"Sid9" sid9@ bellsouth.net wrote in message
...

"RD Sandman" wrote in message
...
John Smith wrote in news:irec2j$3ri$1@dont-
email.me:

On 5/23/2011 9:59 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
John wrote in news:irbjfe$naf$1@dont-
email.me:

On 5/22/2011 10:58 AM, RHF wrote:
...
- It is the University of California at Santa Cruz
- who you are calling idiots.

Well Now... any Institution of Higher Learning
with 'Slug' {For Brains} as their Mascot is a
http://www.kohoso.us/images/ucsc.png
place that 'I' am not Banana's about. ~ RHF
http://www.ucsc.edu/about/mascot.html
-wrt- Sammy the Slug
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_California,
_Santa_Cruz#Mascot
...
Since the figures are actually a summary of the federal reserve and
govt. figures, the ultimate message comes from them ... you will
notice,
no one is able to come up with figures which dispute them -- that
often
happens with the truth ...
Particularly when you post both sides.......you didn't.

Whoever make the money pays the bill ... no-brainer ... this financial
crisis is just working out those terms.

However, you wish to tax the wealthy even more even when the stats show
that they pay about where they should be when looking at the amount of
wealth or income that they show.


The wealthy, whose income is reported on 1099s, pay a lower effective tax
rate then people whose income is report on a W-2.
Up to 33% if you work at a job.....10% on dividends......for not working.

Excuse me, but what exactly do you mean by "effective tax rate"?

Is that some sort of realspeech for "we need to tax them for an even larger
share than what they have to pay now?"