posts from hell
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2004
- Messages
- 9,371
- Reaction score
- 7
I'd have a lot more respect for these guys if they would decide that as a condition of joining their Patriotic Millionaires group, members would have to donate x percent of their income to the treasury so their effective tax rate is what they're demanding the law should be. Otherwise, their only purpose is to bask in the glow of their own self-righteousness while sleeping on their pile of $100 bills.
I'd have a lot more respect for these guys if they would decide that as a condition of joining their Patriotic Millionaires group, members would have to donate x percent of their income to the treasury so their effective tax rate is what they're demanding the law should be. Otherwise, their only purpose is to bask in the glow of their own self-righteousness while sleeping on their pile of $100 bills.
Yeah, I guess ten or twelve men demanding to "tax me more" while exposing themselves to charges of hypocrisy is much more effective. :roll:You do understand, don't you that they are making the statement that tax laws are inequitable and need to be changed for all upper income brackets? Ten or twelve men making a voluntary donation is hardly a solution to the inequities in the tax burden.
Yeah, I guess ten or twelve men demanding to "tax me more" while exposing themselves to charges of hypocrisy is much more effective. :roll:
Just curious though, if they get what they want, it'll raise about $70 billion a year, according to static analyses. If that happens, will you be satisfied that tax laws are then equitable?
I'd have a lot more respect for these guys if they would decide that as a condition of joining their Patriotic Millionaires group, members would have to donate x percent of their income to the treasury so their effective tax rate is what they're demanding the law should be. Otherwise, their only purpose is to bask in the glow of their own self-righteousness while sleeping on their pile of $100 bills.
You do understand, don't you that they are making the statement that tax laws are inequitable and need to be changed for all upper income brackets? Ten or twelve men making a voluntary donation is hardly a solution to the inequities in the tax burden.
Valid point. 24 men making a one time donation to the Federal Reserve vs all those who fall within a certain income bracket paying increased taxes. About time too - the lowest income brackets pay the most in income tax.
They're demanding they pay their "fair share" but refusing to do so voluntarily. If they're concerned with fairness, they should lead by example rather than continuing to indulge in the unfairness.Where is the hypocrisy?
They could give their money agencies that help people in need.
They're demanding they pay their "fair share" but refusing to do so voluntarily. If they're concerned with fairness, they should lead by example rather than continuing to indulge in the unfairness.
How about my question? If they get the policies they're demanding, would you be satisfied that the tax laws are equitable?
They're demanding they pay their "fair share" but refusing to do so voluntarily. If they're concerned with fairness, they should lead by example rather than continuing to indulge in the unfairness.
How about my question? If they get the policies they're demanding, would you be satisfied that the tax laws are equitable?
I'd rather they demand ALL those who fall within their income bracket pay increased taxes as a law rather than just a select few making voluntary donations.