The Tax Policy Center has recently updated the Presidential Candidates’ Tax Policies. I encourage you to read the entire report:
A Updated Analysis of the 2008 Presidential Candidates’ Tax Plans: Executive Summary – August 28, 2008
The summary report is only 6 pages long and contains some helpful graphs.
For the lazy, and to aid in initiation of debate and discussion, I will parse out what I feel to be some of the more essential elements of the report.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Both John McCain and Barack Obama have proposed tax plans that would substantially increase the national debt over the next ten years, according to a newly updated analysis by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.
Neither candidate’s plan would significantly increase economic growth unless offset by spending cuts or tax increases that the campaigns have not specified.
Compared to current law, TPC estimates the Obama plan would cut taxes by $2.9 trillion from 2009-2018. McCain would reduce taxes by nearly $4.2 trillion. These projections assume the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire in 2010 and that the Alternative Minimum Tax is fully effective with 2008 exemptions.
Both candidates prefer to compare their plans to the “current policy” baseline, which would extend the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts and indefinitely extend an indexed AMT “patch”–and collect nearly 3.6 trillion less than under current law over the coming decade, while McCain would lose $600 billion. But choice of baseline doesn’t change how the proposals would affect the budget picture; without substantial cuts in government spending, both plans would sharply increase the national debt. Including interest costs, Obama’s tax plan would boost the debt by $3.5 trillion by 2018. McCain’s plan would increase the debt by $5 trillion.
The Obama plan would reduce taxes for low- and moderate income families, but raise them significantly for high-bracket taxpayers. By 2012, middle-income taxpayers would see their after-tax income rise by about 5 percent, or nearly 2,220 annually. Those in the top 1 percent would face a $19,000 average tax increase–a 1.5 percent reduction in after-tax income.
McCain would lift after-tax incomes an average of about 3 percent, or $1,400 annually, for middle income taxpayers by 2012. But, in sharp contrast to Obama, he would cut taxes for those in the top 1% by more than $125,000, raising their after-tax income an average of 9.5 percent.
These projections are built on descriptions of the candidates’ plans provided by senior McCain and Obama staff. However, TPC has also projected costs based upon what candidates have actually said on the campaign trail, and those promises paint a quite different picture.
- Â TPC estimates that one version of McCain’s proposal to create an optional simplified individual income tax system would increase the cost of his plan by more than $1 trillion over 10 years.
- Obama has proposed raising the payroll tax for those earning over $250,000. Again, he has not provided details, but TPC assumes this would be a 2 percent income tax surcharge on adjusted gross income. . .Such a plan would increase taxes on high-income workers by nearly $400 billion over a decade.
What About Healthcare?
In the July 23 update of its analysis, TPC added a preliminary estimate of the candidates’ health care proposals. Because the campaigns did not provide complete plans, TPC assumed certain details.
We conclude that the McCain plan, which would replace the current exclusion for employer-paid premiums with a refundable income tax credit of up to $5,000 for anyone purchasing of health insurance and make other changes to the healthcare system, would increase the deficit by $1.3 trillion over 10 years and modestly trim the number of uninsured.
The Obama plan, which would make relatively low-cost insurance available to everyone through non-group pools and subsidize premiums for low- and moderate-income households, would cost $1.6 trillion, but would also cover virtually all children and many currently uninsured adults.
TPC projects the McCAin plan would trim the uninsured by 1 million in 2009 and nearly 5 million by 2013, although their numbers would slowly rise thereafter because the tax credit would fail to keep pace with premiums. Obama would reduce the uninsured by 18 million in 2009 and 34 million by 2018. Even under the Obama plan, however, 34 million Americans would still lack insurance in 2018.
Keep it clean folks!
Obama doesn’t get it…to raise taxes at this juncture would be a disaster. You have to keep taxes low AND cut wasteful spending. Bush was right in lowering tax rates (govt revenues actually increased as a result), the mistake he and Congress made was spending too much. McCain’s philosophy to keep taxes low and reduce pork barrel spending makes sense. To raise my taxes before government waste is reduced is basically asking me to pay for government waste—this is not how I want my hard-earned dinero used.
Nice synopsis, Wood. Here’s the deal. This is really quite simple. Let’s say my boss, the guy who started the business from the ground up and has done well because of his entrepreneurship, suddenly has his taxes increase substantially (forget about what the these 2 jackasses will do to taxes on business for the sake of brevity). Now he can’t take that trip to the Fiji Islands 4 times a year anymore and his wife (or is it his mistress) can’t afford her blow habit anymore. I can tell you, life won’t go on as usual. He’ll suddenly decide that he can’t afford to continue to keep the dipshit down on the loading docks on the payroll anymore. He needs that money now for his mistress’ boob job. But don’t worry. The retread with the vacuous mind down on the loading dock that just lost his job will get a tax cut! On that whole $22,000 he WOULD HAVE MADE if his benevolent boss had kept him on the dole. Now, imagine this happens thoughout the economy. The grand total of the tax savings of all the peons, you know, the “lesser” individuals of the labor force, will add up to… wait for it… JACK SHIT.
So, the “lesser” get a “tax break” saving them a bunch of money they never paid anyway, and more important individuals, like myself, now have to find another way to finance our lavish lifestyles; i.e. axing the “lessers” and forcing the “moderately important” into 6 day work weeks for lesser pay. Where else are they going to go? All the other employers have mistress’ with expensive blow habits too.
The answer to is a flat tax. None of this “progressive” choad cheese that Obama floats out there.
Any questions?
Oh, and one other thing, President Junk would take the scythe blade to all “social programs”. He would need tax revenue for roads, bridges, and a military that would make the Klingon Armada soil their skivvies. Oh, and perhaps a little something for children who were tossed on the shitpile of the world by irresponsible “parents”. Voila! A flat tax (doesn’t necessarily need to be on income) of considerably lesser girth than anything in the empty skulls of today’s politicians would do the job.
I’d prefer a consumption tax which taxes individuals and families for what they use / consume. Hopefully this would lead to a change in consumption habits in the US and thus soften our nation’s impact on the environment.
Woodshedder – do you have a synopsis on what the candidates tax plans would do to business taxes? How about capital gains?
Thanks!
Wildcat, you just DON’T GET IT.
Obama will CUT taxes for 97% of Americans,
including most small businesses.
And pay for it from those who can AFFORD to pay- by jacking up taxes on coupon-clippers and bloated CEO’s.
The worthless lazy rich. Like me and THEE.
Taxtherich, actually, I believe the official number that Obama will cut for Americans is somewhere in the low 80s in terms of percentage. I’ll check and post it here later.
I’m doing yard work. I’ll come back and update per some suggestions if I can find the info.
I would prefer not to see these sorts of topics on iBankCoin.
Vote Obama.
A flat tax system has been proposed continuously since I’ve been old enough to read the papers and understand the rudiments of tax law. It has never passed Congress, and I believe has never achieved the level of support that would give a flat tax proposal even a chance of passing.
Congress is the only institution that can pass new tax legislation. The President can propose new types of tax law, harangue Congress, get his Party loyalists on board, and if he doesn’t like the result he can veto the law. But the President cannot make new tax law. The real power wielders in tax legislation are members of Congress, the Congressional tax aides, who take a bare bones Conference Committee report and write the actual verbiage of the laws, and the IRS, who issues regulations implementing any new tax laws and issues revenue rulings. The President is more of a symbolic figurehead than people realize, of course he has some influence, but it’s all smoke and mirrors.
A value-added tax (VAT) similar to Britain’s system has very little support in Congress, even less than a flat tax system.
Failure by Congress to deal with the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) law on a permanent basis has the potential to massively screw up our economy. Yet, they have not dealt with it.
BTW the Obama proposals overall seem to benefit my family for various reasons, but I’ll believe it when I see the details of any legislation that gets passed.
Steve-o,
I would prefer not to see gays like Steve-o on iBankCoin.
Vote McCain (if you can muster the strength)
Steve-O, the discussions are somewhat pertinent since investment or trading in the stock market doesn’t happen in a vacuum, it’s affected by tax law, mortage or GSE rescue plans, etc.
Also, Fly gave express permission for Woodshedder to host this type of topic as long as it did not occur during market hours and was a civil discussion.
Sadly I don’t think either candidate truly understands the economy. What they understand is politics. What to do, what to do….
Tax Spin
Obama said: “I will cut taxes … for 95 percent of all working families.†And he said McCain proposes “not one penny of tax relief to more than 100 million Americans,†a claim his running mate, Joe Biden, made the night before.
Obama is right about his plan’s effect on working families. More broadly, though, the plan cuts taxes for 81.3 percent of all households in 2009, according to the Tax Policy Center. The TPC also says McCain’s tax plan would leave 65.8 million households without a cut, not 100 million.
The TPC’s calculations factor in what’s in effect a hidden tax on individuals that results from taxing corporations. McCain proposes to lower the corporate income tax rate, and Obama proposes billions of dollars in increased corporate taxes in the form of “loophole closings.†Individuals wouldn’t experience those changes as an increased tax bill from the government, but both the Congressional Budget Office and TPC allocate all corporate tax to owners of capital rather than to consumers. That means rather than flowing through to consumers in the form of higher prices or lower wages, corporate tax changes would show up as higher or lower returns on investments, which typically come in the form of corporate dividends, and profits or losses from stock sales.
Only by ignoring the hidden benefit to individuals can McCain’s plan be said to produce no cut for 100 million households. According to a calculation the TPC did at FactCheck’s request, 101.9 million see no benefit if the effects of a corporate reduction are set aside.
For the record, Obama aides say the indirect effect on holders of capital won’t be as large as TPC says. “We dispute TPC’s methodology here,” says Brian Deese of the Obama campaign. He says several of the “loophole closers” that Obama is proposing won’t affect corporations or are on offshore activity that will not directly filter through.
We’d also note that retirees would fare quite a bit less well than working families under Obama’s tax plan: The TPC estimates that 32 percent of households with a person over age 65 would see a tax increase.
from factcheck.org
“If we don’t stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we’re going to have a serious problem.” — George W. Bush, Jan. 2001.
Then George proceeded to spend $575 billion (& counting) on exactly such an effort in Iraq.
I think that would have covered universal health care & free education for the next few generations. Not to mention plenty of cash leftover for other egregiosities.
==========
What does it matter what each of them says they’ll do? They’ll say anything to live in that White House for 4 years. Vote for the face (or ass, in Palin’s case) you’d rather see for the next 4 years. Or vote for who’d you rather hear lie to the American Public for 4 years.
=======
I’m kinda torn: On the one hand McCain is a pathetic hasbeen bore. On the other hand, maybe Palin will sport a wardrobe malfunction. Then Obama is a pretty good speech giver, but hear one, you’ve heard them all & Biden, whatever.
Conclusion: Vote Ron Paul/Jesse Ventura
Thank you for your support Boca.
As I’ve said a few times before, I’m not strictly beholden to one party over another. I vote for who I think will make the best conditions for my family. We will never get the true story from the traditional media, so disucssions like these are important if we want to make an informed decision.
Over the afternoon, I will see what I can find on Obama and corporate tax increases/decreases. If anyone can find anything pertinent, from a reliable source, please post it here.
Juice, I’m just not willing to be as fatalistic as you, although I share some of your frustrations about the amount of money spent over the last 8 years.
Seriously, Obama talks a good socialist game but he does have Buffett & Volcker for advisers. I gotta think you cannot go wrong, for the country as a whole, if those 2 have significant influence, no matter what propaganda he puts forth.
Not so seriously, on the other hand, Palin knows her way around EBay; maybe she can conduct a firesale of US assets to balance our books.
Look you, the Bush/McCain tax plan is the HMS Titanic!
Lock the poor and middle class down below and lower the life rafts so the elite passengers can abandon ship and save themselves from the impending disaster.
Thurston Howell III: “Lovey, don’t forget the jewelry and my smoking jacket!”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-s-yIXydyGw
I’m quite cynical, like Juice. Writing in Ron Paul might be the least of all evils in voting. Sad that the main parties were not able to come up with better choices.
Shed, I agree with you on the bottom line … I try to make my most informed assessment on who has the potential to help me provide a better life for my family. There’s so much spin on both sides it takes very careful consideration.
I don’t have the same visceral reaction (positive or negative) that many people do to Palin. My reaction is … ehhhh, mayor of a town of 9,000 people, ok, now she’s governor, but she has precious little experience that in my opinion justifies her being so close to the presidency if something happened to McCain. The interest and spin that surrounds her is overshadowing McCain, which has the unfortunate effect of making McCain look like a weak candidate. Big mistake for his campaign I think.
Barracudas and bulldogs with lipstick don’t really do anything for me. I had a hockey rink in my backyard as a kid (and played hockey on it) but it doesn’t qualify me in the least to be Vice Pres.
Fly really gave Shed permission to do this? He must be completely out of his mind fucked up on some morphine at that hospital. Honestly I can’t wait till this whole fucking this is over. Consumption tax? Are you insane?
Fly gave permission long before he went under the knife.
Danny, you should be more involved. Whoever inhabits the white house and congress is going to seriously affect you during your big earning years, as you begin to profit from your education and enter the work force as a good capitalist wage earner.
Near the end of the ginormous Woodshedder thread about Palin ripping out Obama’s heart, Fly said:
————————————-
The Fly Says:
NEW FLY RULES!!!!!!!!!
No politics during trading hours.
No name calling, when debating politics. If you are unable to debate with reason, backed with facts or opinions, then you have no business debating in the first place. Plus, name calling is my job.
I will allow political blogs after hours, which is a big shift for me. Seeing how many of you are interested in the Olympics, I mean elections, I will allow some discourse.
However, do it after hours—hat lovers.
September 4th, 2008 at 11:43 am 8
—————————————–
It’s Sunday, otherwise I wouldn’t have the time to be messing about with this political stuff.
Exactly, and that’s why I hate them all.
You have some people who think me banking egregious coin is “unfair.” You have others that want to rape half of my parents estate. You have still others who make up pretty cool hypotheticals about guys working on docks. The people who care “most” are people your age, who, really, will have to bear less of the brunt of the consequences.
To some people, apparently, saying you don’t want universal healthcare is comparable to burning down an orphanage with gasoline. It’s too emotional, and invariably all the stupidest things you say will be the points you hold most dear. Figurative you, not you Shed.
Shed, I appreciate the hard work you spent on this article, I just hate politics, and it really irks my ire here. This is iBC. I like you people (for the most part) and that’s precisely the reason I don’t want to talk about it. For instance, Juice is already pissing me off, and I’ve never disliked the guy.
Let alone headline status. This is what new, prospective readers (customers) see? Put up some fancy charts Shed, something where A.) I want to see it and B.) your opinion matters.
I hope you won’t take offense at B, not my intention, I think you know what I mean. I want you to apply your expertise to something that…matters. Not this.
I missed that Boca, and let me say, Fly, I am disgusted and astonished. Good luck getting the cat back in the bag now. Real Fly knows that most people are incapable of tying their shoes properly and to give them political asylum and a forum on this Godly blog really makes me question when and how soon the apocalypse will be.
I still think it was morphine Fly, using his time machine, that gave you permission to do that.
Danny, what’s your problem with a consumption tax? We as a society are way too compelled by stuff and trinkets and services and the like. Life can be lived quite fully without much of the rubbish that we purchase and henceforth discard.
Do you not agree that there’s a potential benefit to consuming less? Perhaps a good idea would be to exempt food stuffs from my proposal. But things like tv’s and boat trailers could be taxed and the government would make its money that way. Not by taxing people’s income.
Danny, fair enough.
However, banking coin, taxes, and stocks, are all tied into one big package. You can’t just unwrap part of the package and expect to know exactly what is within.
Danny — a hypothetical: if Congress passed an increase in the capital gains tax and some bright-eyed Congressional aide made sure the final text of the bill ensured that day-trading profits or short-term trading profits were always included in the increased capital gains rate…
1. Would you want to know this?
2. Would it affect your trading style?
3. Would you want to discuss any way another trader could find around the wording of the new tax law?
The federal tax system is a Chupacabra sucking the life out of us! Just had to mention a chupacabra.
although I hate politics,let the plebs talk. In other news,I am as sick as a dog.
Fly you’re alive! What happened to you?
If I may ask, what did you undergo the knife for?
iow, ditto DuckQuack..
Fly – I assumed you were immortal — don’t let me down with dog-like sickness. In the two years I’ve known you, you’ve never been sick, or slept, once. Godspeed and feel better.
Juice – Appendectomy.
Duck – There are a lot of reasons tax-wise why a consumption tax is bad.
–change the tax code (this in-and-of-itself is not bad, but it is a complication
— no more interest expense deduction
— Old people — they are getting paid from savings, or annuities, or whatever, and are consuming. So they get double fucked, as they paid the tax on incomes to buy those things in the first place.
A CT taxes what I spend, say at a store like Best Buy or a quaint little Mortgage Shoppe. That means that I will be taxed on the debt I carry, or take out. After all, debt is consumption. The IT taxes what I make on my income, which, having studied the tax code way to extensively for someone my age, makes sense.
Look, it’s an asinine idea.
Also, EU and France or whoever it is has an income tax AND a VAT, I feel like you are suggesting the adoption of just a CT and no IT.
AND I already pay sales tax in CA.
Boca – Yes, chupacabras are funny.
1.) Yes I would want to know
2.) No, it wouldn’t, though I would stop taking some trades.
3.) I wouldn’t expect there to be a loophole of any sort, and if there was, I feel like in the blog community it would be highly publicized.
Re #2, stock trading is football in this regard: We’re all playing the same game, but we all have different positions.
Fly trades dramatically differently than Shed, just like a William “The Fridge” Perry runs dramatically differently than LT. So, if they changed the field, it won’t change how I run, as I feel I have my niche conquered, if that makes any sense at all.
Of course the STCG hike would be a huge detriment.
Danny how old are you?
Obama blinks on raising taxes for the rich (ie – Woodshedder) during recession.
Juice, are you serious? I am the very middle class that Obama is proposing to help. I certainly make no where near 250K/year. Maybe you were joking.
Re: the link you gave. That’s nothing new. Obama has been pretty clear about letting the tax cuts expire on their own.
23. I feel like that information is going to be used to conduct some kind of superficial argument against me. I hope it was just general inquiry.
23! That’s crazy! How did you get into the whole trading / blogging lifestyle?
I’ve always been very into business and entrepreneurship at a young age, running small businesses in middle school, high school, and college.
I saved the money from my businesses, and teamed up with my dad to buy a condo in Florida that was left to me and 4 other people in my family in an estate. I bought them out and sold the condo in 06, they wanted to use it as a vacation spot. I had been interested in the markets since about 2003/4, and invested nearly all of it in the stock of the company that my step-dad was VP portfolio manager for, for the dividend. After I lost a lot of money due to stock tankage, I began to investigate the machinations of the market more closely, and I’ve been hooked ever since. I love the thrill of the hunt and the gamesmanship of it all.
I graduated with an BS in Accounting in May of 2008 and am currently studying for my CPA, and am very gingerly looking for work. I say gingerly bc I need a job in my field, but haven’t begun to look yet in earnest. I do not intend on becoming a CPA. I may, but mostly, I want to either:
— make money trading / revenue from this site
— sell the indicators I’ve developed, The iBC Machine, etc.
— Start my own business, perhaps as a more professional iteration of the above activities.
I met The Fly two years ago, somehow impressed him with my commentary and/or videos, and here I am, one of the original iBC tabbed bloggers, along with Shed.
Since then I have changed my trading style a few times, and am quite happy where I am and with what I’ve got.
Danny is extremely bright and talented for his age. A younger Fly in a way.
Rest up Fly, surgery is a major stress on the body.
Thanks Boca for the compliments.
Wood – Thanks for this post. We need more analysis of this kind. Really not getting it from “the media.” I’m always interested in where and how politics intersects with my portfolio.
Danny – I’m even older than 23, and I still generally agree with your point. At least where that point is “politics disgusts me.” But it affects the markets, so I pay attention. Also, it’s going to be close this year, so I don’t think Obama or McCain have really been “factored in” yet.
_________________________________________
Boca – Good comments, as usual. If “name calling” includes “sexy minx,” then Fly is just going to have to ban me. Stay out of the rain.
_________________________________________
Totally unrelated to any of this, is anybody else going to lose massive coin tomorrow on SKF due to this damnable bailout? I want to punch Blinky so hard in that aerodynamic mellon that hair grows back.
Damn images won’t post:
http://megorious.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/taxes.gif
haha Anton, you’re in fine style today. I’m wondering about my SKF too but am inclined to hold.
Danny I’m just being honest. I don’t often have the pleasure of cavorting with people who can equal or challenge me intellectually, and I’m lucky to have found many such people here, to my benefit of course.
I’m glad Boca. With people you have to use wide stops sometimes.
If a lot of people went through what Fly just did, their insurance companies (if they have insurance) would have found a way to deny coverage. They would go bankrupt and lose their house. Basically the rest of their lives they would be struggling to getting back to zero. It’s easy when you’ve never had the problem of lack of coverage or poor coverage to see this issue as some fiscally principled stand. Social darwinism. If they couldn’t make enough money, fuck em. Let em suffer.
Yeah, I didn’t think it was really The Fly either but I ran with it, because shit, sounds plausible.
I agree Jeremy, make names IP connected or some shit.
Turning your back on politics is a copout. Doesn’t mean you have to enjoy it, though.
When judging the two major candidates and their campaigns, remember how the rules are set up. You get the 270 electoral votes, and you are president. You get a plurality in a state, you get all the state’s electoral votes (with minor exceptions). If you don’t do what it takes to win, you don’t get to spend 4 years in office doing what you think should be done there.
A campaign and a presidency are 2 different things, even though we wish they weren’t.
Recusancy, that was an excellent graphic. It shows very well how both McCain and Obama want to distribute their tax policy.
Recusancy, can you provide any information that shows at what income level and above exist the people who pay 95% of the tax bill?
consumption tax is really hard for low and average earning family. If tax is based on consumption, then family living on paycheck to paycheck will pay a larger share of their paycheck in taxes compared to someone which big fat bloated pay check.
I believe everyone should pay same fixed percentage of their ‘available earning’ in taxes. By available earning I am implying earning dollar available after meeting one persons basic expense. Say a person earns 100k and it takes 25k per year just to meet basic expenses in food, shelter and transportation. Tax should be on a percentage of (100 – 25). Lets say flat tax rate is 38 percent, then tax is 0.38 * 75 k.
The point I am making is give a person who put lots of effort to earn his pay a chance to pay himself first.
Who is that darn Topper Harley anyway?
found this:
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html
Hybrid,
I never thought I would say this about you or anyone on this site, but…..you should be banned for life from this blog.
Futures just lifted off. Gonna be a painful week for those caught short.
And Hybrid, that was just the most despicable thing I’ve ever read on this blog. I think you just bottom ticked the good manners index.
Hybrid’s comment is deleted by your’s truly.
My apologies to those that read it.
What happened to my comments?
Topper, I’ve only deleted 1 comment, in almost a year’s time at iBC, and that was Hybrid’s.
So I’m not sure what happened to your comments.
Don’t worry about limit up futes, according to Bearshitter Tim Rope’O Dope Knight
http://slopeofhope.com/2008/09/lock_and_load.htm
Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data
by Gerald Prante
Fiscal Fact No. 135
The latest release of Internal Revenue Service data on individual income taxes comes from calendar year 2006, a year in which the economy remained healthy and continued to grow, increasing individual income tax collections along with overall average effective tax rates.
This year’s numbers show that both the income share earned by the top 1 percent of tax returns and the tax share paid by that top 1 percent have once again reached all-time highs. In 2006, the top 1 percent of tax returns paid 39.9 percent of all federal individual income taxes and earned 22.1 percent of adjusted gross income, both of which are significantly higher than 2004 when the top 1 percent earned 19 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI) and paid 36.9 percent of federal individual income taxes.
The IRS data also shows increases in individual incomes across all income groups (see Table 3). Just as the highest earners lost the biggest percentage of their incomes during the recession of 2001, so they have prospered the most as the economy continued to rebound through 2006. For example, from 2000 to 2002, the AGI of the top 1 percent of tax returns fell by over 26 percent. In that same period, the AGI of the bottom 50 percent of tax returns actually increased by 4.3 percent. However, since 2002, as the recession has ended, AGI has risen by over 81 percent for the top 1 percent (an average of over 20 percent per year) and 17 percent (an average of around 4 percent per year) for the bottom 50 percent.
In sum, between 2000 and 2006, pre-tax income for the top 1 percent of tax returns grew by 34 percent, while pre-tax income for the bottom 50 percent increased by 22 percent. All figures are nominal (not adjusted for inflation).
This pattern of income loss and growth at the top of the income spectrum is the same during every recession and recovery. The net result has also been a sharp rise in federal government tax revenue from 2003 to 2006 compared to previous years.
***This is from the link provided by SaveTheRich. Nice find.
what did hybrid say?
Not much Danny. Basically he says to wait 30 minutes and then sell the rally.
I may short the rally tomorrow, we’ll have to see
Why is there no post here to discuss the news of the day??? This seems like kind of a big deal, no? I would think there would be a front page post on it. Politics aside.
Danny, thought you were talking about Tim Knight.
I’m emailing you Hybrid’s comment.
Recusancy- sign up for the PG and put up a post about it.
I feel stupid writing posts on a financial site, being that I know next to nothing about markets.
I guess I will anyways.
Also, here’s the article where I got that graph from: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/09/ST2008060900950.html
I don’t know where the top 5% bracket starts. $603,000 is where the top 1% starts so maybe that can give you an idea.
Thanks, yeah that was retarded.
Shed, email that shit to me too. I need a good laugh.
Besides the bitter rueful one I’m chuckling about the Fed/Treasury, etc., I mean.
)