Soak The Rich But How Rich?

If I was in the wealthiest 1%, I'd be angry. And it's not that I wouldn't be able to afford it; it's just that it's all pointless. You have to realize that if you're paying more, it's simply so people can spend more. And the idea of someone spending what I make would infuriate me. There's always that line thrown around about "well, you wouldn't want children starving and dying in the streets, etc." Of course not. It's not like they are, but anyway ... If I were rich, like many rich people, I'd be willingly giving money to make sure that didn't happen. (The US is the most charitable country in the world.) But to take it by force is another story entirely. I don't know if these facts are 100% accurate, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong: Around 10,000 people in New York City, out of 8,000,000 people, pay more than 80% of the taxes already. Should those 10,000 pay 90% instead? What happens if even 10% of those 10,000 decide it's too much of a burden and leave? Taxing the "rich" to pay for outrageous government spending is not sustainable. That's something that hardcore liberals do not seem to understand. Eventually, even if it's 10 or 20 years down the road, the government will have to dip into the middle-class and even the working-class to repay the money. Why? It's simple: People with the means to get out of harm's way are going to flee! Remember New Orleans and Katrina? People stayed not because they didn't think the storm would be brutal, but because they didn't have the means to leave. People who did got out. It will be the same thing here. If the wealthy see that they're going to be demonized and milked simply because they're wealthy, enough of them will flee to where having the "rich" repay the money is no longer a plan. Will there be laws that force them to stay? Perhaps forcing them to forfeit their assets? No. There would literally be a civil war. The only "plan" that could then work is to heavily tax the hard-working men and women of America to pay for these super expensive programs. Pretty soon, our grandchildren will be considered the "rich" if they earn over 20k per year. About the voting block: Ironically, most of the top 1% you see in America are actually liberals! Musicians, actors, producers and directors, etc... they're worth millions more than the average Wall Street tycoon who's considered right-wing because he's a businessman (or woman). Too much taxing is good for no one.

i don't live, or want to, in the current usa but i would quite like to know what us citizens are worried about

Money can also buy power, power to oppose any majority thrown against you. I'm not going to worry about, or cry over, anyone having to pay taxes to live in the very country whose public spending has made it possible for them to be rich in the first place. For every assistance program the wealthy can complain about having nothing to do with them, millions of dollars makes its way into their hands from the people who do receive assistance. The system is so interrelated that it is blasphemy to try and say your taxes do not benefit you in any way. As for the more basic question you ask: I know the "not in my backyard" and "not out of my pocket" mentality cannot be avoided. In a democracy, the line will always be drawn by a majority or a vocal minority. When the two collide, as in the powerful 1% of wealthy versus the lower 50%, it usually balances out over time. (The top 1% have had alot of concessions in the form of deductions, reductions and incentives coupled with a decreasing tax rate instead of a flat tax.) Someone will always stand up and want to raise your taxes. All you can do is weigh the importance of that raise and organize like-thinkers into voting with you.