To answer Bernie Heideman's questions about what is "more likely" for most people ("The rich just keep getting richer, May 30), I need to point out that fueling resentment against the super rich by reminding the rest of us what we DON'T have is non productive argument. Tax increases on any segment of society trickle down to increased costs for the rest of us.
Increasing the rate for high income earners encourages them to earn less, produce less and that would include job creation, charitable contributions, etc. We are still left with a tax code full of credits, exemptions and deductions rife for abuse by taxpayers in any bracket. This has resulted in more than 40 percent of households in America paying no federal income tax at all.
A more valid argument can and should be made for the Fair Tax or even the Flat Tax, so perhaps the politicians we should be looking for are ones who legislate for sharing the "burden." To most of us, this "share the wealth" crap translates into nothing more than one group of people being given what another group has earned. Heideman would whine that the Bush tax cuts help benefit the wealthy, but the majority of wage earners paid higher income taxes on lower wages under Clinton. Though income and employment are two separate taxes, Obama's idea of a middle class break is to reduce social security tax contributions. Where is the outrage at that? Why are there no plans to take the cap off the wage amount subject to social security tax? That would at least provide more funding for the social security that so many are likely to rely on and would "take" more from the wealthy which it seems is the point of his letter.
Paoniablog comments powered by Disqus