Benefits for the rich

Denny Diekroeger (3/2, Letters) relies upon the oft repeated neocon con, which Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush peddled as presidents: that tax cuts for the super-rich in the 1980s and ’90s allowed for increased tax revenue during their tenure.

But, where is Mr. Diekroeger’s mention that Reagan doubled the national debt and Bush tripled that debt?

We now have the crash of 2008 from which we are all suffering, except of course for the super-rich. The unsupported malarkey that tax cuts for the super-rich would legitimately improve the U.S. economy has been proven false.

Trying to control these tycoons’ income at the bonus and stock option level appears to be impossible, but enacting a progressive, seriously higher tax rate on annual incomes above $1 million would place a proper tax at the end of their now protected manipulations and would recover at least some funds for recovery.

Lloyd Hellman

Leawood

Comments

[abc123]

one million! HA you mean $200k, that is considered wealthy in this USA and it should start there. Not my fault if people with $200k overspend.

[chalveyob]

Kee: The idea is to get 51% or more people paying no income tax so the Democrats can pass more taxes on people and the majority of people will not be effected. It isn't a big secret!

[Kee]

86% of income taxes are paid by the top 25% of income earners.....how much more "progressive" can we get?

[chalveyob]

Same old failed class warfare, Reagan had a Democrat congress that was responsible for the spending you morons, and that has nothing to do with tax cuts! Almost 50% of Americans pay no federal taxes currently, and the top 10% pay over 50% of all federal taxes. I love the Clinton comparison, hate to break it to you but Capital Gaines taxes were dramatically cut by Republicans under Clinton and that is when the economy took off. FYI Clinton also never proposed a balnaced budget, he was forced to sign one by Republicnas in congress. Bush tax cuts for the rich increased the share the "Rich" paid, and revenues dramatically increased, same under Reagan. Bush tax cuts also doubled the exemption for children, and elimnated millions from paying taxed all together. The "Rich" went from 39.5 to 35, the other brackets were also dropped from 30 to 28 25 to 20 20 to 15 and 15 to 10, everyone got a tax cuts and they were all larger for the poor than the rich as a percentage. There is no law saying you have to pay the minimum amount in taxes, if you are so worried pay an ectra 10 or 20%, That kind of defeats your purpose, taxes are good for everyone except you! Hypocrites and morons all.

[yahoo!]

Well, BrokeWalletWitey, I own a business and property, and I NEED jobs for the middle and lower class for my businesses and rentals to survive, especially construction jobs.

Warren Buffet very publicly announced that the Bush tax cuts of 2002 made his tax rate less than his admin assistant.

National debt by president: 70% from Reagan and W. This is plainly documented. More wealth was created in the 90s with a balanced budget than the 80s with a deficit.

W created the biggest drop in revenue ever recorded, erasing our balanced budget. He personally took credit for it.

Eliminate the Bush tax cut and Iraq, and Bush almost balances the budget. W's top tax rate dropped from 39% to 35%. The rest of us saw 1/2 to 1% tax cuts. That tax cut on the top 2% meant $250 billion less revenue. See www.irs.gov for ample proof of this.

A flat tax would double your taxes. Guaranteed. You ready for that???

The rich create jobs with money they deduct as an expense and not taxed. These right wingers say don't tax the rich because they need that money to create jobs ... money spent to create jobs is not taxed.

Know your numbers, know your facts and vote that way.

VOTE AGAINST THE KS STATE LEGISLATURE!! They are right now cutting jobs, ruining our schools and raising sales taxes to protect tax loopholes.