Originally Posted by tonton
Anyone arguing for a flat tax, for starters. And that would include you.
That isn't necessarily true.
First, if government spending was substantially reduced (and it should be) then taxes could be reduced for everyone
Second, the revised tax burden, if spread among more people would also reduce the amount of burden that any one individual would have further.
Third, the substantial reduction in taxes, government spending and general government economic destruction would so help the poor that, again, whatever small amount of taxes these poor would pay would be nothing.
Forth, reducing the tax burden on the poor is quite simply not the best way to help the poor (nor is government welfare by the way).
Fifth, some exemption could be provided for the most extreme poor for which even the significantly reduced government tax burden was still a burden could be implemented if the other things didn't help them as much as it help others.
Sixth, reducing the tax burden on all people would let them keep the money they have earned which they can use to help poor people more directly rather than through government welfare. Or, better yet, by creating and expanding enterprises that employ people (including the poor) not to mention producing more, better and cheaper products and services for everyone (including the poor.)
Seventh, if you really want to help the poor get out of poverty, de-progressivize the income tax or stop taxing income altogether. The progressive income tax should be more properly called the "anti-wealth accumulation tax" or the "keep poor people poor tax." If you understood this you'd be much less enthusiastic about it. Assuming you actually cared about the poor enough to understand the real effects of government policies rather than the imagined, hoped for and good intentions of them.
Finally, arguing that taxes should (and can) be reduced on the rich is not
the same as making the argument you claim is being made which was:
Originally Posted by tonton
yet you all complain that the rich pay too much taxes compared to the poor and, "it's not faaaaair... waah waaah waaahhh!!!!!"
But if you wish to argue against the caricatures in your head, so be it. I'm sure it's much easier than dealing with reality, real people and real statements.
What you don't seem to get is that I want to see lower taxes for everyone
. Less government involvement for everyone's
lives. Let government control of everyone's
lives. Less government immorality for everyone
. More freedom for everyone
It's become ever more clear from your posts (and those of your fellow liberals) that you do not
share the goal of trying to get more freedom for everyone, perhaps because some
people are less deserving of it in your view
. It's clear that you only value freedom for some people of your choosing. Your brand of morality (for all of your Bible-spouting*) divides people into different groups or classes who each deserve different treatment under the law and differing levels of freedom based on whatever calculus you deem to be the right formula. That's an extremely dangerous view that leads to great horrors, the least of which is slavery.
*You ought to read your Bible a bit more too. While God does command his people to help the poor, this is an individual command. It is action that is to come from the hearts of individuals and not be forcibly coerced from unwilling individuals through government. Additionally, God created a world in which people are to have freedom and liberty. Free will and choice. He does not coerce people into His prescribed morality, but rather "lures" them into God-honoring behavior through His love, grace and mercy and their grateful response to those things. So before you step up to the pulpit again, you might consider a more thorough and comprehensive reading and understanding of this book of God's.