EU and UK politics [OT]

[Chrkeller]

sundin13 said:

Chrkeller said:

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?  

You advocated for a consumption tax (excluding food). This is a regressive tax.
Chrkeller: "I think, at least in the US, a consumption tax makes sense. 10% federal sales on all non food purchases."

You also made numerous statements criticizing the idea of increasing taxes on those with more wealth.
Chrkeller: "if I already pay more in taxes then most people make, why should I pay more?"
Chrkeller: "Now that I have investments people want to tax me more. Not sure how any of that makes sense to me."

You also stated that raising taxes on those with more wealth won't do anything, or won't help.
Chrkeller: "Raising taxes in a broken system isn't going to help."

My arguments are:

A) We should not introduce a consumption tax, as even without taxing food, this will be a regressive tax.
Note: A luxury tax is a very different thing with its own set of pro's and con's. If you wish to advocate for that, the conversation would be different. 

B) Why should those with more wealth pay more? Because they have a greater ability to pay more without a significant sacrifice in quality of life. 

C) Raising taxes on the upper class does generate revenue for the government. While some of that tax may be dodged in a variety of ways, taxes on this class do still increase revenue. As such, I don't believe "there are loopholes right now" is an argument against increasing these tax brackets, but instead a somewhat separate discussion.

D) I see no value in answering your question of "what is rich" with a number. Either explain why this question is so meaningful or get over it.

If you see no value in addressing my points/questions then you are only interested in a one way discussion.  A shame really, but no skin off my back.

You can't answer the question which proves my point.