|
Moderator
|
IP:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mannie Fresh
why dont u post what they had to pay in 2003, 04, 05, 06, and the expected '08.... because i feel like there is a high probability that it was raised and raised during his presidency, and balooned to say 42%/62% and he cut them from there.... i dont feel as if that makes him a bad man, but i feel like there is some missing information here..... i also would be hesitant to accept alot of these stats just from personal experience... my family fit into the group that was supposed to either get a tax cut or get a check from the government from Bush... and neither happened... they honestly just as easily could Say they did something and Not do it... they are the government after all...
btw 3.99 gpa with only one A-.... cool dude, we're both smart
|
I didn't post that data because I didn't gather that data when I did the research last year. I know I could get it for you, but I'm not seeing the point. If taxes ballooned, then wouldn't that also support my theory that Bush is not helping the rich? Even if he provided the tax cuts after taxes ballooned (which I highly doubt happened because taxes don't increase that fast), the end result was that rich people were still paying more taxes then they were during Bill Clinton's presidency. That hypothetical situation still doesn't justify saying, "Bush is only helping rich people!"
What was/is your major and what school did you/are you going to? |