Comments: Progressive Taxation

I think the relationship of burden you are talking about between the government and some people should also include the extremely poor. if the burden was a graph, it would look like (everyone's favorite) bell curve.

the reason I say the poor is because they use a lot of government resources and place (relatively) little back in. granted, it's probably a lot cheaper to hire a bunch of minimum wage gov't employees to handle the doling out of welfare checks than it is for the gov't to pass a treaty like NAFTA (total monitary effect on the national economy). the big difference, the very poor don't have the gov't working for them.

in the past few years, programs that were designed to help poor people get back on their feet and actually contribute to the progress of this country have been cut and squashed out of existence. all of the money has been diverted to pay for the tax cut for the rich and the "war on terror/Iraq/Osama/Sadam/...whoever". just today on the news, the almost $400 billion dollar debt was blamed, by the gov't, on these two things plus a sagging economy. on the other hand, in this time of need, we can't forget to give to our friends at Bechtel and Halliburton to support and promote the American way of life!

I'll get off my soap box for now. you just struck a nerve (you're good at that!).

thanks for letting us peek into your brain, Bryan!

ch

Posted by hareball at October 20, 2003 08:44 PM

I agree wth your point about the very poor actually drawing out more than they pay in, but I'd also venture to guess that the wealthy to a large extent have benefited far in excess of what they've actually paid in, too. Think of all those loopholes, offshore accounts, etc. the news was full of during the Enron and Tyco meltdowns.

Besides, I think common human decency kicks in at some point and we as a society believe a minimal standard of living is in everyone's interest to provide to the poor.

Posted by Bryan at October 20, 2003 10:40 PM