Quote:It's cute watching you do the exact same thing you chastise other people for. It's not Bush it's Obama. Bush isn't the worst because it's Obama.... 

 

Was it shrinking under Bush? I doubt very much so. I don't even know this to be true but I bet for many decades that it's been increasing and the rate of increase has been increasing and will keep increasing into the future. It's the nature of the haves to want more and have more access to get more. The strategy the right seems to propose is to cut taxes for the wealthy but not the middle class... How exactly does that help people making at or less than that 91k/year? So what's the actual solution that does not effect those it's supposed to help?

 

The disparity between the "haves" and the "have-nots" has been growing, and it did grow under the Bush Administration, but the point is, it accelerated under the Obama Administration.

 

Consider this.  My income has been pretty steady between 2008 and now, despite changing jobs a couple of times (I am a Government Contractor, so my income depends on which contract I am working on).  I have received periodic cost-of-living raises during that period.  However, my income tax burden has increased in that period.  During that period and thanks to Obamacare, I had to purchase a "compliant policy" rather than what I had in order to avoid being penalized.  That has led to a reduction in my effective take home pay.  Health insurance policies aren't cheap, and because of my income I don't qualify for any subsidies.

 

The strategy of the right includes cutting taxes for people like me, what you call "rich".  If you look at the chart that I linked to in the first post, I am not far from being in the upper 20% of income earners.  As I said before though, I am far from what I would consider "rich" when it comes to income or money.

---