Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Whether I have them or not isn't the issue - but I'd support a higher tax on unearned income even should I be getting some. There's a price to be paid for living in a decent society. We have a better standard of living in the US than Somalians have, so we have to pay back some of that back into the system. And those who benefit without working for it, should pay more.
No, it isn't well thought out. In fact it's not thought out at all. Who is this "recipient" class? I'm going to take a wild guess and say you're talking about the 47% that "doesn't pay any taxes" am I correct?
The members of the recipient class being Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, Bear Stearns, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan and several others including many foreign banks adding up to a incredible 29 trillion in banker bailouts corporate welfare since the big financial terror attacks in 2008.
It's also the myth that businesses are the only ones that create jobs. They create the initial jobs, like when a guy opens a small general store and hires a cashier. But then when business is booming and he decides to expand and open more stores the reason business is booming is because the employees are doing a good job and customers are buying stuff
There are 18 enumerated powers of the congress as far as what they are legally responsible for providing.
Infrastructure and common defense are two of them.
Nowhere is the a power to take from those who have to give to another.
The sooner that people get that through their thick skulls the better.
BTW....i like being served stuff by middle class people....I tend to stay away from the recipient class!
Where is "infrastructure" listed as one of these 18 "enumerated powers"?
Still dodging that pesky welfare clause, aren't you? Darn shame that constitution says that congress SHALL (fyi, that means it is mandatory) provide for the general welfare.... Sucks to be on the minority opinion doesn't it?
Low wage workers do not have any federal tax responsibility. and, they're assisted by the provider class.
I missed this. I guess it depends what one means by "low wage". Probably any or most federal tax paid is refunded if the annual income is low enough, although state, local, and the fica taxes aren't. Federal tax responsibility could be measured as absolute or proportionate.
Just as an observational aside, the top personal rate on paycheck income was 91% in 1952 and is 35% today, so the highest earners today would have probably been envied by their counterparts of 60 years ago.
In any case, if someone is working full time to earn a paycheck to pay their bills, then I generally wouldn't diminish them (whether they're cooking burgers at Wendy's, stocking shelves at a grocery store, or assembling cheap electronics in China). Anyone who goes out of their way to do so, or gives a strong impression that is what they are doing, is just asking for trouble and is not going to win over many people.
The real problems are those who won't work but are able to, or those who continuously work just enough to get all their government handouts and a paycheck.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.