We repeatedly hear the Democrats pontificate about the wealthy paying their "fair share" toward the nurturing of the nanny state. How can they give bread and circuses to the mouth-breathing masses that vote them into office without lots of money. I mean, really, there is a limit to how much you can borrow from China and the bearings on the printing presses for scrip are over-heating. You've got to get real money from someone. Just as Willy Sutton said he robbed banks because, "that's where the money is," you have to tax the rich because they've got something.
How much do you want to tax them? Well according to this Wall Street Journal item:
Can We Get to Two-Thirds?
So even the Left has got to recognize at some point when you pull that much out of the pockets of the successful that there isn't much left for research, capital investment and job creation. But, that probably doesn't outweigh the need for re-election pandering.
2 comments:
*like!*
I'm beginning to like the suggestion that instead of Congressional Elections, every two years 435 individuals are selected at random from the phone books of each district, paid $1 million/year for two years then removed from the database preventing redrawing their name forever. I don't think it could be any worse than the current system.
Post a Comment