Income Inequality

That the specific recommendations of forkushV have not yet been implemented in the 'low tax" States, are not being discussed in the "low tax" States' legislatures, and are unlikely to ever be discussed in the "low tax" States' legislatures.

forkushV suggests the "low tax" States should enact forkushV's recommendations out of "common decency".
DonDiego opines States should act as their constituent citizens want them to act, . . . presumedly free State elections yield just this result.

DonDiego suggests without Federal intervention in violation of the letter and intent of The First Amendment, spontaneous enactment by the "low tax" States recommendations is simply not going to happen.
He is pleased that forkushV does not espouse such Federal action.

DonDiego apologizes if he offended forkushV in any way.

Boiler finds it ironic that those being subsidized by others, claim that the "others" aren't paying their fair share.

In your Indiana, the middle class pays about double the state and local tax rate compared with the top 1%.

Boilerman, you're just a turkey that votes for Thanksgiving.

I sure find it ironic that someone who pays no state income tax or his fair share, then goes whining about others.

I wouldn't mind a 3-5% across the board cut along with closing a few redundant agency's(don't ask which ones because I'm not sure) and a few unnecessary ones. The govt is bloated, has been and got a whole lot worse during and after the '08 meltdown. If I recall just about congressman stuck his/her own piece of pork in the stimulus bill. I wouldn't mind a few tax increases IF it's accompanied with reductions in spending. I think that's the only way to start chipping away at the budget. I also think if the govt. did this, it would be great for business, they'd look at it extremely positively.

Maybe if Trump gets in he may be able to do something about it, he is a pretty successful businessman. I'm almost certain if it's Hillary not only will she not cut anything but have a feeling there will be increases. Both in spending and taxes.

Boiler STILL finds it ironic that those being subsidized by others, claim that the "others" aren't paying their fair share.

Jeez, how do these "rich" people get out of paying their "fair share"?

The Clintons earned more than $28 million in 2014 and claimed around $3 million in income as charitable tax deductions, according to tax returns released by Hillary Clinton’s campaign last Friday. The campaign emphasized Clinton’s charitable giving in a press statement, saying that it “represented 10.8 percent” of her income in 2014. But roughly half of that money—$1.8 million—appears to have been channeled to the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation.

According to the tax returns, the Clintons gave $3 million in 2014 to the Clinton Family Foundation, a small private foundation that the family uses as a pass-through to other charities. Records show the CFF disbursed $3.7 million in 2014, including $1.8 million to the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation.

Source: Freebeacon.com

If I remember correctly forky moved from the high tax state of California to the low tax state of Nevada, which is subsidized by the casino industry and tourists.

So forky isn't paying his fair share

The middle class in Nevada pays an overall state and local tax rate that is OVER FOUR TIMES what the top 1% pay.

The top 1% in Nevada are being subsidized by the middle class - big time.

This is the same bullshit argument that you offered in the past. The rich still pay more real estate taxes, sales taxes, etc. (per capita) than the middle class. It only makes up a lower portion of their gross income.

Do you feel you have to resort to diversionary and misleading tactics to make your point?

The fact is you don't pull your share and yet you whine like crazy about people who pay a hell of a lot of taxes.