Yes. I'm a greedy bastard!! I need MORE!!!
No. There's comes a point in wealthiness where it just doesn't even matter anymore.
I'm not sure.
The government has been ripping off every class for the past 230 plus years....IMHO.
All I can say is I hope you guys on the far right can keep it up until 2014 so moderates can retake the House!
Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb
The opposite of hero is not villain, it is "bystander"
" In doing what we ought we deserve no praise, because it is our duty." -Aurelius Augustine
"But why do they use them to make Brawndo??!!"
I can't understand why the Uniparty gets so polarized that it's "all about revenue" or it's "all about spending". A shortfall is a shortfall. BOTH numbers figure into the calculation, but the mere notion that operating at continual deficit is somehow sustainable or even sane is something only a "classically trained" economist (IMHO, one of those professions that is highly skilled in precisely measuring something that very few of them understand AT ALL) could support.
If you want to look at the numbers, it was fairly obvious that Clinton presided over a long, UPWARD trend in spending that saw the budget go from something around $1.8T to $2.1T, but as soon as the "conservative" Bush came to power, that line turned SHARPLY upwards. The PCLL would tell you that the solution is for their President to spend MORE - well, geez, guys, Bush tried that. Spent like a drunken sailor - and guess what - the economy looked great to all of those economists and analysts - then it crashed just like any reasonable and intelligent observer had predicted it would do. DUH!!!!
But, Bush really did take the cake. While Clinton did increase spending, he matched that with increased tax. Bush's administration (and let's not forget that lovely bunch in Congress that get to duck the blame for their dirty work) did BOTH wrong. Up with spending, down with taxes. How could the RRR defend such stupidity? Then, when the Uniparty shuffled the deck to bring the US "change" the new champion of the RRR did EXACTLY what Bush did, only threw a few trillion more into bailouts - and the PCLL defends THAT idiocy.
It SHOULD occur to you/us all that there is something more wrong with the country that just the question of revenue vs. expenditure (which for a decade are BOTH wrong).
The tax on the wealthy is only on income. Many of the wealthiest don't have income so they come under a different classification that is not called income. They get a lower tax. This is one scam that is backed by the Whitehouse. Senator Kerry gets taxed on a Senator salary but has assets with his wife that are in the hundreds of millions.
Another scam are deductions, which were not addressed. Romney was smart since he was going to lower the tax rate, since the tax rate is more for show when it comes to the most wealthy. He was going reduce deductions where the money magic really occurs. This is what allows the rich and well connected get to lower their final tax rate. General Electric had the sanme corporate rate as large business, but through deductions did not have to pay taxes.
Polititians don't like to touch deductions, because this is how they money launder campaign donations from wealthy special interest groups. The tax code is a who's who of campaign money laundering.
If you were to touch deductions, the tax code would shrink shrink and the kickback scam would be harder. For example, unions contributed to Obama, so they get a deduction/exemption from Obamacare. They get their contribution money back by donating up front. If we eliminated all new deductions, then campaign contributions may not be cost effective. Hollywood got a new deduction since they provided campaign value via propaganda. They are very wealthy and may say we accept higher rates, but will pay less.
Romney was well aware of how the game works. But since the game is still on, he and the other smart rich will always win the game, since there is always a need for money laundering by polititians.
Although I think they should pay way more then they do, I think you went about this badly. Although I think that the reason why they don't pay more is because they are greedy human beings who want it all to be theirs, you should still be as unbiased as possible when making the poll.
BTW: it is also informative to note the proportion of revenue that comes not from income tax itself, but payroll tax - which IMHO is the #1 shift of tax burden onto the middle class.
No one should ever have to pay more than 40% in total taxes.
Sadly, with today's tax environment some people are paying above 50% total tax.