You forgot offshoring jobs and worshipping the devil No.. the problem lies in the fact that the Bush tax cuts were made with the promise of jobs. Where are the jobs? The repubs believe cutting taxes will increase jobs. I doubt it. Just look at Buffet. If you give Buffet 1 million more dollars, what will he do with it? Hire people? Or just buy stocks. What are Buffett's expenditures? And you will see that his expenditures are not that different from a guy with only 1 million dollars. In that sense a flat tax is idiotic and a progressive tax is much more desirable. Just look at the graph I posted. Even with a progressive tax, rich quadrupled their income by 400% in 40 years. Progressive tax is not the problem. But I hear ya. A progressive tax is "not fair". Rich earned their money. But sometimes you have to ignore principle and do what works. Look at communism. In principle, you got a good idea. But it just doesn't work. Look at the number of countries with flat tax. There are only 20 out of 160. That 15%. Do you think 85% of the world are evil leftists liberals? Or...maybe progressive tax works better than flat tax?? Here's another example http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shawn-lawrence-otto/rick-perry-abstinence_b_904115.html Abstinence works.. but yet it doesn't.
I believe that was tried once, didn't end well. That said, the country was formed by seceding; it's funny how we excoriate secession talk in one breath and yammer about the right of self-determination in the other.
Tax Cuts for the Middle Class and Poor STIMULATE The Economy, But Tax Cuts for the Wealthy HURT The Economy Extreme conservatives push for tax cuts ... but just for the wealthy. Extreme liberals are against all tax cuts, believing that we need higher taxes to pay for government programs ... and that taxes somehow won't create any drag on the economy. Both extremes are wrong. In fact, tax cuts for the middle class and poor stimulate the economy, but tax cuts for the wealthy hurt the economy. http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/07/its-simple-tax-cuts-for-middle-class.html This isn't complicated. Rampant inequality largely caused the Great Depression and the current economic crisis (and see this). Cutting taxes on the middle and lower classes reduces inequality and stimulates the consumer economy. But cutting taxes for the wealthy reduces aggregate consumer demand.
I said any "stealing" was gov't enabled. Only the biggest, most gov't-connected players can do that by supporting laws and regulations that push out competition. I refuted the claim that lowering taxes was stealing from anyone. Really, it's just Reading Comprehension 101 stuff.
47 % of US Adults pay no Federal Income Tax - that is an IRS published fact. So whom are you referring to ?
Let's play fair. The one who REALLY went out of his way promising jobs was Obama with his record-breaking Spedulous. Remember, the unemployment rate would never go above 8%? Instead, it's remained naggingly above 8% since that time. With Bush, the main problems were all the spending--two wars, Medicare Part D (what a convervative idea, George!), etc. We have no way of knowing what the tax cuts would've done ceteris paribus.
MK Trader: Alberta has a flat tax and it works well. Alberta ships tons of money to support many provinces (It was not always so - they hit the wall in debt once). When the socalists heard about it, they did the following: Imported union members from BC to protest because the workers on strike in Alberta weren't vocal enough Denounced every change in healthcare costs government made as against the principles of healthcare and destroying Alberta. Came on the radio and announced that Alberta should tax their people more so that they could tax their own more. Too many people were moving into Alberta from higher tax provinces. When it was pointed out that we didn't have a use for the money that a provincial sales tax would add, they said take it anyways so we can raise our own taxes to compete. etc. etc. The sad fact is, that there will never be enough money for socialism and they are not interested in negotiating the facts. Don't get me wrong. I think that there is nothing wrong with giving temporary support to those who need it through bad luck, but I don't know of a way to shut off the taps once they are opened. The needs grow exponentially as people become dependent on the state. There seems to be no plan to return them to stand on their own feet again. It is problem that I have spent a lot of time thinking about.