Quote:
Originally Posted by Honus
Non sequitur.
Just because taking all of the wealth of the top 10% would not balance the budget does not mean that it is a spending issue. It is a spending and revenue issue.
Besides, nobody is talking about taking all of the wealth of anybody. What is being proposed is returning the top marginal rates to where they were in the 1990s, which, by the way, was the last time we balanced the budget. Imagine that.
EDIT: By the way, are your numbers correct? They don't look right to me.
|
The numbers are correct. Here's an article explaining it. It's a bit tongue-in-cheek, but bullets are accurate and it's more fun to read than the Economist version:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/262045/there-aren-t-enough-millionaires-kevin-d-williamson
BTW, you might want to research in which year federal government revenues peaked at the highest levels ever. It was 2005 - after the Bush tax cuts were enacted. Tax rates affect people's behavior, and the tax rate which nets the maximum revenue isn't the highest number.