I took Bill O'Reilly's bogus "Cultural Warrior" test and failed it by one, leaving him to label me as leaning heavily "to be an S-P" or Secular Progressive. It's amazing to me already that conservatives go around attacking and labeling people "liberals" because that's considered a bad thing by them, but now this narcissist has to start making up new labels to tear down. Wow--I'm so much more about what people do than who people are.
I am progressive (I can't imagine why a person wouldn't be progressive--any type of growth is progressive, but I digress), but I am religious, so that blows a hole in his ridiculous theory right there.
But question number one is framed so at odds with reality that I had to talk about it here.
1. Do you believe in "income redistribution"--that is, the government taxing affluent Americans at a higher proportional rate in order to fund entitlements to the less well off?
We all believe in income redistribution. If we didn't, we wouldn't pay taxes at all. If we didn't, we wouldn't have local governments, state governments or a federal government.
If we didn't have income redistribution we'd live in an anarchy.
If we didn't have income redistribution we'd all take our big paychecks (G-d knows what the little paycheck people would do) and settle our little plot and dig for water and hire our own mercenaries to keep the other anarchists off our "property." We'd have schools for the affluent, too.
So taxing affluent Americans at a higher proportional rate does not DEFINE income redistribution, it is called a PROGRESSIVE tax system. I'm not necessarily in favor of taxing us this anyway (although I could probably be convinced), let's just take away all the loopholes and pay taxes straight up, corporations, too. O'Reilly, that would still be "income redistribution" you misleading ditto-head.
No comments:
Post a Comment