Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest
You need to put the bong pipe down friend and wrap your brain around federal tax demographics. First, only half of the households in the US pay any income tax. Second, without looking it up, something on the order of 20% of households pay for 70% of the total tax bill. If that's not the few paying for the many, then I don't know what is.
|
First off, this is a debate about the ACA, not total taxes. And ACA-wise, the many are paying for the relative few. As evidenced by "only" 8-11 million people being immediately affected by King v. Burwell.
But you make a good point. The people most able to afford the cost pay the most taxes. That sounds like a good plan to me.
Would it be better if the poorest 20% paid the most taxes?
What do you think a good amount for the top 20% to pay would be?
Taxes are by design somewhat redistributive. That's the whole point. People in New Hampshire pay taxes that ultimately end up in Florida helping to repair hurricane damage. People in Utah pay taxes that ultimately end up in Iowa helping to repair tornado damage. People in Maine pay taxes that help secure the border in Arizona. That's the way taxes work.