No, not really. You spewed some ideological slogans and mantras.
Vague, not a merit worthy refutation.
And that doesn't happen because some "experts" in Washington takes money away from successful people to pump it into loony ideological money pits.
More vagueness and sloppiness, loaded language.
Totally incorrect. A level of taxation to provide the legitimate functions of government is not-confiscatory. Taxes "just because someone is making more than someone else" is confiscatory. Or to "correct" perceived "unfairness" is confiscatory.
And it seems that you are assuming your idea of "legitimate" is the only legitimacy here. That's pure BS.
No one is suggesting 'taxing just because someone is making more than someone else".
As to what the taxation system will be is ultimately up to voters to elect those who will fulfill their wishes, and the majority decides ( usually ). There really is no way around that point, you can try and deny it, fine, but it's a fact.
In other words, when it comes to taxation, there is no such thing as "confiscatory", if you accept that taxation is a legit function of government. If people don't like the system enacted, they vote someone else in to change it. At any given moment, a policy was due ultimately to an election, and therefore will always be "legitimate", though that may change as political winds change.
In other words, like I originally expressed, it is up to the tax payers/voters, some will be happy with the system, others will not. Not everyone will always be happy with whoever is in office and the policies that are enacted. If you dont like how much you are taxed, you'll vote accordingly, and hope you win. If you don't win, you can shout "confiscation" all you want, it's a meaningless statement, one born out of resentment, emotion, etc., than anything else.
