ROANOKE TIMES

                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: THURSDAY, January 6, 1994                   TAG: 9401060035
SECTION: VIRGINIA                    PAGE: C-1   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: Ray Reed
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium


NEW TAX RATES FOR RICH, POOR

Q: In light of President Clinton's new personal income tax rates, which are effective retroactively to Jan. 1, 1993, who and how many does this tax change affect? R.G., Roanoke

A: Precise figures are not available, but here are some guesstimates based on IRS figures from 1989, the most recent data that are broken down for analysis.

The working poor get a break from the earned-income credit, which is almost doubled in the new rate structure. An estimated 11 million families will see benefits increase by $800 a year, on the average. Parents with incomes below $23,000 are in this group.

These are the folks getting a tax cut under the Clinton plan. They file 12 percent of the nation's tax returns.

Tax rates don't change for anyone else until incomes hit $140,000 for families (or $115,000 for singles). That's where the tax rate goes to 36 percent, up from 31. For incomes above $250,000, the top marginal rate is 39.6 percent.

In 1989, these two new brackets would have affected 1.6 million returns, or fewer than 2 percent of the 90 million that were filed.

A couple of additional facts: The top 10 percent of income earners paid 55 percent of all individual federal income taxes in 1991.

Most of the rest was paid by the 50 million who reported incomes between $20,000 and $75,000.

It may be two years before we know how much the Clinton plan has shifted these tax loads.

Pro football cheerleaders

Q: Our American culture glorifies both contact violence and noncontact sex. So why is it that in telecasts of professional football, the cheerleaders are seldom seen? P.T., Blacksburg

A: It's true that video seems to show more fans in the stands and fewer shots from the sidelines than it did when the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders were a new attraction back in the '70s.

Political correctness certainly is a factor, whether the broadcasters will admit it or not, but it probably is not the only one.

Women are earning recognition as players of the games and aren't restricted to spectator-type roles as exclusively as they were a couple of decades ago.

Basketball and volleyball have some excellent female athletes - and we can point to the state basketball championships won by Blacksburg and Floyd high schools this fall to back that up. Speed, skill and aggressive play were on display.

Curt Pires of ESPN said that when it telecasts a football game, the overall atmosphere in the stadium is covered. The cheerleaders are part of that, of course, but they are not the primary reason ESPN is there.

"The game is what we're there to cover, and the action on the field probably is more important to the viewer," Pires said.

He also noted that women athletes get lots of TV coverage, including the national cheerleader championships that ESPN has covered for several years.

The perspective on televising pro football cheerleaders seems to be in better balance now.

Got a question about something that may affect other people, too? Something you've come across and wondered about? Give us a call at 981-3118. Maybe we can find the answer.



 by CNB