PDA

View Full Version : THE HORROR OF DOUBLE-TAXATION


Malachi151
2nd June 2003, 02:00 PM
Sorry, I don't have a link.

The Jim Hightower Report for Monday, June 02, 2003
"THE HORROR OF DOUBLE-TAXATION"

"You have to admire the compassionate conservatism of the only president we presently have. George W has looked around the country, surveyed the growing economic woes of our people, and reached this compassionate conclusion: The rich are hurting.

Feeling their pain, George has responded with a $400 billion tax giveback for these privileged ones – eliminating the taxes that they pay on their stock profits. But this is not merely a matter of compassion, says George, it's a matter of: Justice.

The assertion by Bush is that taxing the stock dividends of big investors is nothing less than the horror of: "Double Taxation." After all, claim the Bushites, corporations already pay taxes on these profits, so the 10 percent of Americans who own 90 percent of all corporate stock shouldn't pay again when the profits are distributed to them. George, who likes things simple, says simply, "It's not fair to tax something twice."

Yoo hoo... George... we know you've never worked for a living, but have none of your hot-shot corporate economists mentioned to you that working people have their incomes taxed not just twice, but multiple times? Check it out: Our monthly wages are hit for federal and state income taxes, social security tax, unemployement and medicare taxes – then these same wages are slapped with ever-rising sales taxes, gasoline tax, property taxes, highway and subway tolls, numerous fees... and, if we buy a six pack to try forgetting taxes, we're hit with the liquor tax.

This is Jim Hightower saying... If Bush really gave a damn about fairness, he wouldn't be singling out a handful of rich elites for more favortism, he would focus instead on restoring some progressive balance to a skewed tax system that grossly favors the rich and global corporations at the expense of America's wage-earning majority. To get the truth about who's paying what and about how Bush's policies are ripping off the middle class, call Citizens for Tax Justice: 202-626-3780.

Sources: "It's not just dividends that are hit by double taxation," Austin American-Stateman, May 17, 2003

Copyright - Saddleburr Productions, Inc"

corplinx
2nd June 2003, 02:11 PM
Those evil rich people, they deserve TRIPLE taxation! Muahahahaha! Up with the proletariat!

uneasy
2nd June 2003, 02:13 PM
Hey, I just realized that the corporation I work for already pays taxes, then when they distrubute money to me in the form of my salary, I'm taxed again. And then I buy food, and the grocery store is taxed again! Hurray for Bush! I hope Bush continues to eliminate this foul double taxation until the only one paying taxes is whoever uses the money first after it comes off the presses at the U.S. Mint. Oh, wait, that would be stupid.

daredelvis
2nd June 2003, 03:09 PM
Originally posted by corplinx
Those evil rich people, they deserve TRIPLE taxation! Muahahahaha! Up with the proletariat!

Do you think the double tax argument was valid? Do you think that the dividend "double tax" was the worst example?

patnray
2nd June 2003, 05:27 PM
There is some logic to it. But the solution seems backwards to me. It seems like corporations should be able to deduct dividends from profits, just like wages and other costs. That would be a much greater economic stimulus than not taxing the recipients... But then Bush's rich cronies wouldn't get the tax break.

Gem
2nd June 2003, 08:46 PM
Didn't the Soviet Union had a simple tax system? I think it was only income tax. Anyone fimiliar with the tax system during the Soviet Union?

Btw, where did he get that quote that ten percent of americans own 90% of stocks?

Gem

Malachi151
2nd June 2003, 09:41 PM
Originally posted by Gem
Didn't the Soviet Union had a simple tax system? I think it was only income tax. Anyone fimiliar with the tax system during the Soviet Union?

Btw, where did he get that quote that ten percent of americans own 90% of stocks?

Gem

I was curious about that figure myself. I assume that he means that the top 10% owns 90% of the stocks in terms of value. Even that I have a hard time believing though.