Yeah, it's funny how we've been beholden to trickle down economics here in Massachusetts until now.

After - who knows how long - with a flat and equal tax on everyone, we're going to reverse this policy.

It worked so well for Maryland: https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703976804575114241782001262

He would already pay 5% on whatever he makes, just like everybody else in MA.

Question #1 is asking him to pay more just because he's more successful.

You too.

So very brave of you, asking that other guy to pay more in taxes.

Stunning and brave.

It just sits under a mattress, right?

Most of the time, wealth is invested in corporations that provide jobs to people. Or it sits in banks that provide capital that can be used to provide credit (business and personal loans) to people. Or it's in treasury bonds that fund the government.

But, sure, we need to hit them up just one more time.

There's a first time for everything.

Do you have a job?

Can I swing by your house and tell you what you're allowed to keep and what I can take because you can afford it?

OMG, so SO much is wrong in this but I'll leave with one question: why does Massachusetts need a new tax on "rich fucks to pay for education" when we already have the highest education level in the entire country?

Tesla, Oracle, and Hewlett Packard say "hello" from Texas.

We have a flat tax. The millionaire is already paying $50K.

What gives you the right to stake a claim on somebody else's money?

That $30K taxpayer gets a $4.4 exemption and with a 5% rate has a tax liability of $1280.

The millionaire will pay $49780.

You have no right to tell anyone what they can and cannot keep or what they deserve.

OK, then why not urge an across-the-board tax rate increase for all MA taxpayers? Why single out one tiny sliver of the taxpayer base?

Make no sense. An extra tax is being imposed simply for business success.

Everybody in MA pays a flat income tax. How is that not fair to everyone?

They tried this millionaires tax in Maryland and they said it would raise $106 million. Take a wild guess what happened:

>Well, the state comptroller's office now has the final tax return data for 2008, the first year that the higher tax rates applied. The number of millionaire tax returns fell sharply to 5,529 from 7,898 in 2007, a 30% tumble. The taxes paid by rich filers fell by 22%, and instead of their payments increasing by $106 million, they fell by some $257 million.

Oopsie.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703976804575114241782001262

Yeah, I'm so sick of these high and mighty [checks notes] cranberry farmers.

>Cakounes believes the damage from Question 1 lies elsewhere; he worries higher taxes will drive businesses from the Commonwealth, as they relocate to avoid the extra burden; that Beacon Hill cannot be trusted with the extra $2 billion annually advocates say the measure will raise; that the state, which is enjoying a huge surplus right now, does not actually need the money.

If only there were some evidence to support the crazy idea that businesses relocate to low tax states.

Robbing Peter to pay Paul will always have the enthusiastic support of Paul.

Probably sell his rental property to a hedge fund that will immediately double the rent. But, hey, you gotta break some eggs to make an omelet!

Here we go: it's always necessary to belittle and dehumanize these rich cranberry farmers since it makes it easy to rationalize why they should pay more taxes and not you.

>adding that he always treats his tenants well, and charges them below-market rent because he knows working people need housing.

Yeah, what a monster. He built up a business and owns property earned over years. Clearly he must be punished.

>“Every single one of those pieces of property my wife and I have bought and sold, we got through hard work and sweat. I am not a trust fund baby.”
His real estate records reflect that work, and considerable savvy: His properties have risen greatly in value over the years, and he holds almost all of them in trusts, “for liability reasons,” he said, adding that he always treats his tenants well, and charges them below-market rent because he knows working people need housing.

It sounds like this cranberry farmer has been working and investing his whole life and has achieved success in the process.

Why should he be punished with an additional tax?

Yeah, he's done. Debate done killed him.

Same vibe: "Republicans Accused Of Ableism For Pointing Out Democrat Candidate Is A Blind Possum With Brain Damage"

https://babylonbee.com/news/republicans-accused-of-ableism-for-pointing-out-democrat-candidate-is-a-blind-possum-with-brain-damage

And neck.