Quote:
Originally posted by DraconisRex:
quote:
Originally posted by Attalus:
Oh, yes, I agree that massive spending cuts are necessary, but the Bushies did the best thing to stimulate the economy, IMHO, and after 2004, go after deep cuts. A big victory for the Administration.
|
Based on what? Reagan's tax cuts of the 80's? Because Bush's tax cuts haven't done a damn thing but help the rich get richer so far... They certainly haven't stimulated the economy as is attested by the 6% unemployment rate.[/QUOTE]
Nice rhetoric but devoid of fact. 1st off Reagans and Kennedys tax cuts...and now Bush's tax cuts. While it has not caused a turnaround like the former cuts that is in part becuase of its reletively puny scope compared to previous cuts.
Bush's tax cuts did do more than help the rich get richer...me not being rich and still doing better is one proof, the fact that economists tell us that the economy is growing (slowly but still growing) is another, because prior to the cuts we were in recession. As for 6% unemployment oooo scare me. remember the 1970's with 10% and 12% unemployments? Do you realize that it is estimated that fully 3% of all people in the US are unemployable anyway so we are looking at roughly a real 3% unemployment.
Quote:
But I do like how it has increased my business as a tax accountant. I get a lot of my clients are all calling me about what this will do for them = billable hours. I tell them that they're (despite 19% of americans thinking so) not in the top 1%, virtually the only ones this tax cut will materially help.
I explain to them that just because they're making good money doesn't mean this tax cut will help. This tax cut is aimed primarily at the wealthy, not the high-earners.
The real benifits go to those that have millions of dollars invested in the stock market
|
Remind me to PM you my accoutnant's number..the two of you should talk..one of you is full of ....something. Only an ass would tell his clinets to go away because they get nothing back..sheesh...this cut will give anyone who makes enough money to pay taxes more in their pocket and I think it would be bordering on irresponsible to tell your clients theres nothing you can do with that.....How do you manage to make a living peddeling doom and gloom?
Now, my retirees argue with me: Then they say, but my SEP-IRA/Keogh... Which I reply "are all ready tax free while in the retirement trust" and are "ordinary income" when withdrawn. So, that doesn't help you at all.
Now, when my very rich clients call, they are very happy. That's another 30K+ (or more) income they won't pay taxes on... Not that they'll actually spend it, mind you. It all goes back into the stock market via DRIPs and creates paper wealth.
See, the difference between the rhetoric spewed and the reality of the law. I deal with this rhetoric all the time. But when the returns are prepared and i tell people the impact, I tell them the truth:
Unless you're a multi-millionaire heavily invested in dividend paying stocks, you won't materially benifit from this. Further, it is unlikely it will stimulate the economy (sorry about that luxury service providers) as advertised because most dividends are reinvested. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Im sorry I just cannot believe you are actually a financial advisor...you don't sound like any I have ever heard. But hey, m not one either so what does it matter?
Edit: just FYI if a couple makes $97,000 a year its considered to be in the top 10% or "rich" according to the Dems and the IRS. $97k a year = 1 NYC teacher + 1 NYC Fireman....hardly rich in reality or in NY.
[ 05-30-2003, 02:44 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]