According to Bloomberg, the uber-rich are getting slammed with a tax increase, just as Obama and Democrats have long demanded, but is it now (or was it ever) a "fair share"?
"The top 0.1 percent of taxpayers, those with incomes over about $2.7 million, would pay an average of $443,910 more, reducing their after-tax incomes by 8.4 percent. They would pay 26 percent of the additional taxes imposed by the legislation."
Let's try a little thought experiment. Suppose you're a young person fresh out of school, nobly dedicated to shaping young minds by teaching. You are making good money, say $42,000/year, which for a single person puts you well out of poverty. Now, Obama and his goons come along and tell you that you owe an additional $443,910 in taxes as your "fair share." Do you agree? I mean fair is fair, isn't it? And if it isn't fair for you, why is it fair for those making a little more than you?
The problem is that the side of this argument that says "the rich get more from a tax cut" wants to talk about absolute dollars, when "fairness" (not that this should ever be the reason for a tax policy) requires us to talk about PERCENTAGE. Those terrible "Bush tax cuts" that have now been made permanent gave the largest PERCENTAGE tax cut to the lowest incomes, lowering their taxes by 100% (from 10% to zero)! Those in the next higher bracket got a 33% tax break (from 15% to 10%), while those in the top bracket got a cut of a measly 4%. But as a result, the rich ended up paying a HIGHER percentage of the total taxes than before! Now we see an additional burden loaded on the top taxpayers. When do we get back down to "FAIR"??? What would you do after an 8% reduction in "take-home pay"? What do you suppose THEY will do and how will that affect jobs and the economy?