The mantra is always that the rich should pay their "fair share". Roseanne Barr recently said that anyone with personal wealth over $100 million should send the excess to the government (and if they won’t, she deadpanned that we should send them to reeducation camps or behead them (civility watch!)). President Obama said that you don’t have any inherent right to a certain amount of profit.

Now that’s an interesting juxtaposition; Roseanne Barr has more courage of her convictions, such that she should have a more concrete dollar value than Obama’s "certain amount".

What I would like to find out is, if there are liberals who would go on the record saying exactly (or even closely) what these values should be.

  • How much is the rich’s "fair share"? The only answer we’ve ever had is "more than they’re paying now".
  • Should the government put a limit on how much private citizens are allowed to earn, or a limit on total wealth? If so, how much?
  • Should the government put a limit on the profit a private company is allowed to make, as either a percentage or an absolute annual amount? If so, how much?

Herman Cain has his "999" plan. Rep. John Linder started a Flat Tax proposal. You know where these guys stand. But how about the Left coming out and telling us how much is too much? What’s the target they’re shooting at?

Related posts:

  1. Just Kidding
  2. Capitalism Saving Detroit
  3. From the Dept. of Lost Causes:
  4. Moving in the Opposite Direction
  5. The Standard & Poors Downgrade

Filed under: Democrats • Doug • Economics & Taxes • Liberal • Politics

Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!