Since the rich make greatest use of loopholes, closing them is good for equality and good for efficiency.
Right. Are we supposed to believe the executives at the WaPo refuse to use personal and corporate loopholes for taxation? What hypocrisy!
....increase taxes on the top 1 percent by 5 percentage points....sharing that revenue among the bottom three-fifths of households would give each family $970 a year.
Write the executive staff at The Washington Post. Ask them when you can expect a $970 check from them.
Meanwhile, closing loopholes does reduce the time Americans devote to gaming the tax code, freeing their energy for more productive things.
This statement is beyond ridiculous. Even if I did spend all of my time (which I don't) looking for tax loopholes.....IT'S MY TIME!!! I can do whatever I wish with it. If society's do-nothings spent more time doing something productive, we would not have to even consider the idea of what the WaPo calls inequality.
Those damn rich! It's all their fault!! /s
What kind of idiot Commie bull$h!t is this? Who says we NEED to, or even want to, reduce inequality? I sure as hell never read in our Constitution (at least the non-living one) where it said that there was any need, or right, to "reduce inequality". This sort of thinking always makes me want to ask the writer, "What sort of emotional pathology makes you hate the rich so much? Are you bigoted against people with money?
And of course, we mean economic inequality, right? I sort of think it's unfair that Angelina does Brad more than she does me. That ought to be spreadh around, too. After all, it's unfair that a lot of people are better looking than me.
The problem is that the "rich" are composed of our country's INVESTORS and EMPLOYERS. Punish them through tax policy and the "poor" get hurt too.
The Top 50% pay 96.54% of All Income Taxes (The top 1% pay more than a third: 34.27%)
I hate the way they call taxing highly productive people at higher rates "progressive". It's absolutely poison to any progress historically. Since pro is the opposite of con I suggest that any future reference to tax levied in such a way be called "congressive" taxation. Or even better yet "aggressive" taxation.
john kenneth galbreath is still alive and well and is dwelling in all the liberal minds he has permanently infested with his brand of economic socialism.
The WaPo's new pastime, driving newspaper sales even lower? Screw em.
Let me get this straight....
Demonrats say the govt needs more revenue, raise taxes.
Pubbies cut taxes, revenue rises.
Somehow, acording to WaPo this is bad.
Liberals basically set up a system extracting trillions of dollars from taxpayers to support their screwball social schemes, and then whine when it turns out that their stupid schemes/scams are constantly "underfunded". It's never enough for libs.
This is also the reason that jobs are being outsourced, labor is cited as the culprit but the crap you have to go through to start and run a business is staggering.
If the US had a few smokestack industries those young persons who graduated from our educational system would have a much better economic future.
Any tax discussion limited to only Federal income tax revision is a non-starter. A tax is a tax is a tax.