Ergo, 78 million taxpaying families are picking up the tab for the entire 180 million American families (360 million people)
Now do the math - if the proposed $819 billion "stimulus" package was given back to the taxpayers, each tax paying family would receive about $10,500. Now THAT is what I call STIMULUS!
But the liberals claim that any tax refunds should go to the poorer folks - the ones who did not pay any tax in the first place. The problem with that is two-fold: first, the poor will not, or cannot use it to stimulate the economy - they will pay off debt, buy drugs, or spend it on plasma TV's as a ONE TIME shot to the economy. Nothing lasting.
But the second problem is one that is even more "to the point" - fairness. Let me explain.
Let's say two people, Bill and Bob, go to a restaurant. The tab comes to $100. Bob, who is wealthier than Bill chooses to pay the tab. Bill gets a free meal and pays nothing. But before leaving, the manager comes up and says, "I forgot - we are running a special today, 20% off everything. Here's $20 back."
I ask you - WHO should get that refund? We all know the answer to that. But liberals don't like the answer, so they say "Bill should get it because he is broke and needs it more."
I say, "So What?" He was broke before he went to the restaurant. And he already collected a free meal. He is not entitled to anything more. Period.
And THAT is why it appears that the wealthy get all the tax breaks. It is because it was their money to begin with, and if some comes back, it should come back to the owner.
When the wealthy pay their taxes, they are paying not only their own share, but also the shares for all those who pay no taxes. So, those "poor" people have already benefited at the expense of the wealthier folks. They do not pay for the roads, bridges, national defense, entitlements - NOTHING! They get a free ride on the backs of those who work harder and earn more. And then when the government gives some of the rich guy's money back, those "poor" people who already got a free ride scream that THEY deserve to get that money.
Where I come from, that is called adding insult to injury. First we pay their way, and then they want our money, too.
So I ask you - what is the difference between that, and a mugger stealing your wallet because you have $20 more than he does? After all, you have money, he does not. Why is he not entitled to what you have? Should he not be able to take your money because he is poor and you are not?
Liberals say "yes". Sane people say "no".
BELIEVE IT OR NOT: Some liberal fruitcakes read that a volcano might erupt in Alaska, and they are already blaming it on Sarah Palin. These people are just unbelieveable!