Posted by
Playful Walrus on Monday, November 01, 2010 5:19:48 PM
There were some good comments written after
a commentary in the Los Angeles Times by Jacob S. Hacker, professor of political science at Yale, and Paul Pierson, professor of political science at UC Berkeley, arguing to let the Bush tax cuts expire for the wealthiest.
"Marphurius Parione" at 6:23 AM September 23, 2010:
What I like about this absurd editorial is that it automatically asserts two radical communist principles, as if they were values that we all commonly share: (1) That someone is obligated to pay the government more than anyone else, because they can earn more than anyone else, and, (2) That when government fails to extract more from someone that is capable of producing more, then it is 'subsidizing' them.
"genuinefor89" at 6:57 AM September 23, 2010:
If you gave everybody in America $1 million dollars today and we started from scratch, in 20 years the people that are rich now will be rich again and the people that are poor now will be poor again.
Yes, because the rich do what the rich do, and the poor do what the poor do. Plenty of people who have inherited their money or have gotten huge payoffs (like Mike Tyson) for some sporting or entertainment ability or even a lawsuit or lottery have spent it all and ended up bankrupt. On the other hand, people from very modest means have grown rich through their risks, hard work, innovation, and investment.
"TimBowman" at 11:49 AM September 23, 2010 didn’t disappoint:
I still fail to see how taxing people at a higher percentage based on what they earn is democratic, albeit is certainly Democratic. Nonetheless, to satisfy your sense of moral outrage, I propose a tax increase on college professors who just can't get it that capital gains stimulate the economy far more than taxes will ever do.
It is good to see that there are some people out there who get it.
Voting tomorrow for TEA Party candidates will send a message about taxes and spending.