-->
@fauxlaw
Care to demonstrate why, or do I just trust you know what you're talking about. As I explained in my post #1 [this is my string] the one-percenters, even if taxed 100%, could not possibly fund the government longer than 6 months at current expeditures, let alone adding wild hair projects progressives/marxists want to cover. Who else would be taxed then, by Biden. You, bud.
I see on your profile that you’re a conservative, so you most likely have at least some understanding of the dangers of extreme deficit spending. I am deeply concerned about the long term impact of all of this (necessary) covid related deficit spending. While some deficit spending is good, the kind of debt the United States has been taking on recently is likely to have dramatic long term consequences as interest payment on the debt becomes a greater and greater portion of the budget.
Creating a few higher income tax brackets would do absolutely zero damage to the economy, unlike a wealth tax or bringing the corporate tax rate back up. Having, say, a 55% marginal tax on incomes about 1 million instead of 40% will not have a meaningful effect on the economy/incentive to work but would be a good start to getting our finances back in order. I don’t want taxes to go up on the middle class (me) but I’ve basically accepted that they will at this point, because it’s incredibly obvious that we are never going to get our spending under control. A compromise of higher taxes and an absolute prohibition on future discretionary spending is the only way I see out of continuously running trillion dollar deficits until the currency collapses.
And to answer your first question, yes, you should just trust that I know what I’m talking about