Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/03/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]George, public employees are -not- net tax payers since the tax they nominally pay goes straight into their next pay packet, topped up by other real taxpayers contributions. If a public employee was directly paid his after tax income and paid no tax, or is paid his nominal income and pays the tax the end effect is the same. All public employees cost taxpayers something I am afraid. The arithmetic is straightforward. FD ----- Original Message ---- From: George Lottermoser <imagist3 at mac.com> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> Sent: Friday, 11 March, 2011 15:50:01 Subject: Re: [Leica] IMGS: check out Keith Wessel's photographs On Mar 10, 2011, at 8:10 PM, Rei Shinozuka wrote: > Given the dozens of M9-equivalents I've paid in taxes, I'm glad the guy > (any my >own governor Christie) is standing up for the taxpayer. public employees are taxpayers. reducing their income further reduces tax revenue, as well as spending within the economy. It seems extremely short sighted to imagine that stripping anyone's bargaining rights and decimating their income some how equates to "standing up for the taxpayer;" unless you're referring to corporate and mega-wealth tax dodgers as taxpayers. The "standing up for the taxpayer" and "government is too big" hypocritical pretenses have become so very tiresome. Far too much factual information is available too maintain these rhetorical canards except to the most uninformed or misinformed. see: <http://www.imagist.com/blog/?p=4996> Regards, George Lottermoser george at imagist.com http://www.imagist.com http://www.imagist.com/blog http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information