#21
|
|||
|
|||
I was misled
Tim McNamara writes:
I've got no problem with paying taxes. I don't like seeing tax money wasted on things like interminable highway projects that are obsolete and under-capacity before they are completed; I'd rather see that money spent on rail transit, bus systems, bike path networks, etc. I have my priorities and my quibbles with what is done with that money, just like anyone else. Aha! You are a communist after all. Public (mass) transit and other amenities don't make it in the libertarian perception. I want to drive my monster truck on roller coaster freeway interchanges and into the mountains with my jet boat. Jobst Brandt |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
I was misled
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
I was misled
Tim McNamara wrote:
Mark Hickey writes: Are you saying that $61K was adjusted gross income, or gross income before your deductions? If the former, it doesn't make sense. If the latter, your deductions probably changed (which you forgot or you're leaving it out for the spin value). What was your AGI for the two years so we can make a "real" comparison? AGI 2001 (line 33): 61,510 AGI 2002 (line 33): 61,850 AGI 2003 (line 33): 61,595 Itemized deductions 2001: 10,534 Itemized deductions 2002: 9,347 Standard deductions 2003: 9,500 (more than itemizing) Tax 2001: 6,776 Tax 2002: 6,379 Tax 2003: 6,196 There is a trend downward, but it is nothing near as dramatic as GWB claimed it would be in his misleading public presentations of his tax cut, which was aimed directly at his cronies and country club friends. The rest of us, as is all too frequently the case, were part of a marketing strategy to try to make the tax cut palatable to people who weren't going to see a whole lot of benefit. I dunno - looks like you are paying over 10% less taxes in 2003 than in 2001... at any rate I think it's hard to complain about paying only about 10% of your AGI in taxes (under 12% after deductions). The rate (for 2001 at least) for those in the same relative income bracket was over 18% of AGI... I'm sure someone who was paying that much would benefit more from the tax breaks (as they should). At any rate, I figure you ended up having your tax burden lowered by about $728 in 2003, compared to the 2001 tax rate. Not quite as large as the average savings, but not bad either. I'm sure you can find better ways to spend it than Uncle Sam can... Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
I was misled
Mark Hickey writes:
I dunno - looks like you are paying over 10% less taxes in 2003 than in 2001... at any rate I think it's hard to complain about paying only about 10% of your AGI in taxes (under 12% after deductions). I have no complaints about paying taxes, actually. At any rate, I figure you ended up having your tax burden lowered by about $728 in 2003, compared to the 2001 tax rate. Not quite as large as the average savings, but not bad either. I'm sure you can find better ways to spend it than Uncle Sam can... Se, that's where I disagree with the cant and sermons of the conservatives. I think my tax dollars are well spent and provide me with excellent tangible benefits with a cost efficiency I could not hope to match through the private sector. But I've discussed that in another post. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
I was misled
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
I was misled | [email protected] | General | 430 | July 23rd 04 12:02 AM |