Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
Because, Taxwonk, because!
First, why do you say that the wealthiest Americans don't work? Do you start from the proposition that all wealth over some certain amount is unearned and undeserved? Seems to me that, in our capitalist system, the ones with the most money (who are made up, by and large, of small business owners, (who, BTW, employ one or two people in our system). and NOT your hated inheritance babies) have, by definition, provided value to enough people who were willing to trade money for their efforts to amass wealth. "Value" isn't an unknown term - it means that they made the people who gave them their money satisfied that they took something from that business owner that was worth what they paid. Is a dollar earned shoveling shit more noble than one earned designing and selling water purification systems? If that's the case, let's do away with schools, and strive for the uneducated life of mules. No? You mean we value education, because an educated person can accomplish more than simply the sum of their muscle capacity? And yet, to you, the results of that education - the ability to work smarter, instead of just stronger - is an ignoble thing? Like it or not, people who cannot offer to other people any product or service that is valuable to those other people are not going to do as well as those who can. That makes sense, because they bring little to the table. Yes, these people should be supported. But, I would stop far short of your seeming wish to elevate those people to some position of nobility and honor over those who CAN do something valuable. They're not exalted because of their lack - they're simply lacking. Likewise, the people you denigrate - the productive ones who make money - don't deserve your scorn based on that very ability to make money.
|
My complaint is that the biggest tax breaks were given to those who don't earn their income. Look at the two biggest tax cuts; the dividend cut and the reduced captial gains tax. Neither of those are aimed at the business owners you are talking about. Once again, your typical wage earner, even your high-income typical wage earner owns his or her stocks by and large through 401(k) plans and IRAs. The value of stock held by those plans doesn't benefit from a reduced tax on dividends or capital gains. Those tax breaks are designed to help Ken Lay and others who earn most of their money through privately held investments.
I don't exalt shovelling shit over designing and building air or water purification systems or practicing law. On the contrary, I am suggesting that both are disadvantaged over income derived from private investment. I don't even exalt income earned through wages from income earned through private investment. I believe that both should be taxed on an equal basis, and that the people who earn far more of either investment, wage, or business income than most should shoulder a greater percentage of the tax burden.
I don't know where you got the idea that I have scorn for any particular group of taxpayer. I submit that you're projecting. If you can, point to one statement I've made that supports this assertion of yours.
Quote:
Second, you seem to live a life (or at least you argue arguments) defined by envy. You've said that, yes, the middle class got a tax break. (More importantly, the middle class avoided the tax raise that would have come in Goreworld, but that's a different topic.) We did - I got a tax break. I distinctly remember it. But, you say that the rich got a bigger break as a way to prove that the middle class did NOT get the tax break promised. (Your words were "did not benefit the middle class".) I don't get this. The tax break that I get is dimished because someone else got a bigger one? Nope - I still saved that thousand bucks.
Wow, this could have used more paragraph breaks.
|
The tax break you got isn't diminished because someone else got a larger one. The tax break you got is diminished because it was much smaller than Bush claimed it would be when he was pushing it, and it's musch msaller than Bush now claims it is. On the other hand, the top 1% of taxpayers got a tax break that was more than 5 times the size of the one you got.
In other words, Bush lied. That is my point. Bush lied. He said he was going to make life better for all taxpayers, and he didn't. Instead, he took care of his largest contributors, and threw you and I a bone. Am I going to turn down the bone? No.
But am I going to vote for a man who lied? Not if his name is George Bush.
