THE PROGRESSIVE PROMISE
The web-site "Roll Call" has mounted a (very heavy) site that maintains the financial data regarding 50 of America's richest Congressmen and women. The site-page has a particular name, Wealth of Congress.
What's it worth? Well, one thing for sure: American voters seem to pride themselves in voting for "successful people". Perhaps they are "successful people wanabees"?
Anyway, my point is this. Any such person elected to Congress is going to want to protect "their best interests", not yours. Now, in fact, the poor far outnumber the rich in America. But they are not getting the representation in Congress they deserve. Perhaps they don't vote for the right-candidates? Perhaps they vote for the Right-wing candidates because the BoobTube says they "wash whiter than white"?
Whatever the reason, this is can be noted: We, the sheeple, are not getting the representation we deserve from the Democrat Party. (It's sheer stupidity to expect it from the Replicants and their Party of BigBucks.)
Which is why I keep insisting in this forum that the Left concentrates politically upon the progressive contingent in Congress. That group of people are found in the CPC (Congressional Progressive Caucus). They are all members of the HofR - Bernie was the only Senate member. (Which says a great deal about the Senate, doesn't it?)
In my last count, the CPC in the HofR is only 15% of all the Reps. Their political punch-weight is therefore not that strong. And if it isn't, then that's the fault of who? Look in the mirror!
If nothing else, do read the Progressive Promise. To my mind, it is the only viable means that the Thoughtful Left has in America to change the economic fundamentals by which the "American rich get richer, and the poor can go to hell. Simply, preferably without a whimper ..."
But, you tell me how wrong, wrong, wrong I am ...
___________________
Wow! This is News to you? Really??????
Last time I looked this was an economics "debate forum", not a News-forum.
Got anything to add in the form of a "debate rebuttal"? Because, you see, instead of acting reflexively, in debate one is obliged to put their thinking-cap on ...
____________________
Thy only react with emotion and what is in their heart, not in their brains
WHY?
Yes, well this here "liberal" engages mind before opening mouth - an old Chinese saying.
In fact, of all the comments by the Replicant Right on this forum, I'd say your admonition above applies perfectly.
I have yet to see, written here, an ounce of well-formulated reasoning that justifies the massive rip-off incurred by upper-incomes subject to a flat-tax at only 30%. The singular most reason for Income Disparity in American as shown by means of the Gini Coefficient, here:
The US and China share the very same Gini Coefficient (about 45%)!
I'm still waiting for a cogent response from the Right to the question, "Why?" (Aside from the mind-boggling response, "Because we work our asses off for it!!!!)
Wanna have a go at it? Be my guest ... !
--------------------------------
What flat tax of 30% are you talking about? I think you have brought this up a few times and I have no idea what you are even talking about. We don't have a flat tax system at all, let alone some magic number of 30%.
This one:
View attachment 67203720
In the fifth quintile (10%+5%+4%+1%) the corresponding tax rates are 31.5%, 32.3%, 32.6%, 33.3%. I don't think I'm exaggerating when I call that - for the fifth quintile (upper 20% of income taxation) - a "flat-tax".
Do you ... ?
NB1: Take a ruler, put it through the mid-point of the horizontal surface of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th quintile; and see how it projects onto the fifth quintile. I figure it is around 50%, from the naked eye. And a really 'n truly progressive tax could take even more in taxation.
NB2: Why do I think that upper-income taxation should be so much higher? Because the Taxation Money-pump (as I call it) allows income to progress to Wealth, and (minus Debt) into Net Worth. Which is then handed down dynastically from parents to children.
NB3: I thought we fought a revolution to prevent one class of people (all sucking up to a monarch for their bit) who became a part of a Dynasty of Royals (but without the crowns).
NB4: How do you think Pennsylvania got its name? Penn (the father) was gifted those woods ("sylva" in Latin) by the English King for services rendered.
_________________
Just out of curiosity, I'd be interested in knowing your story. Are you and American living in France?
And the biggest reason is that centrist--and even right-leaning--Democrats in red and swing districts lost their seats to Republicans.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?