<div dir="ltr"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 9:19 AM, Hal Duston <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:hald@kc.rr.com">hald@kc.rr.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 12:24:25AM -0500, Jim Herrmann wrote:<br>
> Not toget to far into it, but moving from the 10% braket to a 15% braket is<br>
> not a 50% increase. It's an increase on the last dollars you make, not on<br>
> the entire sum. You sir, are twisting the math to fit your meme.<br>
<br>
</div>Well, since my taxable income in 2007 was 10K, and my tax liability was 1K,<br>
and after 2010 the 10% tax bracket will no longer exist and my tax liability<br>
would for a taxable income of 10K will be 1.5K how is that not a 50% increase?<br>
<div></div></blockquote><div><br>Because if you only earned 10K, then you would be eligible for the EITC. Plus, with all the deductions for your children, you would owe no taxes. As it should be. :-P<br><br>Now, if you made more than $39,783, then you wouldn't be eligible for the EITC, but then you'd be in the 15% bracket under either scenario. So, my original accusation stands. ;-)<br>
<br>Also, I don't think anyone is talking about rolling back that part of the tax cuts. All I heard anyone talk about is putting the 31, 36, and the 39.6 rates back in place. Actually, I think only the last two are under consideration. And remember that this is AGI. So, even though might make enough money that they are in the 28% bracket, after 401K, kids, and mortgages, the bracket is really 25%. But if you make enough money to be in the 31% bracket (>195K) you can afford the damn taxes. STFU!<br>
<br>Peace,<br>Jim<br></div></div><br></div>