you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]SaidtItFirst 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

Only if we tax them at 70% after the national average income.

[–]TheParanoidAndroid 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

What are you on about?

[–]SaidtItFirst 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

She's asking for more money, while saying there's a limit to how much other people can have. It seems hypocritical.

[–]TheParanoidAndroid 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

So you're talking about her 70% tax rate? So are you just misinformed or are you intentionally being misleading? The 70% was a marginal tax rate on earnings over $10 million. She even said herself that she would gladly pay it if she made over $10 million a year. That tax would effect very few people at the top of the food chain. Why do you defend the rich when they don't give a fuck about you besides the money they take?

[–]SaidtItFirst 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's the lying "I was raised in poverty in the Bronx" when that's not true.

Now that she's in power (at the trough), she wants more money, but isn't her claim to fame that she's fighting against greedy and corrupt politicians? So there's flip-flopping.

Trust me, when she hits $10 million, the bar gets raised to $100 million -- which is why she's going to be given $10 million.