TheRealMafoo said:
Sigh.... that's not the same. Paying twice as much in taxes as a poor person, for a service we all receive, is far different then telling me I am going to pay for a service for that poor person, that I am not eligible for. I see how progressive taxes can be construed as indenturing people, but I am less worried about it if I am at least reaping a benefit from it. Most of the time, rich people get more out of it. For example, Bill Gates has a much more to lose if we get invaded by another country, so it stands that he should pay more to protect it. If I have an expensive car, I care that the roads are in better shape. I should pay more to maintain them. Can you not see the difference?
|
Show me one vibrant economy that doesn't have a progressive income tax.
We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls. The only thing that really worried me was the ether. There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke
It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...." Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson
