the previous post needs a correction... sort of. apparently the site i linked to with the tax information was way off, the guy didn't have his numbers straight. read forrest's comment to my last post... he sets it out pretty well, and i'm too tired/lazy to type it all out again. i don't know if his numbers are any more accurate--i haven't gone through the math myself--but he makes some good points, and his numbers make more sense. you're not going to increase tax revenue by lowering taxes; it's not like a business, where you can lower prices to attract more customers. i can't think of anyone who would suddenly get an urge to start paying taxes just because the rates were lower.
anyways... in my defense, i was up at 4 this morning for work, so i haven't exactly been at the top of my game today. check the original link, check forrest's numbers, and if you know anything about math, figure it out for yourself. taxes aren't that important to me... i still don't make enough to pay them. i just don't trust john kerry to run this country.
reminder to all 2 or 3 people who actually read this: make sure you get more news than i put up. i like to think that i'm fairly accurate, but i am definitely a biased source.
Actually, Forrest was way off. He apparently doesn't know how tax liability is really calculated. Here's my post today to educate him, you and everyone else: http://texasrainmaker.blogspot.com/2004/08/preying-on-misunderstanding.html
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeletecool. we learn something new every day. maybe i'll check the numbers too, and then we can use all 3 totals to triangulate the true amount... or something like that. and yes, one of forrests good points was that the percentages don't really matter... the guy from my original link was assuming that there were an equal number of people in each bracket.
ReplyDelete"the guy from my original link" is jason... i had him confused with someone else. sorry about that.
ReplyDelete