Dawkinsrocks
Well-Known Member
The OP was about how the burden of tax has (allegedly) shifted to the rich
-
Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum
Can you explain this?
- Thread starter PLC1
- Start date
Werbung:
Fallschirmjager
Active Member
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2008
- Messages
- 43
Which has nothing to do with the overall wealth of the rich, only their tax burden under the US tax code.
Dawkinsrocks
Well-Known Member
Oh I see.
Not
Not
Fallschirmjager
Active Member
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2008
- Messages
- 43
That's obvious, but don't worry, I'm sure that in time the eggnog will wear off and you'll be able to catch up with the rest of us.
Point makes perfect sense to me.
It does not matter how much money someone has, it matters how much taxes are being paid. The highest income levels pay a higher % of all taxes after the Bush tax cuts. That is just a simple fact. What is there not to see?
It does not matter how much money someone has, it matters how much taxes are being paid. The highest income levels pay a higher % of all taxes after the Bush tax cuts. That is just a simple fact. What is there not to see?
Werbung:
Fallschirmjager
Active Member
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2008
- Messages
- 43
Well I'm the 'new guy', so I could be wrong, but it appears to me that Dawkins is one of those "underachievers" who feels that he's been 'held down by the man', so he wants to impose some Socialist/Communist form of government on everyone in order to make things more "fair". His idea of "fair" means bringing everyone down to his level of lazy incompetence instead of promoting a system where the only limitations anyone has are based on their own desire and ability.
He's the same kind of guy who get's all P.O.'s at market capitalism because he wasn't smart enough to pass the test for the night assistant manager slot at McDonalds!
Similar threads
