Replies

Since it is not clear to you this means you have only examined the situation superficially.

Translation, "Since you do not agree with me you have only examined the situation superficially."

I gave you several historical counterexamples. You have given none. If it were "clear", as you stated earlier, a superficial examination would be sufficient. Most of the time people who say "clearly" or "obviously" really mean to skip a step in the proof.

I've seen this movie before, when the CBIA (CT Business and Industry Association-CT's Chamber of Commerce) backed the state income tax in an unholy alliance with Lowell Weicker. It was broad-based alright, based on AGI. I would say 80% plus had skin in the game, and you had to file even if you made $50. Guess what, the tax has gone up since I left CT, and the state is broke again.

Fix the spending first, THEN talk about playing with tax code.

You gave no examples relevant to the issue. And did not even address the problems wrt the one, FICA, which has a little relevance. There are no FICA taxes coming from the Welfare Class which is the biggest RAT constituency and the biggest group pushing for higher taxes.

It should be utterly obvious where the push for higher taxes comes from, even if you do not like it. This refusal to admit where the problem comes from is standard from the Super “Conservatives” who cannot elect ANYONE and prefer to proclaim there is no difference in either party. In truth, it is not a matter of parties per se but the People which gets the government it deserves and, in our case, has kept the Democrat Party alive strictly as an instrument of Class Warfare. And it is PRECISELY those who do not pay income taxes who are the bulwark of this party.

Your slam at Weicker has nothing to do with any of this.

Your last line sums up the only real point in this entire thread and I agree 100%.