Defending the Truth

I feel the more you make, the more you should have to pay in taxes. The more you have the more you can afford to give back and be perfectly comfortable.

If conservatives actually gave support to social programs they wouldn't be a waste.

sgtdmski wroteYou are saying, then, that the inhabitants of the States would not only be paying taxes through the purchases that they make, but would be paying an added tax on top of that with a flat tax on the money that they are paid.

I feel that everyone should pay a fare share...

Maybe music artists, and others who make millions can pay more into it, but if you are going to tax small business owners who make under 100,000 a year, well maybe that's why there's a high percentage of small businesses failing within the first 3 years of operation. I don't recall the number, but it was well over 50%.

I don't think it should matter what you do for a living, only how much you make. The more you make the more you should have to pay. Seems logical.

The harder you work, the more you shall be penalized is how I see it.

The more luxury you have in life the more you should be expected to give back. We are in this together. We all affect each other. Not a penalty, a duty.

I only wish what was given back was used in a wise fashion.

If I were to purchase more luxury in life...I am giving back (taxes)

And how is that different than the system we have now??? We pay income taxes annually, and everytime we make a purchase in a store, we pay a sales tax. Your point?

dmk

The current "progressive" system not only requires that the rich pay more money into the system, but also that they pay a higher percentage of what they earn, as hev would call it their duty. Well what duty do those who are not rich have?? Under this system it seems that their only duty is to accept the money.

Some of the richest people in this country are also the most charitable. It has always been this way, yes there are some exceptions, however, even before the progressive tax system and the need for charitable contributions for tax write-offs, the rich have given back. Carnegie established public libraries, Rockefellar established public parks, and many other contributed to schools to help.

When you punish success you punish achievement. When your reward failure, you reward apathy. Why work hard to make it on your own, when the government will give you more money for not working??? If you want to say that the rich have a duty to give more money to the less fortunate, then the less fortunate have a duty to work harder so that they can one day give more money to those who are less fortunate than them.

Even under a flat tax percentage, the rich still pay more, not in the sense of percentage but rather in actual money. 10% of $30,000 is $3,000 while 10% of $300,000 is $30,000. The last time I checked $30,000 was some 9 times greater than $3,000. But the problem with our progressive friends is that if the percentage is not greater then the burden is not greater. This is why are tax system is broken.

dmk

We aren't talking about what you purchase but what income you earn. Someone who is working within a system that allows them to have a luxurious life should support that system heavier than those that do not.