[bluecalm]

They make more money because they are more productive and their services are highly valued. Those people already bear disproportional burden when it comes to taxes.

I mean, what do you really want? Everyone works according to abilities and everyone is provided for according to their needs?

[stjohnswarts]

"Disproportionate" in raw numbers sure. Disproportionate in quality of life and lifestyle? lol 50% for the 1% is like "damn the government!" 50% for people under median salary is putting them into poverty and likely government assistance to get by.

[refurb]

I’m not arguing the rich need to pay more, I’m arguing that the OP is wrong to argue he’s just a “normal worker” and shouldn’t be paying a large tax burden when he makes more than 99% of the population.

Basically when the OP says “the rich should pay more” I’m saying “ok, but that includes you”

[salawat]

You're misdefining rich I think in the sense it may be being used in this case as a proxy for "companies and taxpayers doing things to obfuscate their actual flow of monetary value".

Even if one makes say 1000000 in income, no equities, and takes the standard deduction, they are not the Rich being lamented here. They would not be doing end runs around tax obligations.

Yes, you blow the minimum wage folks out of the water salary-wise, but it doesn't mean they are in any different a boat than any other tax payer trying to do it right.

Which can actually be surprisingly difficult if you do anything other than basically "money comes in, money goes out". I'm actually somewhat afraid of doing any of the more advanced reading in the tax code, because it'll probably end up with me makimg a few appointments with the IRS to get someone to explain things to me. Their writing style is terrible, and I tend to lose track in the forests of ambiguous antecedents.

I say this as someone who isn't a stranger to reading legal docs or standards for fun.