View Single Post
  #2  
Old 10-26-2011, 03:33 PM
d-ray657's Avatar
d-ray657 d-ray657 is offline
Loyal Opposition
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Johnson County, Kansas
Posts: 14,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by whoaru99 View Post
Seems it's always been in the background to some level, but I seem to be hearing more about the well-to-do/wealthy/rich needing to pay their fair share of taxes, yet I don't recall anyone sticking their neck out with an opinion about just what is "their fair share".

I admit it, I have no idea what a fair share is in this regard.

What are y'alls thoughts on what constitutes a fair share?

(Maybe this is a dead horse topic. I guess if so then it won't be a very long thread.)
Bill O'Reilly said that he would be OK paying 40% (granted with all sorts of caveats and limitations). 40% is less than half of the top rate during the Eisenhower presidency. IIRC, it is less than the top rate after St. Ronnie passed his first massive tax cuts.

Not sure where the 40% rate should kick in. It seems like the top 1% starts somewhere a little over $300,000. From a purely political standpoint, there is a particularly populist appeal to pick the million dollar point for the top rate.

Regards,

D-Ray
__________________
Then I'll get on my knees and pray,
We won't get fooled again; Don't get fooled again
Reply With Quote