The rich create jobs.
I have never seen a poverty stricken individual create a job for another person.
The richest 1% only pay 41% of all taxes?
Why aren’t they paying their ‘fair share”
they’re so evil
This is the most profound paragraph I have read in several weeks. Relying too heavily on rich people for taxes is a very risky business. Not a good business case at all!
This argument, to a conservative, trumps all the "fairness" arguments that typically dominate liberal--conservative debates on this topic.
I’m having a thought. There are way too few wealthy people, and they aren’t nearly well enough armed, that they can co-exist with a population that has been convinced that the rich have ruined their lives.
It makes no difference what the truth is. It makes no difference that everybody can be rich; that most rich work their butts off to get that way, that the rich are mostly paying all the taxes, are giving most of the charity, or are employing most of the people. The truth doesn’t matter.
What matters is the deception/perception. Convince the masses that the “rich” are screwing them, and you have revolution. Representative democracy was supposed to minimize that probability, but it doesn’t preclude it. In Wisconsin, it looks like a considerable part of the population is fine with senators running away, and think that passing laws is anarchy.
Bump
“New York, for instance, imposed a “millionaire’s tax” in 2009 on those earning $500,000 or more, although the tax is expected to expire at the end of 2011.”
Walruses will be living on BLT’s and Jagermeister before New York kills the “millionaire’s tax.”
BOOMTOWN... less taxes, less government..
read in AM
Why not just tax GE?
Who IS John Galt?
After hearing about GE and their 0 tax ... what we typically think as rich seems more like middle class.
Every news outlet consistently calls them rich or wealthy instead of high income. There are plenty of high earners that spend every cent they make and then some, and are not the least bit rich.
I wouldn't be surprised if this "rich/wealthy" tag didn't come out of the Journolist. The liberals saw that the term "high earners" might bring to mind hard-working or highly intelligent people, and that there might be some political sympathy for those traits. Call them the rich or the wealthy instead and people tend to picture trust funders or fat guys wearing tuxedos and smoking cigars in their clubs as they check their investments in the WSJ. Much less sympathy for that crowd. I am certain that this incorrect terminology is intentional on the part of the MSM, and that they will continue to use it even though they know it is incorrect. They want these stories to have a political impact that favors libs and dems.
From 2004 to 2008, NJ lost over $70 billion in wealth because the “rich” left the state thanks to the onerous taxes enacted by democrats and then Governor Jon Corzine.
Bump to the top. Would love to see what the Buchananite populists say about this.