The End of Welfare Reform As We Know It

[_EAllusion]

Small differences in tax rates do have marginal effects. It's complex enough that it isn't there isn't a simple correlation between higher tax rates and lower private sector investment, but there is a general, more rule of thumbish correlation. Where it hurts is people on the border, on the cusp of a risk/benefit decision. In the macroeconomy, modest tax changes can have marginal impacts. And when the difference in a few 10ths of a % translates into the quality of life impacts for a huge numbers of people, this marginal difference isn't something that can be hand-waved away.

[_krose]

I agree that the tax system is much too complicated and I'm in favor of greatly simplifying it.

Now there's something I can get behind.

[_krose]

Droop, you really are a bitter, angry fellow.

I'm sorry. It must be very frustrating to be shown to be so thoroughly wrong, and have nothing left but snarling. When cornered like that, I can understand why you feel the need to lash out with name calling and personal insults. It's sad to see, really.

Obviously, answering a challenge to show evidence of an accusation with "do your own research" is the last gasp of a lost argument (well, that and "everything"). I think we all know that.


By the way, you should know that I have never said a word about what I believe to be your "life history." You must have me confused with someone else. ("Dirtbag"? Really?) Please realize that I have absolutely no interest in the details of your personal life, and have never even speculated about it. I only respond to the words you enter here.

[_Droopy]

Now there's something I can get behind.

Please, let's not bring Paul into this.

[_bcspace]

Well, the bottom line is that it is far more productive to tax the middle class a small percent than to soak the rich at 100% when it comes to actual revenue. Obama keeps up the mantra of taxing the rich to solve the deficit problem but what many don't realize is that Obamacare IS a HUGE tax on the middle class (containing more than 20 specific tax increases) because even Obama understands that the bulk of potential revenue rests with the middle class. I suppose the silver lining is that Roberts labeled it correctly even though it does not pass constitutional muster.

[_krose]

You can't say that "Obamacare" (as in the entire Affordable Care Act) is a tax. That doesn't make any sense at all, and it's not what John Roberts said either, of course. He ruled that the mandate portion, with its accompanying penalty, is constitutional because of Congress's legal ability to tax.

The only thing you can accurately say that Roberts implied is a tax, is the Freeloader Penalty itself, which is a very small fee to be levied on those who refuse to buy insurance when they can afford to. To say the whole law is a tax is not being honest.

[_Analytics]

I suppose the silver lining is that Roberts labeled it correctly even though it does not pass constitutional muster.

This sentence makes my head spin. You think it's a tax, yet you don't think Congress has the Constitutional authority to impose it?