It's not about who can best afford it. A progressive tax system enables economic mobility, while a tax system that taxes everyone equally slowly grows the income gap. The system we have now has those that make the most paying the least (as a % of income) in taxes, which has exponentially grown the income gap. Economic mobility & a small income gap are keys to a successful economy over the long-run.
again, the gap is not relevant. income mobility is extremely relevant. but the gap doesnt matter. if the poor are doing well, it doesnt not matter if the rich are 10x as rich as them or 999x times as rich as them. in the fact the existence of the super rich is part of what helps the poor do well. everyone cannot be relatively rich. there will always be relatively poor folks and relatively rich folks. what matters is that all people have opportunity. if some folks use that opportunity to open up a huge gap on everyone else, so be it. a huge gap exists between people, in everything. in ability to make money, in ability to eat hot dogs, in ability to hit home runs or throw touchdowns. there is nothing wrong with it and it should be expected. it only matters when the rich are getting that way by holding everyone else down. this isnt the case. the opposite is true. steve jobs becomes a billionaire by hiring lots and lots and lots of other people and selling products that millions of people want. it is because of his value to everyone else that we have paid him so much. he is contributing far more than poor people to society. the super wealthy are not hurting us, they are helping us. they create jobs and do things that ordinary folks cannot do, like invest in the companies that can succeed, or manage a complex corporation. if the rich man is saddam and he is taking the oil money and killing the poor, fine. but in america, the rich are not enslaving anyone. the fact that they can create an income gap is a positive, not a negative. america is richer than almost every country on earth because of the market being more free. this means there will necessarily be a large income gap. efforts to close that gap and redistribute will punish everyone, primarily the poor. and again, i would argue that poor people dont even really exist in america. the poor in america have more stuff than they need and are fat.
to better state this: lets assume the amount required to live a decent life is X. lets assume the average fella makes 1.8X. and rich ceo makes 1000X. we would have a problem if lots and lots of folks were making 1/3X. is that the case? if it is, is it because of the folks making 800X? why would it be?
In most countries on the earth so called "poor Americans" would be considered to be rich people. The poor in this country have roofs over their heads. Most of them drive cars. Maybe clunkers instead of Mercedes and Lexus but they still have the same mobility as everybody else. Poor people in america eat every day. Not filet mignon or ribeye but they are adequately fed. A lot of "poor" people have big screen TVs and cable as well as broadband internet. America is a great place to be a poor person.
if we want to have actual poor people, one way to get them is to punish the economy by redistributing wealth. attempting to shrink the gap between poor and rich is a terribly destructive idea. if you hate people and want them to suffer, enact policies to shrink the gap between rich and poor. the actual goal is not to shrink the gap, so everyone has a more equal part of the pie, the goal is to grow the pie. economic growth means the low man is higher (even if the top guy is way way higher). a rising tide floats all boats. growth of the economy is the most important goal, always. name a problem, free trade and economic growth solves it. overpopulation, disease, child labor, nutrition, health care, everything. problems go away when the economy grows. and free enterprise grows the economy. and free enterprise is enabled when people stop caring about the income gap. the reason ****ty nations are ****ty is because the uneducated and unsophisticated idiot people there choose leaders that promise to shrink the income gap and destroy the upper class in favor of the workers. right now in bolivia and venezuela you have people that hate the rich and want a society with one big middle class. well, you can have one class if you want, it will be one large poor class, ruled by power-hungry demagogues telling the poor masses that the rich are not paying their share. it cant be repeated enough. there is nothing wrong with a large income gap, and it should be expected. any system that does not allow a large income gap is punishing everyone and creating massive misery that could be avoided. the key to economic class mobility is education, never wealth redistribution or "progressive" tax policy. poor people could pay zero taxes and it wouldnt matter. it isnt tax policy that keeps them poor. it is lack of focus on education. we need to permanently forget and ignore the income gap and concentrate on economic growth.
Are you saying everyone should pay the same amount of income tax? I should pay the same amount of income tax as Peyton Manning? You really don't see a difference in making 10K compared to 200K or 25 million (A-Rod). If you don't see the difference, I want to work for you.
I'm glad that you agree about economic mobility, and I admit that I overstated the importance of the income gap. However, I still think it is important because an enormous income gap creates dissention in the economy & its government. And I'm not arguing against there being an income gap. An income gap is necessary in a successful economy. I'm arguing against an income gap that grows at an exponential rate.
No he paid taxes on the original income. He did NOT pay taxes on the income that the investment generated. That's additional income.
