Is our tax system progressive enough?

[quote name='gareman']The reason I think it is not fair is because the extra income one has (which can be directed the more income one makes) the less it impacts someone's life. If one is living paycheck to paycheck 5% of the 100 dollars or so that person has to provide food, shelter, clothes, and leisure for oneself is far more impacted then 5% for someone whom has an extra 2,000 dollars a week for those things.[/QUOTE]
True, but if we exempt, say the first 30k of income, then those people who really can't afford the tax don't pay it. Or we could simply charge the tax to EVERYONE, but continue with the EIC.
 
[quote name='Revenantae']Point by point...
1: Granted
2: Granted
3: Really? Based on what do you say that? Define corruption.
4: Really? Based on what do you say that? Major causes of death in the U.S. (according to the CDC) are as follows:
* Heart disease: 652,091
* Cancer: 559,312
* Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 143,579
* Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 130,933
* Accidents (unintentional injuries): 117,809
* Diabetes: 75,119
* Alzheimer's disease: 71,599
* Influenza/Pneumonia: 63,001
* Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 43,901
* Septicemia: 34,136
Not much there that is "caused by rich people's crimes".
5: Granted, but we aren't limiting a child's opportunities, and I don't think anyone is advocating that. Poor children have access to schools same as any class. What you get out of school is, for the most part, a function of what you put into it. After K12, there are grants, tuition waivers, loans, and scholarships all available for higher education. If things are so 'impossible' how is it that F.O.B. immigrants are able to get an education and succeed?[/quote]
3. Paying(contributing ect..) politicians to enact polices which hurt society to benefit them.
4. I was referring to death and damages caused by crime not deaths and damages on the whole.
5. Most poor kids' schools suck, and they poverty the live in is going to affect there opportunities, Or is it a coincidence that most people end up the same economic class the started in.
 
[quote name='Revenantae']True, but if we exempt, say the first 30k of income, then those people who really can't afford the tax don't pay it. Or we could simply charge the tax to EVERYONE, but continue with the EIC.[/quote]


So what would be the conclusion to this argument? Same % still does not equal same impact on someone's life. Thus the fact that you say someone under 30,000 probably should be exempt shows us that you believe a flat tax is not "fair".
 
[quote name='itachiitachi']3. Paying(contributing ect..) politicians to enact polices which hurt society to benefit them.
4. I was referring to death and damages caused by crime not deaths and damages on the whole.
5. Most poor kids' schools suck, and they poverty the live in is going to affect there opportunities, Or is it a coincidence that most people end up the same economic class the started in.[/QUOTE]
3: I would argue that most of our politicians need hanging on that basis, but it's not just rich people that give. It's also people like you and me giving small amount, or companies, or organizations. It's too broad to just blame that all on "rich people".
4: If it's crime statistics you are looking it, then you would be looking at the poor, since they are the ones committing a disproportionate number of crimes.
5: The fact is that you can get good grades at any school if you try. You're right about the poverty line, but it's not that they don't have opportunities, but that they are not encouraged to take advantage of them. I don't have statistics about class movement available at the moment, so I can't really address it. All I can say is that the tools to get an education are available to all.
 
[quote name='gareman']So what would be the conclusion to this argument? Same % still does not equal same impact on someone's life. Thus the fact that you say someone under 30,000 probably should be exempt shows us that you believe a flat tax is not "fair".[/QUOTE]
YOU sir.... have a good point, I concede the argument to you.
 
[quote name='Revenantae']
4: If it's crime statistics you are looking it, then you would be looking at the poor, since they are the ones committing a disproportionate number of crimes.[/quote]

Just to interject, I am pretty sure this is completely incorrect. Laws are tilted in favor of the rich and the poor are punished disproportionately for committing identical crimes.
 
[quote name='willardhaven']Just to interject, I am pretty sure this is completely incorrect. Laws are tilted in favor of the rich and the poor are punished disproportionately for committing identical crimes.[/quote]

Name one good example other than cocaine.
 
corporate crime. PCA's salmonella scandal resulted in 9 deaths, yet nobody was charged with manslaughter.

The Utah mine collapse last year showed that the company willfully overlooked keeping up to OSHA standards, finding that it was cheaper to pay severances to dead miners' families and fines instead.

Fines. For what amounts to murder.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Name one good example other than cocaine.[/quote]


Cigarette companies (said the guy smoking a cigarette right now)
 
[quote name='willardhaven']Just to interject, I am pretty sure this is completely incorrect. Laws are tilted in favor of the rich and the poor are punished disproportionately for committing identical crimes.[/QUOTE]
Feel free, we're all just having fun :)
I would imagine you are correct there, since a lot of what determines your conviction/sentencing is what sort of lawyer you can afford. However, when it comes to the violent crimes he's talking about, the rich folks just don't DO a whole lot of it (well... maybe Phil Spector).
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Name one good example other than cocaine.[/quote]

Off the top of my head, automobiles and drugs rushed to market which would be likely to cause deaths. An example of a drug would be Troglitazone. Rockafeller drug laws are a great example, but I'll file that one under cocaine.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']corporate crime. PCA's salmonella scandal resulted in 9 deaths, yet nobody was charged with manslaughter.

The Utah mine collapse last year showed that the company willfully overlooked keeping up to OSHA standards, finding that it was cheaper to pay severances to dead miners' families and fines instead.

Fines. For what amounts to murder.[/QUOTE]

Excellent points that really show the weaknesses in our system of justice.
 
[quote name='Revenantae']3: I would argue that most of our politicians need hanging on that basis, but it's not just rich people that give. It's also people like you and me giving small amount, or companies, or organizations. It's too broad to just blame that all on "rich people".
4: If it's crime statistics you are looking it, then you would be looking at the poor, since they are the ones committing a disproportionate number of crimes.
5: The fact is that you can get good grades at any school if you try. You're right about the poverty line, but it's not that they don't have opportunities, but that they are not encouraged to take advantage of them. I don't have statistics about class movement available at the moment, so I can't really address it. All I can say is that the tools to get an education are available to all.[/quote]
3. Yes but the rich people have far more influence, and far less good intent
" In 1992, corporations formed 67 percent of all Political Action Committees (the lobbyist organizations that bribe our Congress) and contributed 79 percent of all "soft money" to national political parties."
4. I can't find any crime rates by class just these statistics. There are 15,000-20,000 murders a year. Each year there are 10,000 deaths by the selling of products known to be defective, 55,000 deaths from on the job accidents due to breach of safety regulations by employers. There are about 100,000 deaths due negligent medical practices, Performing unnecessary surgery, unnecessary superscription, ignoring hospital patience ect..
Street crimes cost about 100 billion each year, tax evasion by the top 1% cost about 400 billion and cooperate fraud another 600 billion, that's 1 trillion with only two types of crime
5. Getting good grades isn't enough, That fact is graduating from a bad high school is going to provide you with less education then a good middle school, This will defiantly show up on SAT scores, essays, and every day life. Also many bad schools have much social pressure to not do well in school.
 
[quote name='itachiitachi']3. Yes but the rich people have far more influence, and far less good intent
" In 1992, corporations formed 67 percent of all Political Action Committees (the lobbyist organizations that bribe our Congress) and contributed 79 percent of all "soft money" to national political parties."[/QUOTE]
A company is not a rich person, nor is it primarily made up of rich people. It can be but it's not necessarily so. I work for a company, and I sure as hell hope it lobbies congress to buy our stuff (we'd be at a terrible disadvantage if we didn't). That doesn't make me or the company evil. I don't really like the fact that this form of bribery is legal, I;m with you there, but since it is you almost HAVE to do it to keep up with competitors.

[quote name='itachiitachi']4. I can't find any crime rates by class just these statistics. There are 15,000-20,000 murders a year. Each year there are 10,000 deaths by the selling of products known to be defective, 55,000 deaths from on the job accidents due to breach of safety regulations by employers. There are about 100,000 deaths due negligent medical practices, Performing unnecessary surgery, unnecessary superscription, ignoring hospital patience ect..
Street crimes cost about 100 billion each year, tax evasion by the top 1% cost about 400 billion and cooperate fraud another 600 billion, that's 1 trillion with only two types of crime[/QUOTE]
Again, you seem to be confusing large corporations or other conglomerates with "rich people". The guys who decided to, say, ship a car with a possible defect weren't just rich guys sitting in zillion dollar offices. They are committees consisting of engineers, marketers, and a pile of other not-rich guys.

[quote name='itachiitachi']5. Getting good grades isn't enough, That fact is graduating from a bad high school is going to provide you with less education then a good middle school, This will defiantly show up on SAT scores, essays, and every day life. Also many bad schools have much social pressure to not do well in school.[/QUOTE]
Most of this won't matter if you go the same route I did: high-school -> community college -> state school. The worst problem there is the social pressure, and I have no idea what you can do about that. The crappy schools use the same books as the good schools. The same info is there. Hell, sometimes you can get a lot out of a teacher in a crappy school because they'll overcompensate when presented with a student that actually gives a shit.
 
[quote name='Revenantae']Please explain, I do not see a change in the meaning at all.[/quote]

You see nothing odd about taking a slogan promoting Utopian Communism and then editing out all the bits about taking care of the meek?

Fine. The tools to succeed are available to all Americans.
Click to expand...

That is like saying the moon is there and spaceships are available, it is not the same thing as "all" who "want" and "work" for it can go. A rich dumb kid is more likely to finish college than a smart poor kid, someone who had rich parents and no degree is more likely to be well off than someone from a poor background with an education. And that is just going along with your contention that everyone who wants to have a decent life should have an education (only 30% of the workforce does) or that things should be that way. The tools that you are apparently talking about are least in part government programs that would probably go by the wayside in the kind of system you want.

Now you aren't making any sense, unless you ARE talking about food after all. You are coming across as pretty arrogant here. You are unable to do anything other than attack me without offering any reasons why you think my argument is incorrect.
Click to expand...

I could use the word poop in place of pablum, would you understand that?
 
[quote name='Msut77']You see nothing odd about taking a slogan promoting Utopian Communism and then editing out all the bits about taking care of the meek?[/QUOTE]
Not when the discussion is about the taking, not the giving, no.


[quote name='Msut77']That is like saying the moon is there and spaceships are available, it is not the same thing as "all" who "want" and "work" for it can go.[/QUOTE]
Not even close. Spaceships that can go to the moon are NOT, in fact there, and even if they were the costs are so prohibitive only a first-world country can afford it. It's a completely ridiculous comparison.

[quote name='Msut77']A rich dumb kid is more likely to finish college than a smart poor kid, someone who had rich parents and no degree is more likely to be well off than someone from a poor background with an education.[/QUOTE]
If you mean filthy rich, like say a Hilton or a Rockefeller, sure, I agree with you. If you mean more middle class, or net worth of a million or less (including primary residence) I'd disagree.

[quote name='Msut77']And that is just going along with your contention that everyone who wants to have a decent life should have an education (only 30% of the workforce does) or that things should be that way. [/QUOTE]
I already pointed out that our hypothetical janitor could retire a millionaire. So what point do you think you are making?

[quote name='Msut77']The tools that you are apparently talking about are least in part government programs that would probably go by the wayside in the kind of system you want. [/QUOTE]
Absolutely not. Refer to my original statements where I rank schools right up there with roads and other infrastructure.

[quote name='Msut77']I could use the word poop in place of pablum, would you understand that?[/QUOTE]
Nope.
 
[quote name='Revenantae']Spaceships that can go to the moon are NOT, in fact there[/quote]

My grandfather worked on those sort of projects all the time., tens of people have first hand knowledge that proves you wrong.

and even if they were the costs are so prohibitive only a first-world country can afford it.
Click to expand...

If they wanted it hard enough and were willing to work for it anyone could.
 
[quote name='Msut77']My grandfather worked on those sort of projects all the time., tens of people have first hand knowledge that proves you wrong.[/QUOTE]
Yes, they did... but the Apollo hardware, and a lot of the know-how to even MAKE them is now gone :(

[quote name='Msut77']If they wanted it hard enough and were willing to work for it anyone could.[/QUOTE]
Astronaut Farmer FTW!!!!!!
 
[quote name='Revenantae']Astronaut Farmer FTW!!!!!![/QUOTE]

225px-Hydroponic_farmer.png
 
[quote name='Revenantae']A company is not a rich person, nor is it primarily made up of rich people. It can be but it's not necessarily so. I work for a company, and I sure as hell hope it lobbies congress to buy our stuff (we'd be at a terrible disadvantage if we didn't). That doesn't make me or the company evil. I don't really like the fact that this form of bribery is legal, I;m with you there, but since it is you almost HAVE to do it to keep up with competitors.[/quote]
Yes a company is run by rich people that dosn't make the rich people not responsible for the actions of the company. A gang is made up of hoodlums, the hoodlums are responsible if the gang mugs someone. Also I'm not just talking about the gov't buying stuff, the curroption is more along the lines of legislative pricefixing, unnesssary tarrifs.

[quote name='Revenantae']
Again, you seem to be confusing large corporations or other conglomerates with "rich people". The guys who decided to, say, ship a car with a possible defect weren't just rich guys sitting in zillion dollar offices. They are committees consisting of engineers, marketers, and a pile of other not-rich guys.[/quote]
The people that push through the release of unsafe products are ussualy the rich guys, besides that dosn't even adress the 100,000 deaths in the medical industry, or the 55,000 on the job deaths which are ussualy do the decisions of one person.


[quote name='Revenantae']
Most of this won't matter if you go the same route I did: high-school -> community college -> state school. The worst problem there is the social pressure, and I have no idea what you can do about that. The crappy schools use the same books as the good schools. The same info is there. Hell, sometimes you can get a lot out of a teacher in a crappy school because they'll overcompensate when presented with a student that actually gives a shit.[/quote]
I've seen the books at the crappy schools, I don't remeber any chapter in my history book telling me how happy "negros" were to be slaves. The ciriculm at crappy schools is slower than at normal/good schools. The other problem is crappy schools make most of thier students not give a shit.
 
The negative talk of "rich kids" is very humorous and short-sighted.

Many of you are talking like a pile of money comes out of the uterus when a "rich kid" is born. Yeah, that makes sense.

In reality, the "rich kid's" parents, or his parents parents, likely worked their butts off so that the "rich kid" doesnt have to work as hard to succeed like they did. That is the reward the parents - or the parents parents - get for their hard work - to see their child not have to work as hard as they did to be successful and happy.

So, while a mom/dad may not be rich right away and may never be rich, they may get rich enough through hard work to enable their child to have a better chance of being even richer. It is not something that happens in just one generation in most cases. Usually people come to America so their kids and their kids kids can have an easier life than they did, it is not just that they dream of owning a Ferrari or something.

People can spend their money as they please, and if they want to work hard to enable their child to have an easier life than they did that is a good thing IMO. Don't turn it into something negative or pretend that the "rich kid's" parents have a money tree in the backyard or something ridiculous like that. It is not something to be resentful of as many here appear to be, and likely if you have kids when you get older you will probably want to use your money to assist them in success as well.
 
Ruined: bringing uninformed meritocratic justifications of our system of stratification shrouded in the disguise of informed and well-considered discourse since August 2004.

Yes, rich people are rich because they worked hard for it, and poor people are lazy vagrants. bring back temperance, I say.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Ruined: bringing uninformed[/quote]

Mykervermin: keeping his status quo of personal attacks running strong through 2009.

P.S. - big words do not make you right nor more informed.
 
edit: I've realized that we're way off topic here, and so won't continue it here. If we want to continue here, we should be discussing whether the tax system is progressive enough. If we want to discuss class warfare or opportunity (or lack thereof), we should make a new thread.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Ruined']Mykervermin: keeping his status quo of personal attacks running strong through 2009.

P.S. - big words do not make you right nor more informed.[/QUOTE]

As I've said to you before, say something worth debating and you'll get a debate.

Bring up radio talk show caliber blithering idiot arguments (some nonsensical Davis and Moore "the rich are rich because they work hard, and the poor are poor because they're lazy and don't try hard" bullshit) isn't going to get you a conversation. It's going to earn you well-deserved mockery.

Stating things as facts that aren't facts is not debate.
 
We're not overly strict about staying on-topic here, Rev. Observe!

Anyone that plays Terran is obviously a lazy, uneducated, flu-carrying immigrant. We should round them all up, put them in a giant box, and send it to Switzerland. Because fuck Switzerland.

And Zerg? Communazis. All of them.
 
Myke hates the fact that some people actually become rich by working and thinking their ass off. Sneaking into the poor peoples' homes every night and stealing their weed money IS hard work, dammit.
 
Shit, so that's where my weed money keeps going...
[quote name='SpazX']Don't give me your ivory tower protoss bullshit Crotch. If you were a man you wouldn't have shields, pussy.[/quote]
Raise your hand if you can drop a tank in single combat. Raise your other hand if you can take a nuke and only lose 10 hit points.

Yeah. I'm seeing a lot of Protoss hands up, Zerg-lover.
 
[quote name='Ruined']
In reality, the "rich kid's" parents, or his parents parents, likely worked their butts off so that the "rich kid" doesnt have to work as hard to succeed like they did. That is the reward the parents - or the parents parents - get for their hard work - to see their child not have to work as hard as they did to be successful and happy.

So, while a mom/dad may not be rich right away and may never be rich, they may get rich enough through hard work to enable their child to have a better chance of being even richer. It is not something that happens in just one generation in most cases. Usually people come to America so their kids and their kids kids can have an easier life than they did, it is not just that they dream of owning a Ferrari or something.
[/quote]
A child's future should not be determined on how hard working/rich their parents are.While well off children will always enjoy some sort of advantage, that's no reason to deny millions of children a future. Not only is it unfair to the child, but as a countries economic status is closely tied with its education level you're hurting the future economy of the nation.
 
Is affirmative action in its present usage, where ethnic diversity (except Asians) and Jews are desired instead of trying to help those of lower economic status, providing an unfair advantage to children of color? Shouldn't a child have to earn their college acceptance? The majority of minority students accepted into a school would not be there if they were white. It has nothing to do with economic status and it has everything to do with discrimination. I'm certain that putting a kid into a much more difficult environment than they can handle (which they do at almost every school) causes them to perform more poorly and suffer more than a school that they could actually handle- one that their past hard work and grades showed they could get in. And, as itachitachi pointed out, promoting dumber kids with undeserved opportunities doesn't just hurt the kid but the entire country.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='tivo']Shouldn't a child have to earn their college acceptance? The majority of minority students accepted into a school would not be there if they were white. It has nothing to do with economic status and it has everything to do with discrimination. I'm certain that putting a kid into a much more difficult environment than they can handle (which they do at almost every school) causes them to perform more poorly and suffer more than a school that they could actually handle- one that their past hard work and grades showed they could get in. And, as itachitachi pointed out, promoting dumber kids with undeserved opportunities doesn't just hurt the kid but the entire country.[/QUOTE]
It depends on the mission of the college. States may have priorities that don't begin and end with scholarship.

My brother-in-law is a perfect example. He was a middling high schooler that was accepted to UT-Austin for race reasons by his own admission. Yet he believed that was his opportunity to succeed. He kicked ass in college and is a totally different person living a totally different life because he was admitted. He talks about all the kids from the Texas valley (that is dirt poor on another level) that didn't get the chance and how their lives are universally poorer for not getting a shot. It doesn't help that they're told they shouldn't bother because they can't afford it anyways. Help like that comes out of the clear blue sky like the hand of god. That's an amazing and powerful thing.

Just saying there are living, breathing examples of success bestowed by an approach like the one you're advocating against. You're right that some will piss it away, but you'd be surprised at what you'll find when you give a kid a chance.
 
[quote name='itachiitachi']A child's future should not be determined on how hard working/rich their parents are.While well off children will always enjoy some sort of advantage, that's no reason to deny millions of children a future. Not only is it unfair to the child, but as a countries economic status is closely tied with its education level you're hurting the future economy of the nation.[/QUOTE]

LOL? How is working hard so you can equip your child with the tools to succeed "denying millions of children a future"?? That is completely illogical. Of course it would be utopian if everyone had the same perfect tools, but that is 100% unrealistic.

People choose to spend their money on/save their money for different things, and one of those things can be the future of your kids . Thus, some kids will have an advantage thanks to their parents whether one likes it or not.
 
Ruined -- You need to realize that at some vague point in recent American history many Americans have decided that the primary concern of a society should be to force society to take care of society; everyone's survival and wellbeing must be everyone's concern, and if you think otherwise -- you are a selfish, worthless, heartless, piece of right-wing trash that not only needs to learn to take care of more people with what you earn, but you should trust the government to do so because they are best equipped to do so.

Many people have "progressed" to this line of thinking, while others like yourself have not. This is the root of all the conflict in this thread.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Ruined -- You need to realize that at some vague point in recent American history many Americans have decided that the primary concern of a society should be to force society to take care of society; everyone's survival and wellbeing must be everyone's concern, and if you think otherwise -- you are a selfish, worthless, heartless, piece of right-wing trash that not only needs to learn to take care of more people with what you earn, but you should trust the government to do so because they are best equipped to do so.

Many people have "progressed" to this line of thinking, while others like yourself have not. This is the root of all the conflict in this thread.[/quote]

Yes, because "every man for himself" was going swimmingly.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Ruined -- You need to realize that at some vague point in recent American history many Americans have decided that the primary concern of a society should be to force society to take care of society; everyone's survival and wellbeing must be everyone's concern, and if you think otherwise -- you are a selfish, worthless, heartless, piece of right-wing trash that not only needs to learn to take care of more people with what you earn, but you should trust the government to do so because they are best equipped to do so.

Many people have "progressed" to this line of thinking, while others like yourself have not. This is the root of all the conflict in this thread.[/QUOTE]

You, obama, and the entire left wing community are completely right thrustbucket. We need to tax the fuckING SHIT out of everyone who makes over 500k 250k 100k 50k 25k minimum wage and give it to welfare recipients and single mothers. We should also grant amnesty to the millions of illegal immigrants here in the US so they can get a piece of the pie too. I mean, its unfair to deny so many children a future. But fuck anyone too far away to sneak into the country. Let's take care of the problems in our country first ;). I mean, that's society- our borders. fuck anyone overseas. They don't have a quality of life 1/100 that of the poorest bum in America, but we need to give more money to "poor" americans because they don't have enough money to buy food water clothing shelter electricity television cars expensive luxuries that the heartless, selfish, and fat-cat right wingers don't want them to have. That's why we should vote more like-minded individuals into office- so they can grant us gifts from the public treasury and continue to demand more. And granting amnesty to illegal aliens will guarantee our master plan - a totally fair and balance level of sub-mediocrity for every single American. Hope and change baby, hope and change.



But seriously, as for speedracer, yes, its great that your cousin took the opportunity and finally made something out of himself but for every person who got in because of race and failed, there's someone who had worked harder and were denied the same opportunity because of their skin (white or Asian). Is that fair? Is that great? Is that American? No. I'm saying a lot of affirmative action recipients would perform better at a lower demanding school and affirmative action should refocus scholarships to qualified individuals who lack the money to go to school- not promote "diversity". I shouldn't be asked what's my ethnicity. I also have a similar problem with extra time recipients (for test taking). That's seriously fucked up but again, liberals love it. They love "making things equal" when in reality, they're providing an unfair advantage.
 
[quote name='Ruined']LOL? How is working hard so you can equip your child with the tools to succeed "denying millions of children a future"?? That is completely illogical. Of course it would be utopian if everyone had the same perfect tools, but that is 100% unrealistic.

People choose to spend their money on/save their money for different things, and one of those things can be the future of your kids . Thus, some kids will have an advantage thanks to their parents whether one likes it or not.[/quote]
LOL! Easy if we choose not to help kids succeed and instead let parents do it many of them have no chance at a future.

Millions of kids are born to parents who did not work hard, make good choices ect... Why should these kids be punished for their parents mistakes?(not that hard to understand)
 
[quote name='tivo'] I also have a similar problem with extra time recipients (for test taking). That's seriously fucked up but again, liberals love it. They love "making things equal" when in reality, they're providing an unfair advantage.[/QUOTE]

Whaaaa? Do you even know what you're talking about here? Explain to me how this is fucked up if someone has a legitimate learning disability. Unless you don't believe in learning disabilities.
 
[quote name='willardhaven']Yes, because "every man for himself" was going swimmingly.[/quote]

Of course not, but there has to be some middle ground with the corrupt nanny state we're blazing towards.

What should a person be responsible for?
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Of course not, but there has to be some middle ground with the corrupt nanny state we're blazing towards.

What should a person be responsible for?[/quote]

See the charts on page 1. The top percentage of the country should pay a comparable rate.
 
[quote name='willardhaven']See the charts on page 1. The top percentage of the country should pay a comparable rate.[/quote]

Not where I'm going.

I want to be more item specific.

What percentage cost of a person's food, lodging, clothes, credit card debt, transportation, etc should the government pay for?
 
That's a tough question, and it really depends on the circumstance. If someone is completely incapable, 100%. It's relative, I don't think the government should have to pay for any of my things, yet there are people far richer than me who want a lot more. Can you give me more details as to what you are trying to figure out?
 
[quote name='willardhaven']That's a tough question, and it really depends on the circumstance. If someone is completely incapable, 100%. It's relative, I don't think the government should have to pay for any of my things, yet there are people far richer than me who want a lot more. Can you give me more details as to what you are trying to figure out?[/quote]

Maybe there should be better ground rules.

For example, you can't receive WIC if you're in second quintile or above.

For another example, you can't have a credit card if you're on 100% disability.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top