Seems like BHO isn’t being truthful again. A lot of people will be paying more in tax under the chosen one’s plan…including the middle class.
Your article certainly didn’t say that…here’s what it said:
It’s a clever pitch, because it lets him pose as a middle-class tax cutter while disguising that he’s also proposing one of the largest tax increases ever [u]on the other 5%.[/u]
What the article is questioning is the change in terminology from “tax credit” to “tax cut.” It’s still a “tax cut” (or “tax credit” if you will) on the bottom 95%.
Seems you’re not being truthful, or your a poor reader.
Those who don’t pay any tax’s however will do pretty well.
Seems to me if you tax productive workers you will get less of them and if you subsidize those who don’t work or pay tax’s you’ll get more of them. Pretty basic.
This is actually a decent point. 'Course when were talking about the top 5% vs the bottom 95% we’re talking pure populist politics. When that’s measured against the last ten years where the top 2-3% have absorbed almost all the country’s growth (see my plentiful other posts and links on this subject) It’s not too surprising that populist politics came up, now is it?
See the chart in the link you provided? Notice how the numbers start at 250,000/year? What exactly is your definition of “middle class”?
I’m a fine reader and can actually read a chart too!
The numbers start at $25,000. The line on top is Obama’s proposals. If you can read a chart it means the higher number.
Your plentiful posts on the subject have been equally misguided, much like Obama’s.
Pay no attention to GL. He has demonstrated a keen talent in selective reading comprehension.
If you push him hard enough, he starts making up shit you said, as well.
No doubt that won’t be far behind!