[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I would think for someone who's on the go as much as a US Senator is coming up with 10k in qualified business meals wouldn't be that hard. I'd wager a lot of home office, self employed and small business owners go well beyond that.


You're mixing up your outrages. The CEO gripe is primarily that they earn 300x of their workers. The effective tax rate gripe is about large corporations and hedge fund managers.

I think the CBO has studied earners above 700K and found their effective tax rate averages around 30%. It's the mega rich that are going further out of their way to avoid paying.








The economy took off well before Clinton cut the capital gains rate due to the tech boom. It was the surge in revenues that afforded the opportunity combined with the pressure from the '94 House. If the tax cuts had such a magical impact you'd have thought they would have insulated the economy from the oncoming recession but...

"I would think for someone who's on the go as much as a US Senator"

You said he's doing what tens of millions of people do. Sorry if that sounds inaccurate, but you said it, not me.

"coming up with 10k in qualified business meals wouldn't be that hard"

"You're mixing up your outrages. The CEO gripe is primarily that they earn 300x of their workers."

No, sir. I hear him whining non-stop about their tax rates being too low. That's what "not paying their fair share" gets at.

As for income, for the VAST majority of large businesses, CEO compensation is nothing on the balance sheet. You know that. At least you should.

"The effective tax rate gripe is about large corporations and hedge fund managers"

First, wrong. He has whined many times that CEOs pay a lower rate than their secretaries. Second, if he doesn't like the tax rates, his beef is with his counterparts in DC who set those rates, not with people who use those rates, the same way he does, to minimize taxes.

"If the tax cuts had such a magical impact you'd have thought they would have insulated the economy from the oncoming recession "

Maybe they would have, except Clinton (not Bush) repealed Glass-Seagal, and THAT allowed banks to get involved in fishy investments. Please tell us where I am wrong on that. Go on...