Letter of the day: Disgusted in Diamond Bar
It’s the theme of the day. I’m sure the tinfoil-hatters will find a way to blame it on the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. From the letters to the editors page of the Los Angeles Times, another taxpayers goes Galt:
I have employed about 50 people during the last 20 years, and my family’s taxable income is about $300,000. In order to avoid paying a higher percentage of taxes on all of my income, I will decrease output, lay off some staff and still end up keeping the same amount.
I have no incentive to hire people or expand my business, because the more I make, the more President Obama will take to expand government. This discourages expansion of the private sector. It will backfire with disastrous consequences for all.
It is repulsive that Obama is being allowed to take this country backward by pickpocketing the very people who run the private sector through their energy, money and creativity.
Kay Santos
Diamond Bar
Hat tip: American Power, who shines a spotlight on left-wing grievance-mongers who have attacked wealth-producing commenters on this blog.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
CPAC vs. the Occupiers: Keep calm and carry silly string
February 9, 2012 10:15 AM by Michelle Malkin
109 Comments
Femme-a-gogue Debbie Wasserman Schultz smears Tea Party, exploits Tucson massacre anniversary
January 11, 2012 02:13 PM by Michelle Malkin
185 Comments
Romney: I’m the Ideal Tea Party Candidate; Update: Des Moines Register Endorses Romney
December 17, 2011 04:05 PM by Doug Powers
158 Comments
New DNC Ad Portrays Newt Gingrich as Tea Party Godfather
December 11, 2011 11:59 AM by Doug Powers
105 Comments
Occupy Wall Street Shuts Down Production of Law & Order Episode About Occupy Wall Street
December 9, 2011 03:20 PM by Doug Powers
67 Comments
Document drop: What Scholastic is teaching your kids about the Occupiers
December 9, 2011 11:30 AM by Michelle Malkin
102 Comments
Video: On Beltway Newt, Cupcake Mitt, and Lame-Duck Barney
December 1, 2011 09:12 AM by Michelle Malkin
163 Comments
Categories: Tea Party
Weekly Standard
» White House Economic Adviser: 'We Need a Global Minimum Tax'Pundit & Pundette
» Bishop Jenky, Nicki Minaj, and the "98%"Sister Toldjah
» Obama’s new budget is a bad jokeJustOneMinute
» We Hear From The Department Of Good Ideas And False Choices
How long until “Atlas Shrugs” is banned by liberals as “treasonous reading material”?
I suppose I need to buy my copy right now! LOL
Along with 9mm ammo…
BTW-Michelle, could you have someone photoshop the Obama “O” logo with “ink” after it? That would read “Oink” and would be a terrific bumper sticker!
Don’t worry about ‘Atlas Shrugged’ being banned, most liberals can’t read and if they could wouldn’t get the plot nor message – they would synpathize with the looters and moochers.
Obama and his socialist enables view productive people as cash cows to be milked, and the milk given to their political allies. Why feed the beast?
Exactly…they view productive people as nothing – absolutely nothing – more than hosts for parasites.
rotarymunkey – I think you’re on to something there!
Michelle,
OT: Listening to Rush, he has challenged Obama to a radio debate at EIB hq. Seems the white house continues to trash Rush.
Their mistake is going after Rush, he won’t back down from them, in the process he gets the conservatives’ viewpoint out there and shows Obama up every time they go after him. Shoulda listened to Dingy Harry!
Beautifully stated, Kay!
I hope Kay takes a poll on Obama Car stickers and lays the Obama supporters off first.
Let them eat PORK!
Both you and the LATimes have been punked. This letter is a hoax. As long as his marginal return is positive he has an incentive to make more money. If he really were in business he would know that.
I can not understand how bho thinks he can ‘make’ someone hire someone. He can not tell someone they can not ‘fire’ someone either. I have a feeling the 250k if going to be lowered to 200 or 175k to get taxes. I do not believe one word this man says, he is not a truthful person.
L
See. This proves my point from the other thread. These people have no idea what they are talking about and/or no conception of our tax system.
YOU WILL NOT BE PAYING A HIGHER TAX RATE ON ALL OF YOUR INCOME!!! YOU WILL ONLY PAY A HIGHER RATE ON ALL INCOME OVER $250K!!!
I can tell you right now, the California Franchise Tax board will probably audit Kay.
Just their MO.
Buy that ammo quickly! There’s a shortage right now.
Do us all a favor — take a course in Accounting 101.
I think the bigger issue will finally hit Obamabots soon. It isn’t the federal tax that will go up for them(if they pay any at all), just the cost of everything else. Punishing wealth and loading the market with (borrowed/printed) money will most certainly lead to inflation. Of course, inflation will hurt those least able to pay for it…and if I know my stereotypes correctly, those people are overwhelmingly democrats.
Disclaimer: “Those people” includes crackers.
Yet again lgm, you miss the point completely. It’s not all about making more money.
It’s about giving less money to socialist thugs.
Then these people should frame it in that way, and not spread falsehoods that if you make a penny more than $249,999.99, your entire income will be taxed at a higher rate.
Spoken by a person who has no clue about incentive. A person who doesn’t get additional benefit for doing a job well or less benefit for doing the job poorly.
For the rest of us lgm – there are “laws” of diminishing returns and value equations. If the returns are diminishing for the same effort, our value equation tells us it’s not worth it.
Since you have claimed to be a math teacher, let me ask it this way. What do you believe a graph of taxation vs output and/or government revenue looks like. At zero % tax, output is obviously maximum and government revenue is zero. Please you fill in the rest of the way.
Do you believe it’s a step function at 99.99%?
Right about the ammo. Last night, I went to buy some .40 rounds and there was one box left. Guy at the counter says, are you sure you want, ahhhhh yeah.
I guess that would depend on what your concept of “incentive” is.
For some folks, being allowed to keep, say, only 50 or 60 cents (if one is lucky!) of each additional dollar one would make would not be an incentive for putting in the extra time and effort.
Agreed – apparently some people here couldn’t care less how high effective marginal rates top out.
Attention Malkanites: Apparently we’re being Analyzed. A busy day, so I don’t have time to follow the discussions elsewhere.
Once the NeroBama hit squads finish with Rush, I suppose they’ll set theeir sites on Michelle.
Well, at least until all the businesses close down because all the roads have deteriorated to the point no customers can come and no products can ship, or until Canada comes in, invades and burns our military-less country to the ground, whichever comes first.
At that point, I think output drops to zero again.
Um, Chap, God love ya brother but, almost every blog post I have read by people doing this stipulate they are going to be making less money.
As for ammo, buy in bulk when you can. I can also say reloading supplies are starting to get hard to come by as well.
How imbecilic !!! Just because I can make an extra ten dollars by working an extra ten hours… do you think that interests me… yes my marginal return is still positive, but the intangible cost exceeds the reward.
Not only that, but the fees and taxes I contribute by working more go to issues I despise. Why on earth should I support something that I despise, that goes against the core of my beliefs and values. Is it worth making an extra ten dollars knowing my additional taxes are supporting the murder of children in the womb ??? You can do that and explain it all away on Judgement Day before me and a host of others here.
No, I’m not going to squeeze the last cent out of my business… only to support the decadent vile programs of this administration. I’m done.
I don’t know squat about tax law, but I one thing I do understand is that “all of [Kay's] income” is not subject to higher taxes, only her income that exceeds $250,000. For someone who’s running a successful, wealth-producing business, Kay is kind of stupid.
Huh? They say they are voluntarily going to make less money because they are scared a higher tax bracket will cause their entire income to get taxed higher.
Chap:
Hahah. Beautiful.
Honestly folks, I don’t think anyone here is claiming that there isn’t merit to the idea of diminishing returns.
LGM’s point though, that what the letter claims is false, is absolutely correct.
Personally, I abhor when people I don’t agree with twist facts to make thier case. I cannot be intellectually honest if I let folks that I agree with on some level do the same.
“Kay Santos” is guilty of twisting the facts and rhetoric.
Two things: How do you know Kay is a male? Why you should dictate the incentive in the determination of their opportunity costs?
A lot of our John Galt comments are being quoted and ridiculed at that TBogg site. I won’t provide a link but maybe a quick registration/insurgency might be in order.
50% of the people don’t pay any income tax at all now.
The gap between rich and poor is a tool designed to promote class warfare. And yet the ruch get richer.
The gap between rich and poor was smallest when the country didn’t have any income tax.
You can’t tax a country into prosperity.
Rush knocked it out of the park today! If you haven’t seen Rush’s challenge, go to his site and read it.
COME ON OBAMUNNIST….take him up on his offer. YOU AND YOUR AGITATORS and the worshiping liberal media are the ones that have framed the situation as Rush “The leader of the Republican Party”.
Have a discussion on air with El Rushbo. COME ON OBAMA…..bring your wimpy self to the Golden EIB microphone!
He won’t do it because he is SCARED of Rush Limbaugh. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Obama lied….AMERICA DIED!
I think Chap and lgm miss the point. Most realize that below 250K pay x% and once we go above that only the excess is subject to the tax increases. As many commentators point out, there comes a point where that excess, taxed at a higher rate, doesn’t give one the incentive to earn more. My business involves many expenses in expectation of earnings, at what point do I gamble those expenditures for a lesser gain?
Chap – it’s called “progressive tax rates” – which already exist in this country as you know. What people are saying though is “at the margin, for those extra earnings, it’s not worth the effort to get them”.
Or a little numerical example.
Person X makes exactly $250,000 working 3000 hours (not an unreasonable amount for many small business people) and pays 35% total tax (Fed, state and other). This means they start at $83.33 per hour but keep $162,500 only $54.17 per hour.
The next hour they work, the again get $83.33, but since their effective marginal total tax rate is now over 60%, they get to keep less than $33.33 for that hour of work. So they have to work harder and get less benefit. Somewhere along the way, they quit working harder.
I’m still trying to get my arms around the LA Times info and new tax increases BUT…you know many people EMOTIONALLY REACT to the tax increases. That’s what it is all about right now and I respectfully submit that no explanation you or lgm (valid or invalid e.g.lgm) provide would change that. The prospect of tax increases of any kind hit many people (me included) viscerally. So they (we) react e.g. thinking/going Galtish.
To use an analogy: Many people voted for Barack Obama without knowing anything about who he was (is) and the type of government he would run. Visceral…
We live with the results..
From the TBogg site: “What’s funny to me is that by dropping out, these people will actually be helping the economy. It’s like they don’t understand anything about economics. Conservatives are the #*#*ing lulz.”
I am speechless at the fact that a thought process like that can actually even exist.
Thanks, I think you spelled it out much better than I, I think even lgm could understand your example.
The fact remains, if you raise taxes on the companies/persons who employ people and tack on a tax increase to capital gains, the gooberment loses revenue and people lose jobs. Marginal return can be 1% or 99%, it will not change the facts.
Huh… we all make more than 250,000???
wow.
Add to that the effect of reducing the deductibility of mortgage interest, and charitable contributions, and Lord knows what other surprises are still hidden in the new budget, and you may understand how the top 5% of taxpayers, who pay 60% of the tax dollars collected, might not want to pay 70% of the tax dollars collected. I was hoping to break into those ranks before the stock market decline, now, I’m not so sure.
No, they are not. Let me repeat the letter:
I am not “missing the point” people. Its just that I kinda object to “Kay” and others “missing the facts” to make the point.
Chap, lgm, Huggy and others who speak of marginal rates are technically correct. The higher marginal tax rate is applied only to that income in a particular bracket. So, they are correct,BUT completely miss the point.
What the letter writers are talking about is the lack of incentive to sacrifice their time, their sweat, their money to earn progressively less money. There is a point where it is simply not worth it. The $250,000 figure is is just an example. No one is saying, wow, if I just earn one penny under that amount I won’t owe any taxes!
Think of it as a boulder you push up a hill. You get a dollar for each foot you push it. You get to keep 100% of the money to start, but 1% less with each foot. At some point you are going to say it just isn’t worth the effort to go that extra foot.
Business owners in these letters are saying it just isn’t worth it to hire that extra worker, or buy that extra forklift to make that extra dollar.
Actions have consequences. Obama and the collectivists are starting to see some of these consequences.
Actualy we have no idea how the law on the new taxes will work. It hasn’t been through congress yet.
SSSOOOOOO.. nobody here is right. for now.
The question is, how many times are we going to be taxed to repave the same roads? Wasn’t one of Clinton’s biggest claims to fame supposed to be that he completely rebuilt our infrastructure? Don’t tell me it’s deteriorated already?!
Whatever happens, I hope team Obama doesn’t make the mistake of reemploying those same contractors this time around – it seems their work, or their tar, isn’t up to snuff.
Chap this letter is the only one I remember reading that said that. The others I have been reading have been along the lines of, “Why work more to pay more to a bunch of socialist thugs? We can survive on less, so lets do so.”
Now granted I haven’t been reading every single one of the blog posts. But the general theme is more about taking money out of the governments hands as opposed to keeping it in their own hands.
jjmurphy:
I think (I hope) we all understand that point very well.
My issue is with the twisting of facts on “Kay Santos”‘s part.
bold print above is where the problem lies and why LGM is right.
You should have stopped there.
Please don’t split hairs over marginal tax rates and diminishing returns. The fact of the matter is they will bring home less under the new structure than the current structure for the same amount of work.
How would any of our trolls feel if they were told they were effectively taking a cut in pay?
Thank you. Absolutely true and why I personally think it’s unfair.
Exactly, one you hit $250,001 in income, for every dollar you earn, ACORN and the welfare-industrial complex are taking 40 cents… plus whatever else the state and local welfare-industrial complexes demand.
Why work harder to earn more if its going to be confiscated and given to some community organizer or welfare cheat?
(BTW, even if the Dear Leader extended the top marginal rate to all income above $75K… it still wouldn’t come close to financing his massive spending plans.)
And the cost of Dear Leader’s cap-and-trade scheme will be another $1000 in taxes on everybody, rich and poor alike. All too enrich carbon traders in the name of an imaginary climate crisis.
As far as the tax code goes, there is no way any common man can know it all. The tax code is a joke run by people who have no clue. Hell I got a bill for $33,000 because the idiot who reviewed my tax return for 2005 cannot read a profit/loss statement. My brother had his HSA debit card stolen and the theif charged away his savings. Guess who the IRS decided had to pay taxes on the theft as income.
Flat rate tax will be good & fair so, we will never see it.
all this blathering about marginal rates and effects of tax on salaries is clouding the issue of this thread. Simply put, Obama wants people making over $250,000 to pay MORE tax. That is enough, along with the rest of his Marxist and socialistic endeavors, for me to join a revolution.
Zeroangel – Yes, the letter writer was incorrect on that point, but that was not the point of her letter. The fact that she made a math error does not negate the entire meaning of the letter. And you guys all know that, anyway.
But, but, but what about the historically disadvantaged?
I agree, which is why I would encourage MM to use as examples in her posts people that actually know what they are talking about, rather than idiots like Kay.
Oh and BTW…. that 13 dollar a week more in your paycheck , people who earn less?…… It’s a credit! you’ll pay tax on it in 2009. Barry Soetoro’s minions didn’t change the tax tables for ya to enjoy it….. how’s that for hope and change?
That is not a “math error.” That is a fundamental misunderstanding of our tax system.
jjmurphy:
I wonder if it was a simple mistake or purposeful rhetoric. The former I can forgive, the latter I cannot since I wouldn’t let the “other-side” get away with the same.
A major mining operation here has issued “pink” slips to a large number of its workforce (rumor has it fifty employees will go) in anticipation of the hidden taxes in Obama’s cap-and-trade on coal/energy use.
Unless these men and women have other skills/ed, they are in for a tough go, as few if mines and businesses around here will be hiring.
Opportunity costs and effective rates will out.
I agree that the statement misrepresents the facts, though I think we are arguing semantics here.
Half the people on this thread are fiscal idiots. Kay obviously knows the tax laws. What he (or she) said was that the effort wasn’t worth it above the Obama threshold. But this is a typical democratic tactic “punish success”.
It’s ‘idiots’ like Kay, that Obama is relying on to help him halve the defecit he just tripled.
obama is also going to let the bush tax cuts expire. That will rasie taxes on almost everyone right there.
MNUSMCDavid: You are kind of wasting your breath, they don’t know the difference between a tax credit and a tax cut.
Ms. Santos can expect an audit notice from the IRS to arrive any day now.
Oops! …few if [any] mines… .
sonofdy
well, gee I gotta try!…….someone has to know the difference. Obeyme’s relying on the ignorance of people to sell that ” more money in your check each week” canard.
Well to quibble semantics…
If I pay 10% of 1-100, I pay 10 dollars.
If I pay 20% of dollars 101-200 I pay a total of 30 dollars
All in all, I’ve paid 15% of my 200, if I keep it below 101, I’ve paid 10%
Looking at it that way, it is “In order to avoid paying a higher percentage of taxes on all of my income…”
Southpaw,
Thanks for the link….I got mocked (out of context) by a liberal site. Awesome! Self-esteem rising….
They don’t get us, do they? I don’t dislike the government because I hate liberals/dems….I don’t support it because its policies have been shown by history not to work. The bill will come due one day. It’ll be due for policies I can’t support.
Why give the government any extra funds to do things I resent if I can afford not to?
No matter how you slice it, allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire, and thereby increasing the tax rate on those earning over $250K, will cause a loss of jobs and decreased revenue to the government. In addition, government payments for unemployment will increase. Mr. President, meet the law of unintended consequences. Oh, by the way, if you had studied economic history in addition to Rules for Radicals you would probably already know this.
Very simply put and spot on.
Chap – I imagine the letter write has a very good understanding of how the tax system works as he/she sends in estimated taxes each quarter.
MNUSMCDavid boils it down nicely. All this talk of marginal this and that is smoke. The bottom line is more to the government, less to the producer.
The_Livewire:
Correct. However:
If you made $100 in your example you take home $90.
If you make $101, you take home $90.80.
You know, you guys have really hurt my feelings. I mean, here I thought we were friends. Why, there are even those that have offered to meet and even buy me a drink from here. Yet now I have to go over to one of the Liberal Brown Shirt sites to find out the the whole lot of you not only have Lear Jets, but have been winging off to Nova Scotia in order to watch some total eclipse of the sun…and not ONE of you even invited me.
Well that just tears it.
See if I ever send my fleet of limos out to your mansions to pick you up to watch the Super Bowl from my private suite, wing over to The Continent to purchase our new polo ponies or stay in my suite at the Wynn in Vegas, let alone open up a full line of credit for you ever again.
After all, I am stuck with my converted 737 and apparently that just isn’t good enough for you anymore.
Boy…you think you know people…
Anyone choosing to make less than $250k when they could have made more is unpatriotic, right Veep-Joe?
/lgm-off
I have a simple question, one that has nothing to do with marginal tax rates or accounting.
My question is directed at those people people who voted for Obama (or sat out the election) who are now writing letters to the editor and complaining his wealth-destroying policies. And that question is:
Where the screaming blue hell were you people on Nov. 4th, when your outrage would have done some good?
Obama said, in so many words, that he thinks things work better when you “spread the wealth around”. He had a voting record that put him to the left of Ted Kennedy and had plenty of documented comments that showed him to be hostile to capitalism and a big fan of class warfare.
When you voted to put such a man in the White House with neigh-invincible majorities in both houses of Congress what did you think was going to happen? Did you expect him to have a free-market epiphany overnight?
Now that your stupidity/laziness has put us in this position you can pay along with the rest of us. But spare me the outrage. You were warned, repeatedly, and you gave Mr. Hopenchange the job anyway.
Veep-Joe???
Don’t you mean, THE SHERRIF???
James_Felix:
Speaking for myself, I voted for Bob Barr, not that it would have mattered at all whoever I voted for because of our ridiculous pseudo-electoral college system.
Exactly, zero. Either this person does not know what she is talking about or is being purposefully disingenuous.
Well, I have to confess, I did have some Wagyu steak for dinner last night. I promise you next time, you’re invited.
RetFireman said:
Nova Scotia is so gauche. My Gulfstream flies exclusively to the section of Europe that only rich people know about.
RetFireman – Shhhhhhhh! You’ll give us all away. Next thing you know Obama will be singling out the Malkanites as the greedy rich. Keep it quiet for a while and maybe it will all blow over. (Then we can break out the caviar, ride our polo ponies and head over to Geneva for some skiing.)
But that will keep us from discussing any tax related bills from the obama admin!
Chap:
Yes. thank you.
All:
The only way you could have a situation where it would be in a businesses’ best interest to cut production and fire workers would be if either the total taxes on all income go up (as Kay seems to be alleging) or if the tax was based on gross, not net.
This is not the case here.
It’s still unfair and the LoDR applies, but Kay is, as Chap says, either ignorant or disingenuous.
Seen somewhere else on the net and if you don’t already have your sign made for the next protest rally, you might consider this. It’s spot on!
Obama : the economy
as
Kevorkian : health care
Fixed it for you.
Good one!
I am suprised Kay Santos is a business owner using this kind of logic.
” . . . In order to avoid paying a higher percentage of taxes on all of my income, I will decrease output, lay off some staff and still end up keeping the same amount. . .”
All you have to do is to stop paying yourself that much money. Why make your staff suffer? In fact, take your reduced income and give it to your staff. You could even buy more equipment.
Exaggerration for effect – If you want to work for a dollar a year you could. How many more people could you hire for $299,000? If your salary is a function of output, change the formula to lower your salary.
Count me skeptical of Kay Santos as a business owner.
As far as the ‘Ammo’ part of the discussion, handloading is an option for center fire, although some calibers have been seeing restricted supply, probably increased demand. Who says Obama isn’t stimulating the economy?
PS:
…and what zyzzyg said.
Honestly folks, we really should (as fiscal conservatives) understand the issues better ourselves so as to not look a fool like Kay.
I agree – some are not saying “at the margin”.
I’ll re-phrase – I AM SAYING – AT THE MARGIN IT BECOMES NOT WORTH IT.
But I also conclude some are saying – it’s not worth it to have ANY of their hard earned effort go to activities which they consider anathema to civilized society and therefore choose not to contribute in any way.
Then would you apply that same theory/standard to the energy producing industry? Like I stated earlier, a major coal mining operation here is laying off workers to cut production and decrease tax liabilities in preparation of cap-and-trade.
This is a mute discussion anyway.
Kay, whether you make 300k, 250k, or a 100k your taxes are going up. Way up!
I disagree.
We KNOW punitive taxes do not enhance output or revenue – and we do know the ideology of those in power is punitive taxes.
I’d venture to say it would be impossible for those in power to not implement punitive taxation.
Take from the most productive, give to the least – the Obama way.
Well we don’t actualy know what the tax bill will look like after the radicals in congress are done with it so this is all a little premature. I KNOW pelosi would prefer to see the entire amount taxed more even if thats not what the bill says now. How do I know that? Based on her past. Could I be wrong? yes, but more taxation is the way to bet with democrats in charge.
This of course does not take into account the fact that this bill conatins MORE taxes than just this one. The tax credit may offset SOME of these other taxes for the 250,000 and less crowd, but is just an additional cost of business to those earning more or just an additional tax for them. All of which will be passed on
DBNinKY:
What theory / standard?
I dont know the particulars of that specific case. I am willing to bet though its a completely different problem then the one being discussed here which is the $250,000 issue.
My issue is mainly with false rhetoric like Kay’s. I am a “fiscal conservative” (although not a laissez-faire capitalist).
No no no…I’m sorry, but after all this time, I have to find out about this from THEM? Do you have any idea just how broken hearted I am to have to find out THAT WAY???
I mean really. You spend your life using your parents millions, crush the little guy, spend all that time with insider trading and frittering away people’s savings and retirements and THIS is the thanks I get?
You think you know people…
The original letter stated…
…and many liberals here jumped all over that in their comments…
Using the Tax Bracket calculator at moneychimp:
Income brackets for 2009 (married, filing jointly):
Assuming $350,000:
taxes = $93,321 (26.66% of income)
Since Obama has said that his tax plans will affect only those making $250,000+, I’m making the assumption he’s just going to change the endpoints on the tax brackets. If he actually increases the upper bracket, the amounts will increase even more.
Assuming $350,000…
…after adjusting $372,950 top level down to $250,000:…
taxes = …
(8,025-0)X.10 = $802.50
(32,550-8,025)X.15 = $3,678.75
(65,725-32,550)X.25 = $8,293.75
(137,050-65,725)X.28 = $19,971.00
(250,000-137,050)X.33 = $37,273.50
(350,000-250,000)X.35 = $35,000.00
TOTAL TAXES: $104,217 (an increase of $10,896).
…which is 29.78% of income
Now, unless I’m totally mistaken, 29.78% if GREATER than 26.66%!
Picture that… the business owner who posted the letter really DOES know more than liberals.
The conservative members on this thread will await apologies from the math and logic challenged (listed above) in 3… 2… 1…
Oh, who am I kidding…
And careful Felix,
I made a similar statement last week and got jumped all over.