This article is much more about emotion and generalizations than numbers. It suggests that people who agree or disagree with some tax policy proposals: (a) do

This article is much more about emotion and generalizations than numbers. It suggests that people who agree or disagree with some tax policy proposals: (a) do so based on the tax bracket they're in; and (b) aren't being cowboys or men if they happen to advocate a policy that would reduce or maintain their current tax burden. Is this really what we need in the political debate? More emotion and personal attacks? No, what we need is better accounting, more numbers-based analysis, and voters who take their duty seriously and as objectively as possible. My opinion: I think that closing loopholes and eliminating tax breaks across the board (not just for rich people), and generally simplifying the tax code is the best approach. And that nearly everyone should pay some net taxes. I also think stability is important, so we could announce such changes and apply them gradually over a long period of time.