right now the richest 1 percent make 22% of the income but pay almost 40% of the income tax
but Haymarket is against any tax system that would allow the rich to pay less of the tax burden because that hurts his party
a flat tax would mean that the richest 1 percent would pay about 25% of the income tax if they pay 22% of the income. that seems fair to me
Haymarket thinks that its wrong for me to argue against a system that makes one group pay more of the taxes than almost 90% of the rest of the country.
Actually what you fail to comprehend, what you fail to understand, what you fail to acknowledge is that we have lots of different taxes in this nation paid to different levels of government. You obsess about one particular tax becuase it is progressive in nature and is designed to hit the wealthy harder. So you hate it out of pure self interest.
We have property taxes. You have supplied this board with the details of your own property tax payments Turtle. You have told the board that you have some 25 acres and are wealthy and pay only $6,000 a year in property taxes. I, on the other hand, live on 3/4 of an acre and pay $5,000 in property tax each year. I pay a significantly much much much higher percentage of my income on property tax than you do.
But I do not obsess about this.
I do not whine about it continually.
I do not make it the focus of my life.
I simply accept that different taxes hit different people differently and there is some sort of rough balance since in the end, we all pay about the same percentage of our income in taxation when you count all taxes paid to all levels of government.
Do not preach to anybody about what is "fair". A word like FAIR implies some sort of ethical framework is in place which you use as a standard to make a rational judgment. In your case turtle, that would be an outright lie. You have no ethical framework to help determine what is fair. You have no principles to guide you. What you have is your own self interest and only your own self interest and you are more than willing to embrace almost any idea which furthers that same self interest.
Just look how you have proven this to the board with your own positions on taxation:
1 - You insist that taxation should be based upon how much government services one utilizes and everyone should be taxed based on what they use like a retail shopping experience at Costco. You say this over and over and over again, you say this in thread after thread after thread. You cling to this the way a drowning man in the ocean clings to a piece of driftwood and refuse to give it up claiming that this is your sacred principle and is what is right and ethical.
2- You suddenly trash that position in favor of a 180 degree turn to the exact opposite - suddenly you favor a per capita tax where everyone pays the same regardless of what government services they consume or use. Your sacred principle went out the window, was smashed and trashed, was flushed down the porcelain receptacle in favor of the directly opposite approach. What happened to your sacred principle that you espoused for a very long time?
3 - Then you trash and bury the per capita idea in favor of a consumption tax which has nothing at all to do with government services that were the lynchpin in ideas #1 and #2.
And even though all three ideas are polar opposites of each other in principle, they all have one thing in common: they give Turtle a tax cut since they benefit the wealthy.
If you see as a PRINCIPLE the idea that what is good for Turtle is the final standard - then that seems to be what passes for principle in your eyes. That is your definition of FAIR. FAIR is what Turtle benefits from. No more and no less.
You have made it clear with your 180 pivots and reversals that you have no political principles - you have only your selfish interests at heart.
but its your right to post whatever you choose.