sundin13 said:
Why not fix the broken tax code and increase taxes? These two things don't need to be mutually exclusive (and I disagree with your implication that increasing taxes on the wealthy doesn't help. It helps. It could help more, but it helps). Like I said, one isn't an argument against the other. As for the exclusion of food, that doesn't fix the problem. You'd have to carve out a lot more than food. If you actually want a tax only on luxury items, call it a luxury tax and then have no illusions that it isn't going to solve any budget crisis. As for what is considered rich, the reason no one has answered (imo) is because it is a silly question. It isn't a binary where if you make, say, $999,999 you aren't rich and then if you make, say, $1,000,000 you are rich. That is why progressive taxation exists in a scale. As individuals make more money, they pay more taxes. |
Do we need to do both?
And nobody, including yourself, can define rich. Which means your argument is weak.
Define it.
You and others want to raise taxes on the "rich." What defines rich?
When do the increased taxes kick in?
Define rich.
Edit
And nobody, not a single person, in this thread has argued against a progressive tax system. In fact I'm on record as supporting progressive taxes.
So why are you fighting an argument nobody made?
Last edited by Chrkeller - on 07 August 2024