Quote:
Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan
Well frankly this thread is ridiculous because it began with an article about how these people would be nailed if they had to pay an additional 3% on the $50,000 they make over $250K (i.e. the extra $1,500 they wouldn't see each year and that would sink them apparently). I think the whole idea of a progressive tax structure has really flown over a lot of people's heads here. Those tax cuts were bad financial policy to begin with, but if we are so intent on keeping helping those who make significantly more than $250K then let's do some serious cost cutting. Stop paying for the Iraq War with supplementals that hide the true cost, have massive cuts to social programs, cut government spending across the board. I'm sure that will not increase economic inequality and a healthy society is all that important anyway. Get yours if you can get it, if you can't then clearly you were not cut out for the great race of life. Survival of the fittest as Herbert Spencer would say.
|
I have to wonder whether this whole debate is about what is fiscally wise or what "feels right." The former issue is up for debate as I highly doubt that anyone here is qualified to say with a very high degree of certainty that any tax scheme is what is best for our country. The latter issue is I think what is dominanting the conversation. I never would have thought that a discussion about tax schemes could become so heated.