If we all pay what you consider an equal share then we should all have an equal amount to lose or gain… and we do not. So what to do about that if equal shares is your concern. Any ideas?

And why won’t Mitt release his tax returns?

Also, why does he say a flat tax will hurt the middle class and that would be bad for business? Isn’t that quite different than what you allege? And yet you support him? Of course he does flip flop around on the topic so maybe you’re not quite up to date on his various discussions of the subject.

Does the propensity to consumer rise or fall with income? And does it benefit business and the economy if the middle class is consuming?

Baloney patrol is accurate, if you include all taxes and fees the highest earners pay a smaller percentage of their income in taxess

Well of course…because if you include all taxes and fees the highest earners pay a much smaller percentage of their income in taxes.

You need to patrol your own baloney. We are talking income taxes, not capital gains, which is actually a double tax. The initial investment was already taxed via the income tax, so you are wrong, as usual. Another day, another liberal scam exposed.

The top 50% wage earners pay 95% of all income taxes. Just because you don’t like people pointing that out, doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

JEN: “The upper class, by the by, is usually defined as the top 1% . . .”

. . . and they pay about 40% of all income taxes, whereas the top 5% pay about 60% of all income taxes. Whatever way you break it down, the rich pay more, therefore, their tax cuts should be more.

A flat tax is the only way we all pay an equal share of government. That way when you liberals propose spending and tax increases, it’s not just the job creators and most successful that bear the brunt. You wouldn’t be so quick to steal the fruits of the people’s labor in that case, but when it’s the evil rich, who cares right? Until we all pay, with a stagnant economy.

Wrong again, as usual. Most of the income of the very highest earners is taxed as capital gains at only 15%.

(hint: as income rises, it drops)

I did, that’s how I know you are inaccurate and really have no idea what you’re talking about.

I encourage to look it up too and to perform the whole cost-benefit analysis. Yes, you do need to do one because everyone knows that some have more to lose without certain services and social goods and those who have most to lose are those with the most, to put it in the most simple terms.

The upper class, by the by, is usually defined as the top 1% with household incomes exceeding $250,000 annually. To be considered “rich” most people think you’re net worth must be over $1 million.

What is the average percentage of the income those rich pay? How much do they have to lose without the benefits that come from societal goods such as national defense, infrastructure, etc? (More … ) Do you claim that we have a progressive taxation system with no credits, incentives, loopholes or tax breaks?As income rises, does the marginal propensity rise or drop?

I gave you the numbers. And, my source is the federal government. Look it up.

JEN: “How do you define ‘rich’?”

Top 50% wage earners. They pay 95% of all income taxes.

JEN: “. . . what cost-benefit analysis do you use to determine “fair” share . . .”

Do you really need a cost-benefit analysis to know that Americans paying the same share of government via the same tax percentage is fair? Freedom and fairness don’t require such obfuscation, as it comes natural to most Americans. Only dishonest liberals . . .

JEN: “. . . such secure property rights, highways and infrastructure, national defense and so on?

All possible with a flat tax that ensures we all pay our equal share of government. Why do you insist some Americans not pay their fair share of government? That’s right, it’s necessary for Democrats to win elections.