WALL STREET JOURNAL
NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE
THE WEEKLY STANDARD
DRUDGE REPORT
THE WASHINGTON POST
SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE
NEW YORK TIMES


*=recently updated





Matthew Hoy currently works as a metro page designer at the San Diego Union-Tribune.

The opinions presented here do not represent those of the Union-Tribune and are solely those of the author.

If you have any opinions or comments, please e-mail the author at: hoystory -at- cox -dot- net.

Dec. 7, 2001
Christian Coalition Challenged
Hoystory interviews al Qaeda
Fisking Fritz
Politicizing Prescription Drugs

RSS FEED
<< current


Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More













A note on the Amazon ads: I've chosen to display current events titles in the Amazon box. Unfortunately, Amazon appears to promote a disproportionate number of angry-left books. I have no power over it at this time. Rest assured, I'm still a conservative.



Friday, January 17, 2003
Explain the chart: There's been a lot of discussion about the latest Bush tax cut plan and whether it's wise to give so much back to "the rich."

But a chart on Page 35 of this week's Time magazine has me confused about the less-talked about Democratic plan.

Entitled "For Richer or Poorer," the chart compares the "estimated average tax savings under each proposal" for various income levels.

If the chart is accurate -- and I've no reason to believe it isn't -- then the Democratic plan is merely a transfer of funds from the rich to the poor and not really a tax cut at all.

According to the chart, people with an adjusted gross income of "Less than $10,000" would get a tax break of $5 under the Bush plan. It's next to nothing -- but realize that these people don't pay any federal taxes anyway with a gross income that low. Under the Democrats' plan, that same income group would "save" an average of $234.

How exactly does that work?

Also, looking at that same chart, I'm happy that apparently I classify as "rich" to Democrats -- since I would save more under Bush's plan than theirs -- and I'm a journalist! A profession whose low wages are rivaled only by those of social workers.

12:31 AM

Comments: Post a Comment

Powered by Blogger Pro™