"When you are filthy rich you can set up a charity and then benefit from it - like paying for a portrait and then "donating" it to your golf club..."
Or setting up a PAC and "donating" to your favorite candidates and/or causes (ones that benefit you PERSONALLY, *right* Mr. Soros???)
The super-rich ALREADY have their money. Taxing their income WILL! NOT! MAKE! A! DIFFERENCE! [they'll shift it into something else, like capital gains or charities or a trust or whatever, thus being EXEMPT]
What a 'marginal' tax rate does is tax those who are *TRYING* *TO* ***BECOME*** *THE* *RICH*!!!
In other words, it's a "keep the RIFF RAFF in their place" tax. It's a STUMBLING BLOCK for small business and entrepreneurs and professionals. THESE are the people who DRIVE THE ENGINE of innovation, new job creation, and TECHNOLOGY.
So, you want to put a TAX in place to HOLD BACK those who make society GROW? That's REALLY FORNICATING STUPID!!!
That socialist [insert profanity here] congressman from New York City needs to GET A FEELING CLUE. *MARXISM* *FAILS* *EVERY* *TIME* *IT* *IS* *TRIED* !!!
"from those according to their means, to those according to their needs". Except for those MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS. She obviously did NOT read 'Animal Farm' in high school. Or maybe she *did*, and wants to become "one of the elite" to CONTROL EVERYONE ELSE???
When it comes to people like THAT, Orwell was an OPTIMIST. Reality could be FAR WORSE than his dystopian novels. And icon, obvious.
note: I say 'congressMAN' because the suffix 'man' is a generic for either a man OR a woman. I realize that [insert profane version of her name], the congressman from New York City, is a woman, and ALSO that she'd be VERY irritated being called 'congressman'. So yeah, I did it DELIBERATELY, and it's GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT. Phhhttthhhhhh.