Ernest Schaal <eschaal@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote:
> in article cald2g$a46$1@news.Stanford.EDU, mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net at
> mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net wrote on 6/15/04 8:41 AM:

>> Right. I don't speak Gibberese.
>> 
>> However, it is a fact that the tax cuts were disproportionately in favor
>> of the rich. MUCH larger cuts were given the very richest than anyone
>> else, who got a much flatter cut.
>> 
>> If you wish to refute this, simply post the data in the first part of
>> your reply; you do not get smarter the longer you type.

> Actually the tax cuts simply reduced the extreme disproportional nature of
> the previous system. The US system still taxes the rich at a higher
> proportion than the poor, but not at such a disproportional amount.

> Bottom line: Even under the reduced tax rates, the rich still not only pay
> more taxes than the poor, they also pay at a higher rate than the poor.

Which everyone knows, which is why it's called a "graduated tax".

Mike