What would you do if Bernie won and, as he said, taxed you at 52%?

quote:

---

What would you do if Bernie won and, as he said, taxed you at 52%?

---

I'd do what workers in every socialist/communist country have done in every instance that mindset has taken over...

Work less.

Unfortunately I don't make $10 million a year so I wouldn't fall under his 52% tax bracket.

Everybody is focused on the 52%, which is bad, but targeting very high incomes.

The real evil in his plan is that he wants a NEW 4% flat premium on all income over $29K

The 52% is for complete class envy show. It would hit about 16,000 Americans and even then, only in theory.

The 4% is just another across the board arse raping.

I’d be amazed that congress passed it.

quote:

---

I’d be amazed that congress passed it.

---

I wouldn't be.

The following is an excerpt from a writing by Herbert Spencer called The Man VS The State.

The Man VS The State

As a corollary to the proposition that all institutions must be subordinated to the law of equal freedom, we cannot choose but admit the right of the citizen to adopt a condition of voluntary outlawry. If every man has freedom to do all that he wills, provided he infringes not the equal freedom of any other man, then he is free to drop connection with the State,—to relinquish its protection and to refuse paying towards its support. It is self-evident that in so behaving he in no way trenches upon the liberty of others; for his position is a passive one, and, whilst passive, he cannot become an aggressor. It is equally self-evident that he cannot be compelled to continue one of a political corporation without a breach of the moral law, seeing that citizenship involves payment of taxes; and the taking away of a man's property against his will is an infringement of his rights. Government being simply an agent employed in common by a number of individuals to secure to them certain advantages, the very nature of the connection implies that it is for each to say whether he will employ such an agent or not.

As a government can rightly act for the people only when empowered by them, so also can it rightly act for the individual only when empowered by him. If A, B, and C debate whether they shall employ an agent to perform for them a certain service, and if, whilst A and B agree to do so, C dissents, C cannot equitably be made a party to the agreement in spite of himself. And this must be equally true of thirty as of three: and, if of thirty, why not of three hundred, or three thousand, or three millions?

TLDR:
Govt works for you, not the other way around. You can't be forced to employ them if you don't want their services even if the majority does.

I’d do a bit of research instead of believing every meme I see on Facebook

quote:

---

Unfortunately I don't make $10 million a year so I wouldn't fall under his 52% tax bracket

---

That is what you think.

No one in house and Senate will support that kind of shite.

Even Democrats would shut that shite down. Democrats will not risk their political futures on someone who is not one of them. Bernie says shite that is similar to the Democrat party, and he's a socialist like the Democrat party..but, he's not supported by the permanent government.