Obama introduced his "economic team" today, which consists of more Clinton cronies and leftists who are now set to begin the processing of income redistribution.

"We've got to restore some balance to our tax code and the Bush tax cuts were disproportionately targeted to the very wealthiest Americans -- those who were making more than a quarter million dollars a year can afford to pay a little more," the president-elect said. 

"And it is important if we're going to help pay for some of these expenditures that are absolutely necessary to get our economy back on track that those who are in a position to pay a little more do so. Whether that's done through repeal or whether that's done because the Bush tax cuts are not renewed is something that my economic team will be providing me a recommendation on," he said. 

Class warfare also begins today as you can already see.  Obama is already talking the usual rhetoric that the "rich" must pay their "fair" share so everyone else can get a break.  I just love it when liberals call taking money from one person and giving it to another "fair".

 


Comments (Page 3)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on Nov 29, 2008

ThinkAloud
Where do you get your data for this claim?

well mason, from those same numbers you posted. if you took time to just add things up here is what you would have discovered:

$51970 is 90% of the income in 2000. i.e income in 2000 was$57633.

now, the total increase up to 2006 was $5770 ... that puts the avrg income by 2006 at $57740 ..... is that the increase they are talking about Mason... 0.2%? and that is up to 2006

now consider the slow down in 2007 and 2008 ... and you will realize, according to the same NY times, that NOW (and that is the time frame i was talking about) the avrg income is around $1000 less than what it was 2000.

and even assuming it is a 0.5 or 1 % higher (which it is not)... do you really consider that an increase? 1% increase in 8 yrs????

from 1993 to 2000, the increase was a total of about $7500 i.e 13% (7500/57633) during those 8 yrs ... (all figures are adj for inflations and from the NY times also)

you could have done those same calcultaions yourself ...

now you see why i always said that there is another fallacy i.e. "the MSM is a left-biased media" .. in fact they twist everything (as the above openning statement does and which is disproved by the details they provided) to the benefits of the Right not the Left... where is that "avrg higher income" that Americans enjoyed????

 

Yes, there was a sharp drop in 2001/2002. Incomes began to increase again, albeit slowly, after that. Just because they haven't gone back to that 2000 level is not the same thing as "they have dropped over the last 8 years" which is what you were trying to claim, which is misleading. Incomes have not dropped over the course of the last 8 years, they dropped and have been slowly climbing again as the numbers indicate.

on Dec 02, 2008

maudlin27



YOu amaze me.  Really.  YOu are not easily defined.  On the one hand you argue for tax increases (or are you just playing devil's advocate?) and then write an excellent simple piece on the money value of time!  Whatever you believe, it is obvious you at least understand this issue.  Have some karma for an excellent response!

3 Pages1 2 3