Posted on 10/27/2008 8:43:49 AM PDT by KarlInOhio
Maybe the problem is the term "progressive," which some equate with "liberal." But in fact "progressive" in tax parlance means increasing proportionately with wealth.
I equate "progressive" with ever increasing like a progressive disease. Thus cancer and the progressive income tax should be forever associated with each other.
Or maybe it's because it's a tax on income, which some think wealthy Americans — being more skilled at earning — have a higher moral right to hoard?
Since when does the hoarding of wealth by individuals, rather than jobs creation, do more to "grow the economy?"
Very few of the rich "hoard" their money. It is invested in businesses, either directly or indirectly through bank savings which is then used to lend to businesses and people. Warren Buffet doesn't have the largest matress in the world to hoard his wealth under.
The fact is: The U.S. has never levied anything but a progressive tax on income.
That's because the only way to get an income tax passed is to convince the majority that some other sucker will be stuck with it, not you. The 16th Amendment was passed by the majority of states by having a low rate initially and convincing most people that it would be applied mainly to rich East Coasters, not to the general population.
When you're very rich, you can't spend all your money, so it's socked away, out of circulation. The rest of us just getting by, spend proportionately more of our money on necessities, small extravagances and entertainment. Putting money into the economy is what creates jobs and makes the economy grow.
Tell me again how a rich person with personal interest in making more money is a worse steward of that money than someone from Washington who expects more political pull from spending the money rather than economic success.
Neal Boortz is savaging this lady and her column on his morning radio show.
If liberals really believed this, their tax returns would show a huge percentage of their money being “given” to the poor.....instead they show very little given to charity and their money safely tucked into non taxables.....they just want YOU to give more money.
Someone please take this idiot's keyboard away before he does any more damage. Apparently he's never heard the term 'investment' before. Or maybe he thinks that just something politicians do with money they take from people by force.
excuse me ...he = she.
Sounds progressive enough to me.
Don’t you just love the sick scumbags who write this stuff?
“Asking”....
Joe Biden says that people who earn more than $250,000 need to man up and pay more for their fellow man.
Biden made $425,000 and gave less than $1,000 to charity.
When he was making $300,000+ for several years, he was giving under $400 a year to charity.
He is an obnoxious hypocrite who wants to spend YOUR money to ease his guilt.
http://sheilatobias.com/index.html
When we were not paying attention the communists seized control of all the institutions of higher learning in our country and now are planning to reap the benefits. And this kind of cloudy, anything-but-critical thinking is the best they can offer? One someone who has spent her entire life sucking off the public tit and achieving nothing of actual worth could write such bilge with a straight face.
Taken to the extreme, and yes these are extreme times and issues, the progressive or graduated tax rate will eventually achieve 100% taxation above the median income.
Oh, they’re “asking” me to pay more tax?
So, I can say “no”?
Its was the boat builder who lost jobs not the rich.
I heard that which is why I posted it here so we could all have fun hitting this pinata.
Since the “very wealthy” ($30 million and up) support Obama (and Democrats) far out of proportion to what the “modestly wealthy” ($1 to $30 million net worth) class of people do, let’s give them what they want.
Find the income profile of the vastly wealthy and tax the dickens out of them. I mean, tax them into the ground.
This will do two things:
1. It will remove future campaign contributions from the liberals/Democrats.
2. It will forever change the tune of the very rich who feel very guilty for being rich, and want to raise all our taxes.
When I say “tax the dickens” out of them - the goal should be to make them paupers within four years. I want their net worth reduced considerably within four years.
Warren Buffet doesn't have the largest matress in the world to hoard his wealth under.
Thank you! This is the first thought that popped in my head as I read this toilet paper article...
Is a progressive tax payment scheme socialist? What is the money being spent on? National defense? Or a welfare state that is redistributing the money from those who have to those who do not?
Spread the wealth is nothing but trickle up poverty.
They protect their wealth with "foundations" which their families serve on.
Look at Europe! China! Russia” All the Arabic countries! Do you want to live poor anywhere in the world?
America offers bettering oneself by work and being enterprising. No one is locked out of this opportunity, except those that are unwilling to participate and get educated. Night school, on line intern-net participation toward earning a degree is open to most all.
Even the poor have Ipods, cell phones, etc. What they really value they have.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.