Which is worse, letting a rich kid off easy for a heinous crime or allowing an ultra wealthy adult to drain public coffers through bribery? These two scenarios may seem completely unrelated, but they both illustrate the corrupting influence of modern inequality—treating those at the top differently than the rest of the country.
Maybe some of my ancestors were right -- "Les aristos a la guillotine"!!
Could someone please tell Mr. Hoxie that we are outraged by this unfair taxation but as yet this is an oligarchy and not a real practicing democracy. Plutocrats rule! The corporate coup and Citizens United!
No taxation without representation... Um? I think they forgot to include us this time?
What exactly can we do about this? The game is rigged!!!
That is why they are so worried that Bernie might win. Bernie wants to represent the little guys not the plutocrats or the corporate traitors.The rich are worried that they might have to be taxed the same way that the little guys are taxed.
Go Bernie... it'd be nice to see the rich pay fair taxes too!
I am SO grateful this article came out today here on Common Dreams. I was trying to figure out how to get the word out after reading the two stories on these two seemingly separate matters in the NY Times today. You saved me the trouble. I am still stunned about the teen literally getting away with murder, on the grounds that he is a spoiled rich kid who didn't know any better because his parents didn't raise him right. REALLY? The jails and prisons are full of people whose parents didn't raise them right; the only difference is they aren't filthy rich and can't buy the Just-Us system. And his mother should be put in jail along with him, Not only for 'not raising him right,' but also for taking him across the border and hiding him as a fugitive.
Shame on them, and shame on Texas!
If responsibility is based on bad parenting then yeah it would seem that bad parents should do the time...lol.
Bonne année Madame !
Hoxie sez: "Which is worse, letting a rich kid off easy for a heinous crime or
allowing an ultra wealthy adult to drain public coffers through bribery?"
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
TOTALLY!!!! Let them eat cake!
OK, here's why progressives like Mr. Hoxie have zero credibility. He equates manslaughter (which is actually illegal) with using legal methods to reduce tax burdens. Tax "evasion" is illegal. Taking authorized deductions is not. Does Mr. Hoxie take any deductions on his income tax return? Not eve the standard deduction? Does he voluntarily pay more taxes than he is legally required to? If he simply writes Uncle Sam a check for 50% of his wages and says "Thank you very much!" then he can lecture about others taking deductions. Otherwise he's just another progressive hypocrite.
Congress gets to set the priorities of the IRS, and defines what portion of its budget gets used for enforcement of the different aspects of the tax laws. Newt Gingrich ensured that the majority of the IRS's enforcement budget goes towards searching out people who don't actually qualify for the Earned Income Tax Credit (only the poorest of the poor qualify). That portion of the enforcement budget is a serious money loser.
Penalties on wealthy tax cheats can be extremely lucrative, but those kinds of cases are difficult and expensive to pursue. Gingrich and company made sure that there isn't enough money to prosecute more than a handful of cases each year, and subsequent congresses have maintained that status (for reasons which should be obvious).