That’s economic slavery? Having those who can afford it the most, who have gained the most from using the system, pay more to sustain the fairness and viability of the system? That is slavery? Right. Well, that pretty much says it all about your bias.
Really. So, the rich are not allowed to do what they want to with their money, because they’re rich, in your mind.
Yes, that’s economic slavery.
Myself, I would make it much simpler. I would restrict the both the accumulated wealth and income for any one person not to exceed 10 times the lowest paid person’s income and total wealth at, say, four million dollars absolute in wealth.
If you listen, you can hear the money flying overseas into investment as you speak. Nobody keeps their money in a country where the government has more rights over it than its owner has.
It’s not rocket science. You serve a greedy god. I serve an egalitarian god.
Mmmm. Tyrants for thousands of years have said the exact same thing. The rubes love to believe that a politician can be egalitarian. Fortunately, most people know better.
You want what is best for the rich and powerful. I want what is best for the widest # of people.
Wrong. Economic freedom is what benefits the widest number of people. But tyranny, not economic equality, is the ultimate outcome of what you propose. This is the lesson of history.
How the Heritage Foundation and their ilk could so successfully manipulate the Republican base into voting for decades (and then the Dems and the Democrat base for the last 20 years) against their own financial self interests. Truly, a remarkable propaganda campaign.
Well, if you actually UNDERSTOOD it, it might be. But you don’t.
Spare me the “your own financial self-interest” shibboleth. I would never want to live in a country where people are so selfish as to vote only for their own financial best interests. Neither would you. Be careful what you wish for.