Taxes
One of the central issues of this election are taxes. Both candidates have proposed a plan to change the tax rates in this country. They both purport to be able to fix the economy and allow prosperity to build again, but plan on doing it in radically different ways (this is to say they actually get to pass what they propose, but that's a post-
( Read more... )
Comments 2
sunponySunpony, whom you may know as daemonturtle, collects a lot of political arguments on his blog. They're worth checking out, and he also is more free of the blinders of Obamania than many others.
As for why the rich should be taxed, I think you missed a point. Rich people are rich because they can buy anything they want (just about). Not-rich people can't. So when you give a not-rich person some money (like a tax break), they're more likely to spend it all on frivolities like food, housing or medical bills, thus quickly returning the money into the economy. Rich people are less likely to spend that little chunk. Trickle-down economics says that the economy is healthy when you give the rich people a chunk of money, but for the reasons I just gave, I think the opposite is more true.
Reply
Ah, yes - I remember only too late that I was going to try to make that point. The easiest example of this is the people who voted for Bush because he was pro-life... and nothing else mattered. Early on in the campaign I was trying to make sure I was not falling into that trap (especially when in came to the primary). I even evaluated McCain as a viable candidate for me. Although I'm pretty sure I chose the correct candidate to make my point of view (Obama), I'm sure many people aren't that careful.
As for why the rich should be taxed, I think you missed a point. Rich people are rich because they can buy anything they want (just about). Not-rich people can't.
I didn't quite miss it, I kinda glossed over it. Its hidden in the 'marginal propensity to consume' part of my second reason.
Trickle-down economics ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment