Haha, idiots. Tax them too much and rich people just LEAVE! Then you COMPLETELY lose the rich tax base. Isn't this what happened with big cities in the 1960s and 1970s? Taxes went too high and the people who could afford to move just fled to the suburbs.
Meaning... Make someone else pay for it. I don't want to.
Let's just cut to the chase and let me quit my job and raise taxes on the wealthy to 80%, they can afford it. It pays to be poor I guess, except for that not getting paid much thing.
Why does anyone still want to live in NY? Too bad, it's such a beautiful state.
Translation: Gimme more stuff, you evil rich people.
I am FOR increasing taxes on the wealthy.........as long as employers, entrepreneurs, and investors are exempt. (:
Yes, I bet this surcharge would really hit home in Plattsburgh.
Theft. Plunder the rich in the land of the "free." Why should parents be responsible for funding their own children's education when they can rob some rich stranger?
Indiana is getting ready to sqeeze the "rich," too. Rich means household income of over $100,000 in this case. Thanks, Mitch Daniels. Not to mention he is going to revoke our status as one of the last bastions of sanity by imposing DST.
There is education needed.
1) Dedicated funds don't mean squat. In many states where lotteries were set up to fund education the legislature reduced the education component from the general fund because the lotteries would now pay for that. Education did not get more. I can see the day where schoolkids are selling lottery tickets to their parents so the school can buy a new football stadium or what-not.
2) Taxes are always created for the wealthy and then imposed on the less wealthy. That's because there aren't enough wealthy to do anything meaningful. So they set some arbitrary number like $150,000 and give it a go and the legislature comes back and crys, "We aren't getting enough. All the rich people moved to Florida. We need to lower the threashold to $50,000." And you're screwed.
Shalom.
One would think that even they would begin to notice how profoundly shallow they sound!
I'm really beginning to think it's something in the public water systems.
At times like this, an old buddy used to say to me, "I never had a poor man offer ME a job". The old saying comes to mind, "given a vote, 51% of the polulation would strip the other 49% of all their rights" (and their money methinks). Isn't it great to live in a Federal Republic run by educated wealthy landowners so this won't happen? </sarc>
These people voted for Hillary. Nuff said.
If a working couple make $150,000 but all of their income is spent on housing, cars, child care, food, college, etc. and they have very little savings, are they rich?
We need Bolshevik Conservatism!! Soak the REAL Rich!! Tax all WEALTH over $10,000,000 at 100%!! THAT would fund all the schools you want.
Let's see if the Hollywood Left and Limosene Liberals agree to REALLY soak the REAL rich! Instead, they want to soak the hard-working upper middle class. They can BITE ME. /rant off
The question is;Where is the tax money that should support education going??
A tax on anyone is a tax on everyone.
They're too ignorant to see that the money is the general revenue pool is NOT dedicated to education. Every extra dollar taken IN from new sources is one dollar that will NOT come from the general revenue. There are no guarantees that education spending will even increase (let alone any guarantee that increased spending will do any good).
Pass tuition tax credits! Keep the Catholic schools open which will ease the overcrowding in the public schools.
TS