Innovation and America

[Beebs]

Originally Posted by DDTempest

"Fair share" is a very relative and hard to define term ... would the rich be as rich if they didn't have publicly funded law enforcement to protect their assets? Who benefits more from an interstate highway system: the business owner or the factory worker? Would being ultra-intelligent have the same result on your own well-being if the bulk of society was uneducated?

I know these are philosophical questions that can't really be answered because the fact of the matter is that structured society, mostly funded by the wealthy, has existed for centuries. The "wealthy" today have substantially more to gain by being a part of society than they have in past centuries.

That is a pretty clear double standard; the entire basis of a progressive tax rate, and even a progressive tax total (as opposed to everybody paying one set amount) is to separate benefits and payments, or else the majority of the country would not be allowed access to any benefits, based on their lack of paying income taxes.

I'm not trying to be an absolutist, because as you rightfully say, it's an ambiguous term, plus I don't want to come off as if I am arguing with you.

However, there is just no way to reasonably say that the rich are not paying, at bare minimum, at least a "fair amount" or that they aren't "chipping in" or that they get "all the breaks", or best of all, that "the rich don't pay their taxes." These are all just non-starters.