So Let's See What Happens

[blaknoize]

You aren't giving the rich anything at all - they are just keeping more of their own money. The government just takes less from them - the money that the rich already earned and own. The government is not giving them anything. It isn't welfare if they are not being given anything - instead they are keeping the money that they earned. This is how capitalism works.

Now, taking the money from those that earned it, and then giving it to those who did not earn it is called wealth redistribution, and is a cornerstone of socialism. That is how you create a true welfare state, complete with those that live on the meager subsitance that the government gives them.

Well the income tax takes money from those who "earned" it. Even though its Unconstitutional. Also, how is it that a big "earner" can be more resistant to paying their affordable dues to the country than a person who makes less which creates more of a burden for them? The person at the bottom is forced to request some assistance from government services, while the person at the top can just pay for it and even waste it.

Then when the person at the top makes a mistake or does it wrong, they are "forgiven" (bailed-out) or protected because they're already up there at the top. Unlike the person trying to get up to the top who makes a mistake and it can ruin their entire existence and REALLY create a situation where they will need "hand-outs" or "free money." Then they are all critized for where they are in life for whatever mistake (bad financial decision, risk, helping out others in their same "class," got SICK, car broke or business closed because it got purchased by another business that then outsourced its workers.)

Also, the "now" business billionaire got his money from someone or just inherited it from their parents which got that money from somewhere. They or their parents have asked for donations and help in hard times during their growth, assistance from government and tax cuts just as much, so they can be insured of their future. Their communities of "poor" wealthy and alike all contributed to the growth of that said business. From purchasing their goods in hard times (because u know, back then America was America and American's cared for each other and their lifes work) and even solitating their city or towns product.

[David88vert]

Well the income tax takes money from those who "earned" it. Even though its Unconstitutional. Also, how is it that a big "earner" can be more resistant to paying their affordable dues to the country than a person who makes less which creates more of a burden for them? The person at the bottom is forced to request some assistance from government services, while the person at the top can just pay for it and even waste it.

Then when the person at the top makes a mistake or does it wrong, they are "forgiven" (bailed-out) or protected because they're already up there at the top. Unlike the person trying to get up to the top who makes a mistake and it can ruin their entire existence and REALLY create a situation where they will need "hand-outs" or "free money." Then they are all critized for where they are in life for whatever mistake (bad financial decision, risk, helping out others in their same "class," got SICK, car broke or business closed because it got purchased by another business that then outsourced its workers.)

Also, the "now" business billionaire got his money from someone or just inherited it from their parents which got that money from somewhere. They or their parents have asked for donations and help in hard times during their growth, assistance from government and tax cuts just as much, so they can be insured of their future. Their communities of "poor" wealthy and alike all contributed to the growth of that said business. From purchasing their goods in hard times (because u know, back then America was America and American's cared for each other and their lifes work) and even solitating their city or towns product.

You are confusing individual taxes with corporate taxes. They are not the same.

Our income tax system is progressive - which means those that earn more, pay more. You seem to think that even though the rich pay more, they should get less of a tax cut than someone who paid less.

I don't know why you are putting quotes arounder the word "earner". If you sell a product, or provide a service, you earned your money.

As for income tax being unconstitutional, the last I checked, the 16th Amendment was still in effect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteen...s_Constitution

[Browning151]

Well the income tax takes money from those who "earned" it. Even though its Unconstitutional. Also, how is it that a big "earner" can be more resistant to paying their affordable dues to the country than a person who makes less which creates more of a burden for them? The person at the bottom is forced to request some assistance from government services, while the person at the top can just pay for it and even waste it.

Why do you quote earned like it's some mythical term and people who are rich just woke up that way one day? As far as paying their affordable dues, the top income earners already pay the majority of the tax burden, but I suppose we should just tax them til they're poor like everyone else, then who will provide you with a job? Also, who cares if the person at the top wants to waste money, that's their right, they earned it and they don't OWE anyone a damn thing.


Read this
and this
The tax burden for those who make less is just too high, so high in fact that 36% of them pay no federal income tax after all credits and deductions and some actually get more back on a refund than they paid in. When you factor in people who don't make enough to file a tax return that number goes up to 47% who pay no federal income tax. All that is just from a quick google search and based upon 2009 tax figures, I haven't done serious in depth research on the matter.


Here's a very simple redistribution analogy: You are a student who works their ass off and earns the top grades in the class and maintain a perfect A and there is another student who just can't quite cut it and only has a C. The end of the semester the professor comes to you and says, well since you have such a good grade and he has such a poor grade, you can afford to give him some of your points even though you earned them and he didn't. I'm going to redistribute your grades so both of you have a B average. Are you completely ok with giving up something you worked your ass off for so that someone else can have the same thing as you even though they didn't earn it?