Liberal superstar??? She got 17,000 votes in a low turnout district. If you listen to her, she she should ask for a refund on her college education at Boston college. she knows nothing, she learned nothing and she was propagandized for 4 years, with loony Bernie Commie claptrap!
Sounds to me like she qualifies as a star of the libs.
Wht not?
…
Because it doesn’t hurt equally.
And that is the purpose of taxation – to cause pain?
With a flat tax the richer you are the less it will affect you, and that’s wrong.
If the country received all the funds it needs to satisfy all its financial obligations, then why would it be wrong to ‘affect richer people less than poorer people’? This makes no sense unless your goal is to punish success due to class envy.
With a flat tax the wealthy will automatically be paying more money in taxes than poor people. Why do you want to financially hurt them?
If after paying taxes their lifestyle has not changed then their taxes are not too high.
You are not answering the question.
Why do you want to see their lifestyle change? Would that somehow be beneficial to the country? If so then how?
Whatever the percentage the tax is, any detrimental effect will be greater the less wealth you have. So the rich can afford to be taxed more without detrimental effects.
Why do you want there to be a detrimental effect on anyone? In this case you want to penalize the wealthy. Why? Are you really that jealous of the success of others? When you go out to dinner and you split the check, do you divide it according to the income of each person there?
Would you be in favor of a tax system in which everyone ended up with the same result. After taxes everyone has $12,000 income for the year. those who earn less would receive money from the government, those who make more would give all above $12,000 in taxes. In your mind would that be a fair system?
No I wouldn’t, but I am in favor of a income cap of one million a year after taxes.
Why not? Everyone would have the same results from their labor. Wouldn’t that be fair? And the rich would suffer more under that system. Isn’t that what you want to happen?
Semantics really.
Regardless it was terrible. They never should have capitulated and negotiated with the GOP in good faith with the GOP in the end picking up their toys and going home.
It’s time for single payer. Everyone else does it for half the price and better outcomes.
1 Like
Because the cap is one million, like most cons you seem be unable to understand the concept of moderation.
In your imaginary scenario I guess it is. But sometimes clarity can be better seen at the limits. If it is not fair to take everything over $12,000 why is it fair to take everything over $1 million? I dare say the real answer is you live in the first scenario, but not in the second scenario. So it wouldn’t be your ox that’s getting gored.
And like most liberals you worry about things that are really none of your business. What another person makes has no bearing on your life what so ever. But if someone is making more than some arbitrary limit you want to set, you want to confiscate it.
I was asking to find out if you have a good reason for wanting to limit the success of other people whom you don’t even know. As expected, you don’t, and I doubt you’ve given the matter enough serious though to know why you feel the way you do. To you, your position just “feels” right. What it really boils down to is envy and class jealousy.
SOCIALISM
Egads we can’t have that…no…no…no…No matter how much better it might or would be in the long run.
1 Like
The hilarious part if Trump came out tomorrow and said he was proposing single payer the Trumpsters would immediately get on board spouting how it’s gonnasavr is money and Trump is looking out for the little guy.
1 Like
Maybe they would. Whomever that might be.
I would not.
Yep.
56789A
