the "middle class." It's easy to make arguments using the "middle class" because you can basically make it mean whatever you want it to.

I also agree that the poor pay not only the above taxes, but also sales taxes and possibly state and local taxes as well. Not to mention property, school, or vehicle taxes, if they are fortunate enough to own a home or a car.

The rich have to pay those as well and they pay a lot more for them too as they usually own more, buy more, etc. So just another example of the rich paying a lot more taxes. Only difference is sales tax, property tax, etc are fair as they're calculated equally across all income brackets.

Are you suggesting they shouldn't have to pay sales tax, property tax, etc? They're paying their share, why is that such a hard concept for people to understand. A rich person own's a car, they pay property tax on it. A poor person own's a car, they pay property tax on it. A rich guy and a poor guy are shopping at Wal-Mart, they both have to pay the same sales tax. Why is that wrong? Everyone pays their fair share, that's a great concept!

[richloughlin]

The Middle Class might be shrinking, but it's because more are moving into the Upper Class...

The Middle Class is shrinking; with more people moving down the ladder than up the ladder. The links below back it up:

http://www.heartlandalliance.org/mai...edstates07.pdf

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/7/23/123025/562

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/20...26_186836.html

I cannot see how this country will be stronger economically if an increasing amount of the population struggles; while a minority prospers.