States Consider Increasing Taxes for the Poor and Cutting Them for the Affluent (politicians, money)

[Opin_Yunated]

Originally Posted by Mwahfromtheheart

Oh you evil poor person. That just means you need to work for your boss a little more! Or find like 3 other jobs or something. Work harder!

...so basically I need to be a slave?

[whogo]

Since the poor tend to use a lot of public services it is only fair that they pay more.

[Old Gringo]

A number of Republican-led states are considering tax changes that in many cases would have the effect of cutting taxes on the rich and raising them on the poor.

Conservatives are known for hating taxes but particularly hate income taxes, which they say have a greater dampening effect on growth. Of the 10 or so Republican governors who have proposed tax increases, nearly all have called for increases in consumption taxes, which hit the poor and middle
class harder than the rich.

The Pubs are favoring the wealthy at the expense of the workers?


Call me Claude Rains.

Shocking!

[texdav]

Plus get back to g buying those things and sell the cellphones and 100 dollar sneakers. Your not going to get support when you as a whole are seen as buying such things instead and making a big display of it.

[Toyman at Jewel Lake]

Originally Posted by bUU

There is nothing to resent. The only reasonable explanation is hatred for the poor. Intense ill will - the desire to have detriment fall on poor people, in the interest of fostering the comfort and luxury of the fortunate.

No hatred of the poor at all. Everyone, rich, poor and middle class, sees some services from the government. And everyone, rich, poor and middle class, should pay something to finance those services. That is especially true when those voting on what services are to be provided by government are all all counted equally (not that I propose any different). If you expect services from a government, you should understand that they come with a cost attached. And should be willing to pay for that service. Or be willing to do with a lower level of service.

The real issue we have is hatred of success. We have a large voting block that wants more and more services provided by the government. Yet they are unwilling to pay for those services and want to shift the cost on an ever-shrinking portion of the population. That is far more hate-motivated than any desire to share costs equitably.

Honestly though, since it's done at a state level, why do you care? You and others are welcome to move to states that share your beliefs and reward failure and punish success. While others can do the opposite. That's why the US is often described as 50 experiments in democracy.

[Toyman at Jewel Lake]

Originally Posted by Opin_Yunated

Don't go creating an argument that the parties are the same when you don't have a coherent argument to stand on. The parties are not the same.

100% of Democrats tried to amend the constitution to get money out of politics. Republicans (still) oppose it.

Democrats NEVER tried to get money out of politics. They only attempted to silence those with different opinions than theirs. They never attempted to separate the MSM from commenting on, supporting or endorsing particular parties or candidates, nor did anything to ensure that the MSM treated all sides equally. Which, actually I agree with. The only thing worse than our corrupt and biased MSM is a corrupt, biased MSM with corrupt, biased politicians involved.

They also did not propose restricting unions from donating to political campaigns. The only thing they attempted to to was ensure that opposite sides of the spectrum had no means of access to the airwaves or means of getting their message out.

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by Opin_Yunated

...so basically I need to be a slave?

How is that any different than being a federal income tax slave for a significant part of the year?

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by whogo

Since the poor tend to use a lot of public services it is only fair that they pay more.

Yep. That's how it works in European countries. Take a look at the two tax progressivity charts, here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/09/19/other-countries-dont-have-a-47/

[marcopolo]

Originally Posted by Opin_Yunated

You have to keep the poor down to keep yourself wealthy. The only thing that matters is the gap.

If I want to get wealthier, I just need to widen the gap between myself and people below me.

Umm, not so much.

People on the lowest rung in America in 2015 live better and longer than kings of 200 years ago. We all got much, much wealthier.

Only a dedicated class warrior would focus on the gap between the most useful to society and others.

[vvega]

Originally Posted by Opin_Yunated

The poor don't have a choice.

Human beings need shelter, food, and water. If that costs almost all of my income because I'm poor, what do I have left to save?

Then get a job.