[refurb]

You raise a good point. People talk about taxing the rich more, but guess what? There aren't that many rich! In order to substantially raise gov't spending, the middle class will need to pay more.

This reminds me of a Canadian election back in the 1990s. The NDP (left wing) wanted to fund more programs by increasing the taxes on the "rich". So someone asked who the "rich" were.

A family of 4 making over $60,000.

At least they were honest!

[pandaman]

Just today I walked past a new BMW in the garage with a "Bernie" sticker on it. I am not sure it was in support of Sanders but even if it were not it's the perfect symbol of the engineers from the OP: people driving new BMWs supporting taxing "the rich" as if "the rich" are not them.

[politician]

You're engaging in a logical fallacy; have you considered that the people driving the new BMWs might consider themselves to be rich --or-- might nevertheless consider Bernie Sander's policy positions to be laudable?

[pandaman]

> You're engaging in a logical fallacy;

I don't see how.

>have you considered ...

Yes I have. If such people exist I doubt they make a statistically significant fraction among supporters of such policies. All Sanders supporters I know are both "rich" (i.e. can afford a new BMW or two) and do not believe that "the rich" to be taxed are them. These people are not really dumb so if they thought their own wealth needed redistribution they could figure easier ways to achieve that.