The Bush Defense

Michael Pollak mpollak at panix.com
Sat Jan 11 04:18:46 PST 2003


[Bush defends his tax plan with what looks like a good counterexample to the "it all goes to the rich" argument. I was wondering where the sleight of hand is. I've snipped it out below]

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/10/politics/10ECON.html

New York Times January 10, 2003

Bush Says Tax Proposal Will Be Fair for All Incomes

By RICHARD W. STEVENSON and SHERYL GAY STOLBERG

WASHINGTON, Jan. 9 President Bush promoted his tax cut proposal today

as fair to all Americans and accused opponents of the package of

engaging in class warfare.

<snip>

"You hear a lot of talk in Washington, of course, that this benefits

so-and-so or this benefits this, the kind of the class warfare of

politics," Mr. Bush said. "Let me just give you the facts, that under

this plan a family of four with an income of $40,000 will receive a 96

percent reduction in federal income taxes."

<snip>

In his stop at the National Capital Flag Company in Alexandria, Va.,

Mr. Bush emphasized that his plan would create jobs and focused on the

benefits to middle-income workers. Using the example of a married

couple with two children and income of $40,000, he said his plan would

reduce their federal income tax bill to $45 from $1,178, a savings of

$1,133.

<end excerpt>

Okay, so what's the catch? Is there a way in which this couple is so unrepresentative as to be absurd? If so, how?

Michael



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list