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.
|
Monday, January 20, 2003
I wish they'd come up with a better phrase: The Wall Street Journal editorial page has taken on the issue of the poor paying no federal taxes again. The Journal has referred to these people as "Lucky Duckies" -- a characterization that just gives columnists like Paul Krugman fodder for his column.
However, I will point out, once again that Krugman is a liar when it comes to what the Journal is complaining about. As I pointed out at the time, the Journal isn't advocating raising taxes on the poor. Instead it is arguing that no more people should be removed from the tax rolls.
We raised this issue several weeks ago, pointing out that the unceasing addition of exemptions, deductions and credits to the tax code was shrinking the tax-paying base. And, as more lower-income people saw tax liabilities fall to zero, more upper-income people shouldered a larger part of the tax burden. We did not, by the way, suggest that lower income people should pay higher taxes. We even went out of our way to flog our favorite horse that everybody should pay less in taxes.
The Journal also has an interesting chart that every Republican should be using when talking about Bush's tax cut plan that shows that people making $200k+ on average are receiving a 12.3 percent tax cut, while people making below $30k on average get at 17 percent reduction on their tax bill.
11:16 PM
|
|
