There's a growing contingent of well-meaning folk who, inexplicably, believe that raising tax rates for those they deem "wealthy" will literally solve our nation's budget woes.
They've waged a war of words against the "rich". "They're not paying their fair share" is the battle-cry. "We wouldn't need to cut spending, we wouldn't need to leave cold the needy if we would make the "fat cat" pay up."
At some level, and I have to dig deep to find it, I understand. But that's a level that makes absolutely no practical sense. Every presumption in the Robin Hood of today's position is one to be easily refuted. So easily that each, upon objective consideration, provides its own refutation. See if you agree:
#1: That the politician would be more stewardly with Fatcat's money than he would be himself.
#2. That the politician is better at creating jobs than Fatcat.
#3. That Fatcat's investing in his own or other people's enterprises is not an economy-expanding and tax-generating effort.
#4. That Fatcat's lavishness is not helping the economy by supporting producers, wholesalers, retailers and their employees...
#5. That Fatcat putting his undeserved excess in the bank does not add liquidity to the economy, that it does not keep interest rates low and fund loans to businesses and home-buyers.
And #6. That if we balance the budget through tax increases the politician will stop there, that he'll not find new vote-garnering causes to exploit, and that he'll never again turn our nation's balance sheet into an utterly disgusting financial obscenity (don't you dare take sides on this one, both parties have had their way with our money).