Posted on 08/17/2012 7:07:52 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
In an interview in Investor's Business Daily on August 13, 2012, Mitch McConnell said: "We have an administration that believes if you are making a profit you are up to no good. You must be cheating your customers or mistreating your employees or both.
"I just met a guy who was running a medium-size business. He said, 'We never had much to do with regulators, but we had one show up recently.' He said they came out just fine, which caused the business owner to ask, 'Why are you here?' And (the regulator) said, 'Mister, you are making too much money.'"
Making too much money? I'll bet there's no such thing as too much money when the administration asks for campaign contributions, or for the worker who wants a raise, or for the church that asks for donations. Funny how that works.
The notion that a business is making too much money is disgusting, but it is not at all surprising. Americans have long bought into the notion that money is evil, so is it any wonder that our government is now working to rid us of it? But money is good. It is simply a medium of exchange used when men trade with each other. If someone has earned a lot of money, it means that he produced a product or a service that a lot of other people wanted. What is wrong with that?
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
NEVER!
Be thankful we live in a Republic and not a Democracy, because if this stupid concept were put to a public vote it would pass with overwhelming numbers.
I would have replied I wasn’t making too much money the government is taking and wasting too much money.
If our governmant does not comprehend the word, ‘enough’ where taxes are concerned...then they have no business telling us what ‘enough’ income means.
"I cannot figure out how wanting to keep what you earn is greed...but wanting to take what someone else earns and give it to others...is not greed."
The trouble with the left’s assumption that, after we’ve “made enough” the government can gobble up an increasingly large chunk of our income is that many, once they reach that point, will simply choose to reduce or eliminate their income for the rest of the year.
I’m self-employed, for example, and my work doesn’t require me to work all year. If we ever get to the point that my marginal tax rate (including federal, state and local taxes) much exceeds, say, 60%, I’ll simply cease striving for the rest of the year and go fishing. This is why the left’s static projections of the revenue they think will be achieved by an increase in taxation levels are invariably wrong. Every increase in income taxes inevitably drives a few more people past the point where leisure is preferable to more income, since so little of any additional marginal income winds up in the taxpayers pocket after taxes.
States like California, Illinois and New York are already well past that point. If Governor Moonbeam shoves his proposed tax increase by California voters in November, I predict that in mere months we’ll be reading stories about state revenue receipts being far lower than projected. In California’s case, not only will more taxpayers have throttled back their work, but more will have gone to Texas.
Obviously when the 4 star Admirals are capped at a certain level. They are working as 4 star Admirals making 3 star Admiral money. It is not right at all.
It is none of the Government’s damn business how much I make or what I choose to do with it, so long as my choices are legal.
It is none of the Government’s damn business how much I make or what I choose to do with it, so long as my choices are legal.
They believe that some people have more than they “need” and they are unwilling to share. They believe that those that have lots, somehow received it from those that have little or none. Worst of all, they believe some seem to have more that they “deserve”. They state that some people may have inherited certain assets from their parents and that’s not “fair” to other less fortunate people.
But what hypocrites! The Rats berate success, them promise more to anyone who will voted for them.
RE: “the duty rests upon the Government to restrict such incomes by very high taxes.” -— Franklin D. Roosevelt
Define “such incomes”, Mr. FDR, and why...
Also, define “very high taxes” and why the rate.
That regulator needs to become acquainted with the “3 S” priniciple.
FDR proposed 90% on everything above a certain amount, I want to say that was $250,000 (4.4 million today).
Yes.
When your business requires a bailout from the taxpayers, you no longer deserve your eight figure salary.
The 13th? I thought it was the 16th...
That's not the government; that's the market -- the only time the government should step in is actual crime (ie fraud, theft).
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.