| for which our "pay as you go" congress decided they didn't have to pay as you go. What a shock. |
You mean the Democrats aren't going to find someone else to stick with the tax bill that would have hit people that it shouldn't have?
In reality the federal government shouldn't even be thinking of counting the revenue from the people that would be needlessly hit with the AMT. Even if you support the tax at all (I'm not sure I'm a fan of it), it was meant to tax people who otherwise would pay (normally much) less than they should have. Now it's hitting people that it shouldn't be hitting at all because of course when it was initially passed Congress didn't index it for inflation or put in any other automatic adjustments to make sure it kept hitting the right targets.
The money that might come from allowing the AMT to hit the wrong targets is money that the federal government should never be seeing, so I wouldn't get too worked up about the idea that they (the Congress) are breaking their pay-as-you-go rules in not finding alternate funding for the money that is lost from not allowing the AMT to hit the wrong targets.
If you'd like though, I'm sure it could be arranged that you (and perhaps Gene and a few others) could be made the new targets for where to find the money that is 'being lost' here. If that happens, I'm sure there'd be cries about how wrong the AMT is in general and how it's hitting entirely the wrong groups of people (and how the rich still aren't paying their fair share).
JoeUser Forums
