Originally posted by Arlo
Actually, your opinion of relevancy is relative to prespective. Ain't it? No different than mine. But your argument still seems to beg more taxation on the rich, by your Kennedy family example. (Wait .... you thought I was a Democrat, didn't ya?
). And the top five percent makes equivalently more. You act as if their paying more in taxes is a real tragedy. Guess I'm not seeing reason to weep.
The real relevant point was that the "tax the rich" gag is just that - a gag. The super-rich have the lawyers and loopholes to avoid the taxes. The guys that end up paying the big tax bills are the middle class and small business guys who are just out there earning a living.
You could have upped the estate tax to 99% and the Kennedy's wouldn't have been the ones that would be hurt by it - they've got the offshore trusts and foundations holding their cash. On the other hand, the farmer holding a few thousand acres of nice real estate that's been in the family 50 years - his family gets a million dollar estate tax bill when grandpa dies. Thats tax fairness?
If you really want to "tax the rich", then you should tax them like everybody else. Do a flat tax with no deductions, or a Federal VAT so that everybody pays the same rate and I would bet that the total number of dollars paid into the system by the "rich" would suddenly skyrocket.
The only problem I really see with it is that when the revenue skyrockets, the porkers in Congress will just spend that much more.