I agree that our current system needs restructuring, but this strip specifically mentions the income tax code. I was simply pointing out that by definition, a regressive income tax would assign higher responsibility as your income level decreased. This is not a matter of "Mitt Logic" as you stated, but simply facts.
When it comes to income taxes, 46% pay none. In fact, many of these people receive cash back in the form of EIC (free money). This cannot fit the definition of "regressive."
It is quite obvious from your bombastic rhetoric that you are of a much higher intelligence than I could ever hope to achieve.
[As a nation we have not yet developed the political cojones to throw out congresspeople who are not serving the American public. Mainly, basically everyone. The self-serving continue to get re-elected, and the 99% continue to get boinked in the bung. Nothing will ever change until our legislators truly understand that if they do not assist the populace to improve their condition, they *may not keep their jobs.*]
Congresspeople mostly serve the people who elect them just fine. The key part here is 'people who elect them'. When folks complain about congress its other folks congresspeople (i.e., congress elected from other districts) that they mostly have trouble with.
Has Scott just moved to the UK ?
Our tax year - and new tax rates - started on 6 April !
( no don't ask me why it's not the 1st of the month.................. obviously Stanky has been around for many decades)