| radishhead said: I actually messed up a little bit - I meant to say $200,000. I actually hate the higher taxes in place in the UK - my household falls into the higher rate (40%), and it actually works out worse than if my father was in a job that paid £20,000 less - either way, I accept that it's a good thing for the economy, and it makes no sense why the richer americans get let off so lightly |
If you hate your higher taxes, then why are you arguing for them for Americans?
It's not a matter of 'getting off so lightly'. Our actual tax rate for the wealthiest is 38%. Additionally, tax rates are entirely pertinent to what your government provides. For example, your postal system is horrendously inefficient and costs a lot of taxpayer money. You are paying higher taxes for less work. Comparatively, we are not - at least in that area.
The argument shouldn't be for higher taxes, but an honest discussion about what taxes should pay for, then decide exactly what kind of taxes are needed to pay for said services. As I've said earlier, there was a time in America and the UK that almost no one paid taxes, because the government simply engaged in the very basic needs for people. We should address the question of if that was beneficial or not.
Back from the dead, I'm afraid.
