Tax em all
Friday, December 2, 2011 at 01:48PM Remember ousted politician Deb Pignatelli?
This week I stumbled across a letter to the editor from her husband Michael Pignatelli worth some discussion.
High-income earners, as well as most Americans, overwhelmingly support a modest 4 percent tax increase on those who can pay.
...
Voters will choose America’s future next November. In the meantime, the debt grows. The economy doesn’t.
Before I dig into responding to this above sentiment I would like to stress that I do not hold Deb accountable for her husband's statements and vice versa but from her record it's clear they both think similarly.
That said, I have to wonder when I see statements like this why we aren't seeing liberals in mass sending checks to the government offering up an additional 4% of their incomes. Why does it take the force of a gun to get them to pony up if as Michael states here so many people want to do this?
The next part that caught my attention was his statement that this 4% should be imposed on "those who can pay". Who determines that and what do they base it on? Clearly Mr. Pignatelli feels others know better then he what is best for his money.
I love the conclusion, that debt grows while the economy doesn't. Perhaps it's because too much of our money is already being wasted by the government. Perhaps because we as a society have grown to a point where we reward failure and people who sit home doing nothing feel entitled to the income of others that we have the problem of growing debt and a shrinking economy.
One only has to look at the statements from the occupy groups to see this. They expect us to pay for their college, pay for their housing, and so on. If everything in life was given to you then what incentive would you have to work hard? For that matter what incentive would you have to work at all?
Reader Comments (4)
Hey Troll, perhaps you could do a brother a favor and try to explain this liberal thinking. And I mean "liberal" in the US political sense of the word, not the actual, original definition. Danke schön.
– C. dog begs for liberal debate
Because that would be almost as stupid as this comment. We are all one big happy nation and thus we all need to chip in our fair share. Just because one is cheap and self centered does not absolve him from his responsibility.
"The next part that caught my attention was his statement that this 4% should be imposed on "those who can pay". Who determines that and what do they base it on? "
I think we can all agree that the guy who makes a million dollars a year can probably afford to kick in a little more. Those that don't think so are probably Republican.
"I love the conclusion, that debt grows while the economy doesn't. Perhaps it's because too much of our money is already being wasted by the government. Perhaps because we as a society have grown to a point where we reward failure"
Maybe it's because corparate fatcats moved all of our jobs to other countries so they can make even more money. Maybe it's because all of the economic gains in this country have gone to one percent of the people while employee pay is down to the smallest share of the economy since the government began collecting wage and salary data.
"One only has to look at the statements from the occupy groups to see this. They expect us to pay for their college, pay for their housing, and so on. If everything in life was given to you then what incentive would you have to work hard? For that matter what incentive would you have to work at all?"
This one is harder for me to defend. I do think that there are ridiculous elements of the occupy movement. However, just like Tea Partiers want everyone to know that they are not the weirdo with the tea bags on their hats, the occupy movement is not entirely filled with air headed hippies with Ipads. Saying "they" want "us" to pay for school etcetera is marginalizing those people in the movement that have a legitimate beef.
Thanks Troll for playing. Too bad more of your compadrés don't feel they can play in a sandbox other than one they control with a biased, inane schoolmarm moderator (å la Concord Moronitor). For that, I give you a thumbs up.
Now onto the nut of your position: that you, personally, are incapable of giving to the cause to which you feign such fierce loyalty. Humorously – and I think I speak for the majority of those who pen a blog here – you aren't willing to GIVE one red cent to Nanny. Only under "collective" threat by your beloved Mafia Mamma to put you in the doggy house are you "willilng" to part with your piece o' da pie, which becomes magically fair when blessed by the DNC. That's some cool-aid you're drinkin' there pal. Wish my TAX-free hard cider had that much punch to it. (I gotta get me some of that secret recipé yeast to foment more smoke and mirrors)
So Troll, throw us stupid brotha's a bone, and explain – in real simple language like – why your grate organization, the super-corp. of all corporations, with fiat monopolies over whatever it pleases, "Captain AMERICA!", only deserves your cash and coin under threat of big gun deployment with possible incarceration. And please, don't dodge my prior challenge to you regarding your use of the word "responsibility". I expect such dodges from much lesser Libs than you.
Remember, and here I don't pretend to speak for others who frequent this electronic X-change board, I real stupid vis-å-vis these collective thoughts, so type reel slowly.
– C. dog just luvs making frequent trips to the magically moronic Land-o'-make-believe