So . . . at a time when the Republicans controlled the White House, the Senate, the House of Representatives and the Supreme Court, two democrats are responsible for some of the Bush tax cuts. Amazing! I don't suppose that you can document this notion that the real billionaires are supported by democrats while the republicans help the little guy.
George Soros, Charles Ergen, Vance K. Opperman, Daniel Abraham, Warren Buffett, Jeffrey Katzenberg, Robert F.X. Sillerman, George Lucas, Alice Walton, Paul Allen, Sumner Redstone, Bill Gates, William Barron Hilton, Eric Schmidt, William Randolph Hearst III, Marc Benioff, Anthony Pritzker, Ray Milton Dolby, Charles Schwab, Robert Kraft, Gordon P. Getty II - all Obama donors and don't forget GE in general.
I think Tiger Exile did a pretty good job. You could also check other in the Hedge fund industry who supported the Ds by a large majority. As to the Hedge fund clause that part of the Clinton Tax compromise and was part of the deal to gain the D votes.
Why do you think ones opinion is based only upon what happens to him. If that was true, no one in the middle class would be supporting Republican tax cuts for the wealthy that don't help them a bit. Most flat-tax proponents say that it will be more like 15-20% if it is expected to pay for current budgets. Not as a percentage of their income they don't . . . not by a long shot. The very rich roll most of their money back into investments to get even richer. They would avoid taxes on all of that income. Poor people spend 100% of their income every month. Middle class people spend close to 100%. It puts the burden of taxes squarely on the middle class because the poor cannot pay more than they need to live. Sales taxes as a replacement for income tax is a transparent tax avoidance for rich people. Period. Why? It does't hurt them. They are taking more advantage of the freedoms provided by this country to pursue the American Dream than anyone. Having achieved it, their owe a bit more. Bullshit. Sir Paul McCartney, Sir Elton John, and Sir Andrew Lloyd Webber are among the richest entertainers on earth and are residents of the UK along with David Gilmour, Mick Jagger, Sting, and many others.
Bill Gates and many others on that list contribute to Republicans as well as democrats. The list of Republican billionaires is far longer. Politifact thinks that the numbers are difficult to interpret for America's 492 billionaires, many of who contribute across the aisle or who guard their support carefully. Many billionaires don't contribute to either party, despite their political leanings. Most investigators say the Republicans have the most billionaire money, at least they did in 2012.
I just threw out the number 10% because that's what seems fair to me Even 15% to 20% would be a lot better than what it is now. Why does somebody owe a higher percentage of their income just because they are better at taking advantage of the same freedoms we all enjoy? They only owe more if the law says they owe more. Not because of some so called moralistic view that it doesn't hurt them. OK, you threw out the names of some rich and famous Englishmen. I'm sure they all own houses and property in the UK but how do you know where their legal tax domicile is? Decades ago Monoco was a preferred domicile for the British wealthy. I don't know if it still is but I'm sure Sir Paul and Sir Mick and Sir Elton all have tax advisors to tell them and set it up for them and make it legal even if they do spend most of their time in the UK. Last year when Phil Mickelson won the British Open he had to pay British taxes on his winnings as well as American taxes along with a 13% California rate on incomes of more than $1 Million. After all that he only got to keep a small percentage of his winnings. Not that I am crying for Phil but it does seem blatantly unfair.
Because they also get to take advantage of tax credits, offshore havens, investment havens and other tax laws that require paid accountants and lawyers that the middle class on salaries. If all of the loopholes were eliminated and I mean all of them, then a flat tax would be fair. I'm sorry that is the richest English entertainers. Its a matter of record. You don't get knighted if you live abroad. Ringo lives in LA and he never got knighted. Most billionaires have houses abroad and investments, too, and pay taxes in several countries, but the ones I listed and anymore officially reside in the UK. There are over 100 British billionaires. Why should he get a tax break that everybody else must pay?
Why should people, that work for their money, have it taken away and given to those that choose not too? Y'all really do like wealth redistribution? I haven't been in a "po' persons" house that hasn't had 2 or 3 flat screen tv's. Satellite. iPhones. Or an empty fridge. Why bother to work for it when you can sit on your sorry ass and have others vote it to you.
This is a tired old myth. The money goes to the nation, not to somebody else. What a crock! Rational people also understand that most poor people work for a living, they just don't make enough money to get by. Other poor people worked for 40 years but are now retired and living on small incomes. Others are disabled and helpless. Lots are kids who are not responsible for their situation. Welfare was reformed 20 years ago and is no longer a long-term income. The only people who "chose not to work" are the homeless bums and they don't get benefits anyway.