comp health jobs

Obama says he wants to cut taxes on around 95 of Americans -- i.e. Those making less than $250,000 a year.

The conservative talking-point response is "95 of Americans donapos;t pay taxes THEY GET REFUNDS ANYWAY"

If you really believe this argument, bring out your last pay stub for me please. Humor me; just do it.

Now. Look near the top, as I believe thatapos;s where the Gross Pay figure is usually located. See that? Okay. Now read down with me. Say, what are those things being subtracted from my gross pay?

Why... Arenapos;t they taxes? You mean those things that 95 of Americans donapos;t pay? Oh my god, they are

Repeat after me: "net pay is less than gross pay because of taxes. All Americans pay them."

Now, if you mean come tax time at the beginning of the year (January to April)... You might be right, then. But then, generally refunds come about because the taxpayer has paid too much in taxes. This is how our tax system works.

Therefore If we are talking about the "redistribution of wealth" of, say, Joe the Plumber (what a shitty name), we must take a few things into account:

- It is easier for Joe the Plumber to pay high taxes than, say, Bob the Hobo, Steve the Janitor, or Harry the Delivery Guy. If he has more money, chances are you can extract more money. Relying on sheer volume of people doesnapos;t work quite as well as both volume of people and amount of money. Mathematically, you will get more money by taxing 5 $250,000 a year people than from 20 $20,000 a year people, based on sheer "gross pay" alone.

- As for "redistribution": well, youapos;ve increased taxes on the wealthy and decreased/given to the less fortunate. I suppose that does fit under the definition of redistribution, but itapos;s not such a direct thing, more like an indirect side effect of two separate practices. If that is their intention, however, more power to them; a larger amount of people with more money will stimulate the economy more than a few ridiculously wealthy folks who will probably either hold onto the money or be really, really stingy with it. Trickle-up sounds physics-defying but works infinitely better than trickle-down. You saturate the middle ground, and that will rise up by saturating the markets and buying places with money, allowing the money to get right back to the "higher-ups" as it were.

However, I am not an economist. This just seems like it would make the most sense. :/

Besides, tax hikes are near-inevitable because of our Billion Dollar Bailout. Obamaapos;s (ostensibly) trying to keep the bailout as a rich manapos;s problem (when it was rich men who created the problem to begin with -- why put it on the backs of the middle class?), while helping out everyone else. I donapos;t know how many people see that, though.

Ah well. Iapos;m slow and decided to type it all out. Later.

applewood brooklyn new york, comp health jobs, comp health care, comp health, comp headquarters usa, comp hawaii usa.