If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Again, I didn’t say anything about the tax code being unfair to the rich, though I do appreciate your attempt to quickly move the goalposts onyour 91% tax rate fallacy.
I was responding (and referring) to BG but way to assume it's all about you.
It's also silly to pretend that anyone would actually pay 70% or that proposing a 70% tax bracket is equivalent to communism, but you know that is how this is being spun (not by you,just in general)
I strongly disagree with a 70% tax rate, but if you think you have the votes, have at it. I think the top bracket should be somewhere in the 40s.
Graph is included in the article. Looks like 36 or 37%.
Not saying the richest folks shouldn’t pay some more. But citing the 91% without context is silly.
It's also silly to pretend that anyone would actually pay 70% or that proposing a 70% tax bracket is equivalent to communism, but you know that is how this is being spun (not by you,just in general)
No what's silly is talking about our tax code being unfair to the rich given the unmistakable trend of increasing inequality.
Again, I didn’t say anything about the tax code being unfair to the rich, though I do appreciate your attempt to quickly move the goalposts onyour 91% tax rate fallacy.
Graph is included in the article. Looks like 36 or 37%.
Not saying the richest folks shouldn’t pay some more. But citing the 91% without context is silly.
No what's silly is talking about our tax code being unfair to the rich given the unmistakable trend of increasing inequality.
So is even a 5.6% decline justifiable when income inequality is rising?
I didn’t say it was..,I just refuted your snarky Eisenhower 91% comment. If you want to have a real discussion, let’s have at it. If you want to post Huff Post talking points without context, you’re just being a troll.
Graph is included in the article. Looks like 36 or 37%.
Not saying the richest folks shouldn’t pay some more. But citing the 91% without context is silly.
Folks complaining about their $20,000 property taxes and state income tax no longer being deductible make me laugh.....who exactly should be paying more if not those folks?
Leave a comment: