3 ms·
I would argue that the state is taking, not the rich (which are not the only people with money invested in the market).
by thecopy 12y ago
I would argue that the state is taking, not the rich (which are not the only people with money invested in the market).
- toomuchtodo 12y agoFeel free to head to Somalia then. I hear they have a wonderful libertarian system setup. EDIT: Seriously folks, taxes pay for civilization. If you don't like it, don't work (so you don't have to pay) or leave. Roads, schools, fire, police, infrastructure aren't built with unicorn dust.
- icebraining 12y agoThe context was the differences in tax rates, not taxes as a whole. You can support the concept of taxation while considering the State takes more than it should from certain groups.
- toomuchtodo 12y agoTaxes in the US are at the lowest levels since 1941 [1]. OP I replied to commented that the State was taking from them. Of course the State takes. It provides the framework you operate in that allows you to make that income. If anything, taxes should be much higher for a number we should agree on (whether that's $500K/year, $1MM/year, or $10MM/year is TBD). What group is the State taking "more than it should" from? [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States#Income_tax_rates_in_history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States...
- burntsushi 12y ago> Of course the State takes. Then you're agreeing with the commenter that you initially responded to! > I would argue that the state is taking, not the rich
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- icebraining 12y agoWhat group is the State taking "more than it should" from? The poor, arguably (e.g. through regressive taxes).
- toomuchtodo 12y agoI would agree with that.
- SigmundA 12y agoThat would be like arguing your landlord is taking your rent.
- thecopy 12y agoNot at all. Your relationship with the landlord is voluntary.
- Frondo 12y agoThat would not be a well-supported argument.