4 ms·
Your riposte is a strawman argument on whether the rich should benefit more from the government because they pay more and their taxes help others (their same we
by ethn 9y ago
Your riposte is a strawman argument on whether the rich should benefit more from the government because they pay more and their taxes help others (their same wealth that wouldn't have been possible without the government).
The government does not collect taxes, to privilege the wealthy to exclusive services. Quite the opposite, government provides services that benefits everyone instead of one minority group.
In redundancy, as I stated, I'm not a classist and I'm not disparaging the wealthy.
- adventured 9y ago> Your riposte is a strawman argument on whether the rich should benefit more from the government That's incorrect. My post was about two simple things: the parent argument was wrong, presenting an overwhelmingly false narrative factually; and second, that there is very little to be concerned about regarding the top 1/3 of income earners partially subsidizing a Tesla or SpaceX (or NASA, they also pay for that too), it's a non-problem.
- ethn 9y agoYou've ignored the body of my reply, you're being extremely parsimonious. Any money from taxes that does not benefit the general tax payer, is at the expense to the common tax payer (not to mention the neglect of the collection of payment for the externality costs for the privilege to common land). You are now arguing that it doesn't matter where taxes are spent because it comes mostly from the rich. If that was the case, imagine if government only spent taxes on frivolous and unproven projects for private enterprise. It is doubtful that any government would continue to exist. It's a strange claim considering that the government continues to be over-budget year after year.