"If you took all the income of people over $200,000, it would yield about $1.89 trillion, enough revenue to cover the 2012 bill for Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security"
Ngh. I have trouble believing that, honestly, when there's 7 people (Th'wal-mart fellow's inheritors) in the US who have a collective wealth greater than the
combined value of the bottom 30% of the population. I also wouldn't be particularly surprised if that's not including the pieces of filth that do crap like get a $1 income but are making millions through other means.
You'd want to be including everyone making over $100k, though. With that, you've got over two trillion in raw income, to say nothing about the other tricks many of them are pulling.
But hell, if that's accurate and the other points brought up while I was typing this not applicable? We're screwed, there's absolutely nothing we can do. Cutting won't save our asses, because if we do vital stuff's going to collapse.
90% of the wealth of America is in the hands of 10% of the population (That was a few years back, actually. It's probably gotten worse by now.). If they can't cover it when the other 90% is already doing their damnedest to, well. Guess what rest of world, ahahahaha!?
We're going to take you all with us.Hey, if you guys believe that government spending can continue at it's current rate, and the solution to all your problems is to take your money from the wealthy, I don't live in the states, I have no skin in the game, go ahead.
I'm just explaining the reasoning behind those who seek a different alternative.
That, honestly, isn't really what a lot of us want to happen. We want the rich to be paying a fair tax, same as everyone else does. They're not. It's beginning to royally infuriate people.