Teresa release her tax returns... or rather, just two pages of it... See: http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB109805839967047671,00.html?mod=todays_us_opinion The top 50% of all federal filers contributed 96.1% of all federal income taxes in 2001, and they paid an average income-tax rate of 15.9%. That's 3.5-percentage points more than Mrs. Kerry paid in 2003. ...and... Mega-millionaires such as Mrs. Kerry who can invest in tax-shelters will be able to dodge the new higher two top marginal tax rates on dividends and other income that Senator Kerry is proposing for anyone making more than $200,000. The top rate would go back up to 39.6% from 35% -- or to nearly 41% if you include the phase-out of deductions that remains part of the tax code. The people who won't be able to escape these higher rates are two-earner couples on mid-career salaries, or small-business owners who pay taxes as subchapter S companies at individual rates, or pensioners who've saved all their lives to build a nest egg and are now living off dividends. Mr. Kerry calls these people "the rich," but we know a lot of them who are decidedly middle-class and who certainly can't afford the five homes that the Kerrys own. At the very least, Mrs. Kerry's tax returns are a screaming illustration of the need for reform to make the tax code simpler and fairer. But they also show that Senator Kerry's proposed tax increases are much more about a revenue grab than they are about tax justice.
So let me get this straight - you're upset because Kerry's wife took advantage of the current tax code to pay a lower percentage than most? I just want to be clear about this, because it sounds to me like you're advocating some kind of noblesse oblige, whereby she should pay more in taxes out of sheer guilt.
I'd be happy to let you get this straight... I am not upset about Terry K. "taking advantage" of the tax code...what I am saying that in the demagogic anti-rich rhetoric of the Democratic party and John Kerry there is a whole lot of hypocrisy when it paints, with its class-warfare broadbrush, the small business owner, or the retiree who has saved nest egg and is earning dividends, as the bogeyman "rich"
Heh, revenue grab. Thats cute. Of cours its a fricking "revenue grab." Thats what taxes are. Now the question is, can the Government afford to have taxes at the current rate, and if not, who do you end up taxing to do it.
By the same token, people who favor the war in Iraq oughta send their sons and daughters. Oh Jenna!!!!
There's just so much wrong with this post, almost as much as is wrong with Chris Armas' game right now. All I'll say is, you apparently don't know the meaning of the word "hypocrisy."
Middle class families earning over 200K? Where the hell is that middle class? Grenwich? Ugh. Its so frustrating that the WSJ has such great reporting and such hideously pathetic editorials. Kerry's just proposing restoring the old percentages. If you also want to eliminate some of the tax shelters, than say so. I do. But Heinz has those tax shelters because she has capital, and thus pays taxes as long term capital gain. It has nothing to do with income.
Not ONE soldier in Iraq was sent by their parents. You see, the MEN and WOMEN in the armed services volunteered to serve their country. No parent can "send" their kid to the military, despite what you and Michael Moore like to pretend. It's also rather insulting for you to refer to our soldiers as children incapable of thought.
She also had 4.6 million in charitable contributions. She also overpaid by nearly 250k, which to me sounds like she doesn't really care too much about her lawyers figuring out how to get away from overpaying the tax bill as the year closes out. Damn her and here 4.6 million in charitable contributions.
I don't want to get on a charitible contribution fix. You give to charity out of what is in your heart, not how it will benefit you tax wise. I wonder how many wealthy people would give to charity if we did away with the charitible deduction. This is not to focus on Theresa Heinz, just people who only give cause they get some form tax benefit.
The tax returns of politician couples are "fair game." The sexual preferances of their offspring are not. But why bother making distinctions that make a difference around here? Nah, let's just hate and loath.
She escapes the subtantial amount of her taxes by investing in municipial bonds. What I can't figure out is if Karl wants to end tax exemptions for municipal bond dividends (which would decimate the financial infrastructure of most American cities, resulting in increased property and sales taxes) or if KArl believes that investing in municipal bonds is somehow "unAmerican." Most likely, Karl just doesn't know a municipal bond from a pimple on his butt.
But folks who earn dividends also have capital, and they are going to be taxed at a higher rate?? What the article concluded with is the phrase "At the very least..." The fact is that there is incredible inequity in the system as it is currently constructed. And the fact is, that the anti-tax, anti-rich, anti-business, anti-corporation, pro-tax rhetoric of the Democratic part and John Kerry is demagogic in the worst way.
Having worked in the financial services business for 15 years, I know a whole lot more about it than YOU do, I would wager. As usual, predictably, and ever so tiresomely, you, and all your other mentally challenged leftist friends, miss the point. The point is not whether the municipalities should issue tax-exempt securities. The point is whether what Kerry wants to return to in the tax system is "fair" or "better." And you know it, and I know it...it is not. All of this venom on the campaign trail is all about creating a class division to win an election and to then, if he wins, have the goverment collect more tax money in the unfair way it has been collecting it for so long. As his wife continues to benefit, and he continues to enjoy the five spacious residences he can lay his head down in. Simple as that.
Is that class envy I smell in the air? Teresa escapes her taxes by investing in municipal bonds. You call Kerry a hypocrite because his tax plan wouldn't make his wife pay more taxes. So my question to you is: what can Kerry do in his tax plan to avoid the charged hypocrisy? You're making nebulously-defined charges without specifics.
No, the point is to make a stupid anti-Kerry point. If the point was to discuss Kerry's tax plan, then we wouldn't be talking about one rich person, because that would be, by definition, useless anecdotal information.
Being rich is like going to Sam's Club instead of Kroger's. Most people buy a box of Cheerios at Krogers like once a week for four or five bucks. The general public likes the size of the box and they're happy with this choice. But some people like to get the gigantinormous box from Sam's Club that can feed a small army for weeks on end. They pay a whole lot more for this ton or cereal. But Sam's Club says, "Hey, since you're buying so much from us, we're going to give you a little break. You pay, what, four bucks a box at the other place? Well, since our box contains like thirty of thier boxes, we'll make you only pay the equivilant of two bucks a box when you buy in bulk from us." I never understaood why people have such isues with rich people getting tax breaks. They're still paying more than we are. They still pay the bulk of the taxes on the whole. They still donate more money than any of us do to charity.
Agreed. It also can be said that despite paying more in taxes, paying the bulk of taxes on the whole, and donating more money to charity they are still rich. Even if Kerry rolls back some taxes, they're gonna be rich. It's uncanny. As far as bargain shopping, you got it.
OK, I'm still trying to figure out why Karl thinks the rich shouldn't pay more in taxes unless their last name is Heinz-Kerry.