Rstanley0312 1 #1 July 20, 2012 http://www.cnbc.com/id/48257611Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #2 July 20, 2012 Quotehttp://www.cnbc.com/id/48257611 Limiting the window of consideration to 2007-2009 (i.e. the biggest hit of the recession) smacks of cherry-picking. What happened in the years preceding 2007 and subsequent to 2009 probably don't support the conclusions or else they too would have been used. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #3 July 20, 2012 well, they could claim 2010 isn't available yet, but the timing definitely alters the conclusion. By the end of 2010, most of the damage from the crash was gone. But in 2009, the bottom wasn't reached until May. there is also a problem with reporting on income versus wealth in this context. Many have stockpiled capital losses that could be used against gains for the subsequent years which can distort reported earnings in the final line of the 1040. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChangoLanzao 0 #4 July 20, 2012 "This is not an argument against taxing the wealthy. And the incomes and tax rates of the wealthy may have jumped back since 2009, with the rebound in financial markets." Duh! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
