This argument is not about rich and poor you dolt. The rich can afford to be taxed in excess and the poor don't pay taxes. The middle class ends up getting fucked in this whole equation. It's the family with two kids making 85k that loses out, its the young professional that just got his first raise, its the widow in her mid sixties looking to retire and collect the pension she earned after working for 40 years.
If the rich, as you claim control the political system, then why on earth would they allow themselves to be taxed at all?-- especially for the benefit of the poor who are dependant on handouts derived from tax revenue taken from the more productive members of society?
...I understand your argument, and I understand why you believe it to be valid.
But your argument is based upon assumptions that are wholly wrong.
Look at the portions of your post that I have highlighted: totally divorced from reality.
The rich can afford to be taxed in excess and the poor don't pay taxes.
...this is totally wrong. The poor pay the vast majority of the tax burden.
Inflation is a tax on the poor and those who do not own major assets.
Wealth appropriation is one of biggest forms of taxation. It is implemented by the rich as a weapon against the poor: common wealth is redistributed as private personal wealth to the rich. Seeing as the poor don't have private wealth or the ability to accumulate it (due to inflation), the common wealth is all they have, and this common wealth is what is being appropriated by the rich.
If you add inflation and wealth appropriation together it effectively constitutes a tax on the poor which dwarfs all other taxes combined.
The middle class ends up getting fucked in this whole equation. It's the family with two kids making 85k that loses out, its the young professional that just got his first raise, its the widow in her mid sixties looking to retire and collect the pension she earned after working for 40 years.
...the median income in the US is currently $28,500 a year.
This "middle class" ($85k) are actually a feeder class of the rich... a family with two kids earning $85k are only losing out because they aren't rich enough to be exempt from the taxes designed to keep the poor poor.
They suffer inflation tax because they own only one asset (their house)
They suffer income tax because they dont earn enough to be exempt or off-shore.
They suffer education tax (college tuition etc) because the rich have appropriate this form of common wealth (education) lest the poor avail of it.
They suffer stock exchange tax (forced into speculating for retirement, only to be fleeced during stock crashes) because they can't afford insider information; or market manipulation and don't qualify for bailouts.
I'm not dismissing your argument, it's a well reasoned one from your perspective... it's just that your thinking is poisoned by you having bought into the whole charade. Step back and take a realistic look at things.
Just look at your summation:
If the rich, as you claim control the political system, then why on earth would they allow themselves to be taxed at all?
Firstly, the rich owning the political system is not even open to debate... it is a demonstrable fact.
Secondly, the rich don't pay taxes... however they do sometimes contribute just enough "bread a circuses" to keep the poor from rebelling.
Last year, (a bumper year for bonuses)
Government Goldman Sachs payed
less than 1% tax. What more evidence do you need?
...especially for the benefit of the poor who are dependant on handouts derived from tax revenue taken from the more productive members of society?
...you've got this the wrong way round.
The uproductive rich are dependent upon the productive poor for handouts. The rich surrender only enough of their ill-gotten gains to prevent revolution.
The Luke