tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post1593917395422175564..comments2024-02-24T00:37:43.087-05:00Comments on The Other McCain: '6.5% of nothing'Robert Stacy McCainhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084541621503669804noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post-73485288812069534112009-05-27T09:15:19.794-04:002009-05-27T09:15:19.794-04:00I should come here more often! I don't think I've ...I should come here more often! I don't think I've been called "sir" in a comments section before. <br /><br />But the debate about the nature of fairness has been around for a few thousand years and I confess I'm skeptical we're going to resolve it here..Conor Clarkehttp://theatlantic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post-60007480488458137172009-05-26T22:14:56.815-04:002009-05-26T22:14:56.815-04:00Apparently, Mr. Clarke's moral development reached...Apparently, Mr. Clarke's moral development reached its zenith in the sandbox. That blasted Bobby Smith and his superior sandcastle architecture! I'll show him what happens to wiseguys who sculpt flying buttresses!Alec Leamashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16826355850691566819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post-40342929455922695992009-05-26T19:12:34.538-04:002009-05-26T19:12:34.538-04:00Mr. Clarke - Do I correctly interpret your usage o...Mr. Clarke - Do I correctly interpret your usage of "fairness and efficiency" to mean redistribution of wealth / income from those who have more to those who are less fortunate? Because that sir, is utter rubbish.<br /><br />RSM - you think 6.25% is high? Try 10.75% which is the current "millionaires" tax rate in New Jersey. And it kicks in at a mere $400,000. Because according to Conor Clarke that would be "fair and efficient".Chris Wysockihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08108985245945494645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post-33826819522582027382009-05-26T18:04:30.263-04:002009-05-26T18:04:30.263-04:00Hey, thanks for this post. And sure, I believe tax...Hey, thanks for this post. And sure, I believe taxes serve purposes besides raising revenue. I think it's perfectly reasonable to be concerned about fairness and efficiency as well!Conor Clarkehttp://theatlantic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post-18861947559298425782009-05-26T18:01:23.362-04:002009-05-26T18:01:23.362-04:00"A soak-the-rich rationale means that progressive ..."A soak-the-rich rationale means that progressive taxation is preferred even if it results less revenue."<br /><br />Precisely what St. Barry O'Guiltwhite wants. Please recall the campaign of last year, wherein MSM tool C. Gibson had the temerity to point out to Mr. Messiah that raising the cap gains tax will likely result in less revenue for Mommy Gubmint. Barry's response was that taxation should be a matter of punishing success. Uh, I mean, "fairness."<br /><br /><I>"GIBSON: And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased; the government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down. So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected? OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness."</I>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com