[rextorres]

Originally posted by Fian:
If the rich really were running the country, why isn't their tax rate lower? Maybe a flat tax? .

Um . . . well actually when you factor in the Social Security tax which is just thrown into the general fund (and not in a "lock box" remember Gore "lost") the top 5% make 35% of the income but only pay 21% of the REVENUE. (Pretty good if you ask me and something conservatives seem to conveniently always forget).

Originally posted by Fian:

As for the rich owning everything, I don't know if that is true. Can you provide any evidence that it is? We have a large middle class in America that owns stock, and as a whole might own more than the richest 5%.

Well they don't own everything, but 70% of the wealth is owned by 10% of the population. Pretty good if you ask me.

http://www.therationalradical.com/ds...stribution.htm

Originally posted by Krsqk:


Reagan gets slammed for "his" deficit spending. It couldn't be, of course, that the Democrat-run Congress .

REVISIONIST HISTORY (please don't make things up!!)- the Republicans controlled the senate when Reagan passed his tax cut from (1981 -1987)- link below.

http://www.swishweb.com/Politics/USA...itics01con.htm

Originally posted by Krsqk:

"You implied the deficit was a problem, during the depression it wasn't, it didn't become a problem until it ballooned in the 80's."

Um, I think we're mixing up deficit and debt. A deficit is just the annual bottom line. If you spend more than you took in, you ran a deficit.

The "debt" tripled in the eighties with a Senate controlled by the Republicans and Reagan in the white house because the "deficit" was ballooned. Reagan gave everything to everybody without worrying about the future. The deficit causes the debt so yes the deficit is a problem.

[ February 06, 2003, 18:16: Message edited by: rextorres ]