XR7Kurt: For one, if you are poorer than me...I feel for you. Heh. Working to put one's self through college means ultra broke. And two, how many ultra rich people do you hear being praised for their ethics? Excluding actors and such...they just step on other actor's toes. But thinking back I can only think of one, Sam Johnson, owner of SC Johnson Wax. He's a good fella. I met his son, though. He's a prick if there ever was one.
1BADSC: The problem with the flat tax is that you will be doing the same thing as Bush's tax cuts. You will have to find a middle ground percentage which will raise taxes for the poor (which is something they don't need) and lower taxes for the rich (which is something they don't need). Taxing spending, once again, is a swing and a miss. It will once again be a HUGE cut for the rich (who spend about 40% of their income, assuming) and a HUGE increase for the poor (who spend, on average, 102% of their income according to recent statistics). The law says taxes must be levied FAIRLY. Both a flat tax and a spending tax would negate that. Yes, rich people spend more than poor people, but they also make a lot more than they spend. And, frankly, if the rich want to whine about how much they get taxed, tell them I'll gladly trade places with them. I will gladly take over their fortune and pay their taxes, and they can take over my debt and live tax free forever.
Subsequently, I notice you must be reading a lot of Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity...you know...those crazy conservatives who call liberals "un-American" and say "liberals hate America" and such...just because we disagree with our president and speak out against him...which is the most American thing you could possibly do. Not to mention it doesn't kill our troops and/or civilians of other third world nations. And considering that the number of people in poverty always decreases under Democratic leadership...yeah...I would say we like to keep the poor poor. I mean, ALL rich fat cats are Democrats and LOVE to make the poor suffer. It makes for good entertainment, don'tcha know. And what are these entitlement programs and such that our taxes go to pay for? Well, let's take a look...
Military support, welfare (because people DO fall on hard times), unemployment (because Republicans have a tendancy to cause job losses), schools (which Republicans have implemented a lousy program to guide...and then underfunded it by 7 mil), highway maintenence (so you can drive your SC cross country), job training (to keep up with the ever changing job market), medical research (as long as it's not "immoral" stem cell research...which has the potential to cure just about the remainder of diseases on this planet though harm to no one and nothing), social awareness education (at least moreso under Democrats, under Republicans this usually amounts to nothing more than "kids...don't have sex until you're married. It's bad, mmkay?"), and, in general, protecting the freedom and way of life of our country.
And a few closing comments:
1. Bush and the Republican congress DID eliminate the so-called death tax, even though Democrats (namely Russ Feingold, D-WI)were willing to raise the bar to $8million to protect "family farms" which the Republicans were so worried about. Republicans rejected this and went ahead with repealing the ESTATE tax...you know...to protect all the family farms worth $8million or more...which there are none. So, it's official, the rich DO get all the breaks. Now all they have to do is just hurry up and die to take advantage of it.
2. This "socialist" name calling is uncalled for. If it continues I will just start using the term "fascist" to refer to conservatives. Childish, yes, but perhaps this could be seen as an ultimatum to refrain from name calling.
3. Why did the original post disappear, Sly?