[Askan Nightbringer]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
The web sites you had posted before that Last post were all explicitly biased, and could in no way be trusted to give even remotely unbiased information.

So what is an unbiased source? The government and media commentators definetly aren't.

Originally posted by Fian:
If the rich really were running the country, why isn't their tax rate lower? Maybe a flat tax? It is precisely because we are a democracy, and their vote equals the same as a poor man's that we have such a disparity in the tax rates. The poor continue to want services that they can't pay for (prescription drug benefit), and the rich are then the ones that end up paying for it.

As for the rich owning everything, I don't know if that is true. Can you provide any evidence that it is? We have a large middle class in America that owns stock, and as a whole might own more than the richest 5%.

Well if the poor and middle class were running the country why isn't their tax rate lower? Don't know about the US but in Australia the tax-free threshold (the amount of income your earning before you have to pay tax) has moved about 10% in the Last 20 or so years, not really in line with the cost of a loaf of bread.

The rich also benefits from the services the poor gets. ie
1) The waiter serving them food is dying from some treatable illness.
2) The guy receiving welfare isn't robbing him.
3) The person who just left school has the education and skills necessary to flip burgers in his McDonald's franchise.

See, its a win-win situation. Putting more pressure on the poor is eventually going to find its way up the chain and eventually you'll get a peasant revolt and there's nothing more annoying than when your entertaining friends at your manor and angry peasants are burning your cars. Welfare/public services benefits society as whole, not just the individuals who receive it.

As for the rich owning everything. I've clarified that, they own/control almost everything. A large chunk of American's might own stocks but they still have no say in the company they own a part of. The major stockholders do. The advertisers in newspapers have more say in the "content" of the stories than the readers.

Askan