Budget talks: This is getting nasty

So to illustrate, if Person A makes $100,000 and Person B makes $10,000, and Person A pays $5,000 in taxes and Person B pays $1,000, what we need to do to stimulate the economy and get the government going is stop asking so much of Person A, right?

 

Save us, 1 percenters!

 

When was the last time anyone listened to Krugman.

 

I never made any arguments in that vein. But your example is a perfect illustration of what I was getting at. It is a fact that A shoulders 5/6th (approx. 83%) of the tax burden even though A is only half the population. It is also a fact that B pays 10% of his income in taxes, while A pays only 5%. Y'all are debating over how to interpret the facts, not the facts themselves.

 

"It's difficult to get a man to understand something if his salary depends upon his not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair

 

I love the New York Post.

 

Fredo couldn't stand Krugman, but couldn't help being aware of what he was writing, since in terms of what W was up to, Krugman consistently had him in his sights, dead to rights.

 

The "supercomittee" . . . Kyl, Toomey, Portman, on one side?

Where's Shemp? Guess he didn't get Mitch's e-mail, yet.

 

No shit. State/regional sales taxes -- likely the most regressive cashgrabs working, are a bane for many, especially in most of the major metro areas.

The so-called Flat Tax and a national sales tax . . . two of the plumpest pet regressive schemes of Pinhead O'Really and his dittoheads, all fingering themselves. . .

 

How is it regressive? You pay for what you get. If you get more, you pay more. If you get less, you pay less. That seems pretty liberal to me considering they want the rich to pay more because they can.

 

But, but, but...the rich should pay even MORE than that! Fairness and all!

 

And then in steps Mark Cuban:

http://www.thepostgame.com/blog/daily-take/201108/did-mark-cuban-predict-market-crash

His take: It's all a game.