Since a recent study on taxation, echoed by Warren Buffet, points out that the top 400 wealthiest in the U.S. only paid a 17% tax rate, it’s clear you don’t know what you’re talking about. Bet you didn’t know that most red states get back more money from the Fed than they pay in taxes…so all you chumps complaining about being taxed, well, I want my money back. Go ahead and pay for your own roads and disaster relief…and don’t ask for any money for schools or any other entity that might better your children. Stay ignorant. It’s what makes lurking this website so much fun…to see just how uniformed most of you are in all walks of life. (Tea Parties a success? Bwaahaahaahaha! The largest one got 14,000 - in a red state, of course, where they get more tax relief than most - but more often than not, the day fizzled with 500 here, 1,000 there…and this website fills you full of the usual b.s. that “100’s of thousands turned out”. Yeah and Sarah Palin will be the next president. Keep up the narrow-minded blather…it’s so much fun watching the Grand Old Pedophiles shrink smaller and smaller as the vitriol gets more and more psychotic.

How do you define fairness?

In all systems of government, fairness is the goal, but the definition of fairness is what distinguishes them. In a monarchy, it’s fair that those of noble blood are the most powerful and the rulers of society. In socialist states, it’s fair that everyone is given health care, food and somewhere to live, regardless of their contribution to society. In a dictatorship, it’s fair that those who seized power are all powerful. In capitalism, it’s fair that everyone is given the same opportunity to succeed or fail. Milton Friedman summarized this nicely when he said that, “The economic race should not be arranged so everyone arrives at the finish line at the same time but so that everyone starts at the starting line at the same time.”

This is why taxes are based on percentages, not fixed amounts.

By decreasing taxation of the wealthiest Americans, you have to decrease government spending to make up for the lack of revenue, or increase taxes on the poor.

For argument’s sake, let’s suppose that there is a fixed tax rate on net worth, and that the USA makes $1,000 billion (ie. $1 trillion) in taxes each year (this is silly, I know, but the example will serve its purpose). Of this trillion dollars, according to the numbers I posted, the wealthiest 10% of Americans pay $710 billion and the bottom 90% pay $290 billion. Now let’s suppose that you want to cut the tax that the wealthiest 10% pay to 75% of what it was. This means that your $710 billion in tax revenue from these people drops to $532 million. To make up for this revenue, you now need to increase the tax rate on the bottom 90% to 161% of what it was.

If the tax rate was fixed at 20% for all Americans, this cut would mean that the wealthiest now pay 15% for tax, while the poorest now pay 32% for tax - not what I would call fair at all, nor fostering of the American dream that if you live here and work hard you can put food on your table and send your kids to college.

And don’t mistake net worth for value to society. Some of my teachers and professors have had a profound effect on my life and yet hardly have any net worth. Paris Hilton, in contrast, is likely worth more money than anyone here on RedState. Just because someone is not worth $10,000,000 does not mean that they are a freeloader. Just because someone is worth $10,000,000 does not mean that they are not.