Comments on: Obama, Redistributionist in Chief http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/02/26/obama-redistributionist-in-chief/ The national media watch group Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:38:11 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2 hourly 1 By: AJRazel http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/02/26/obama-redistributionist-in-chief/comment-page-1/#comment-3032 AJRazel Fri, 06 Mar 2009 19:23:34 +0000 http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=6376#comment-3032 Today's Factoid?? I don't know where you got your facts (other than the other blog you mention), but at the IRS Website, there are compilations of statistics. It seems that for 2006 there were a little over 4 million filers with incomes over $200,000. The sum of their adjusted gross incomes was 2.5 trillion dollars (yes, TRILLION). If these people were ever taxed at a reasonable rate, we would not have any worries regarding our deficits. Yes we need to use the income tax as a tool to narrow the ever expanding gap between wealthy and poor in America. Today's Factoid??
I don't know where you got your facts (other than the other blog you mention), but at the IRS Website, there are compilations of statistics. It seems that for 2006 there were a little over 4 million filers with incomes over $200,000. The sum of their adjusted gross incomes was 2.5 trillion dollars (yes, TRILLION). If these people were ever taxed at a reasonable rate, we would not have any worries regarding our deficits. Yes we need to use the income tax as a tool to narrow the ever expanding gap between wealthy and poor in America.

]]> By: Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting » Blog Archive » Newsweek: None of Us Are Really Socialists, Still http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/02/26/obama-redistributionist-in-chief/comment-page-1/#comment-3031 Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting » Blog Archive » Newsweek: None of Us Are Really Socialists, Still Fri, 06 Mar 2009 19:07:37 +0000 http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=6376#comment-3031 [...] Wondering "why on Earth they would advance" such a strange and "transparently false" claim, Street comes back to old motivations: "Part of the explanation, I suspect, is simply that they wanted to sell issues with a spectacular title" that "strike[s] a chord amidst the deepening capitalist economic crisis and in light of the Republican Party and right-wing media's hysterical neo-McCarthyite claims that the Obama administration is introducing, well, 'socialism.'" [...] [...] Wondering "why on Earth they would advance" such a strange and "transparently false" claim, Street comes back to old motivations: "Part of the explanation, I suspect, is simply that they wanted to sell issues with a spectacular title" that "strike[s] a chord amidst the deepening capitalist economic crisis and in light of the Republican Party and right-wing media's hysterical neo-McCarthyite claims that the Obama administration is introducing, well, 'socialism.'" [...]

]]> By: JohnLloydScharf http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/02/26/obama-redistributionist-in-chief/comment-page-1/#comment-2971 JohnLloydScharf Sat, 28 Feb 2009 05:29:15 +0000 http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=6376#comment-2971 TODAY'S FACTOID:1.5% of the population earns above $250,000 a year. There are about 116,011,000 households in the U.S. So, there are 1,740,165 households that are "rich." ARRA is budgeted at $787 billion. So, the shared cost for each of those "rich" households is $452,255.96. http://awardsinjournalism.blogspot.com/2009/02/message-on-progressivism-from-oregon.html TODAY'S FACTOID:1.5% of the population earns above $250,000 a year. There are about 116,011,000 households in the U.S. So, there are 1,740,165 households that are "rich." ARRA is budgeted at $787 billion. So, the shared cost for each of those "rich" households is $452,255.96.

http://awardsinjournalism.blogspot.com/2009/02/message-on-progressivism-from-oregon.html

]]>