Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login


Submitted on
April 12, 2011
Image Size
5.5 KB


21 (who?)
Tax The Rich STFU by BlameThe1st Tax The Rich STFU by BlameThe1st
Most of us are familiar with “The Goose That Laid The Golden Eggs”: Old couple finds goose. Discover goose can lay one golden egg per day. Become greedy and want more golden eggs. Take hatchet and cut up goose. End up with no eggs, no goose, and a bloody hatchet.

This fairy tale against greed and envy is becoming more realized every day as unemployment rises along with the national deficit and debt—only instead of an old couple, we have disgruntled Americans (specifically economically-illiterate moonbats), and instead of a goose, we have “the rich” (a term moonbats often say with the same disgust as a normal person would say “the Devil” or an anti-Semite would say “the Jews”).

More and more Americans, disillusioned by the recession, are demanding that “the rich” pay their “fair share.” According to one survey, over 60% of Americans want to tax “the rich” in order to reduce the deficit. Still others like moonbat propagandist Michael Moore propose more radical solutions—like eating “the rich.” (Knowing Michael, he’d probably be able to eat the rich in one sitting!)

But if more Americans didn’t allow the current economic crisis to get the best of them, and thus thought more with their heads and less with their emotions, they’d learn that moonbat claims concerning “the rich” are completely bunk.

“The rich” aren’t paying their fair share in taxes? Wrong. The richest 1% pays nearly 40% in total income tax while the richest 10% pays over 70%. Meanwhile, the lowest 20% pay less than 2%.

“The rich” are getting richer while the poor are getting poorer? Not true. While the lowest 20% do have a lower level of shared income, their real income is actually higher, and income of individual households has gradually risen over time.

Soaking “the rich” will solve our economic woes? No it won’t. Even if we confiscated all of their wealth, we would only be able to run the country for one measly year.

Tax cuts to “the rich” caused Wisconsin’s budget shortfall? False. Scott Walker’s tax cuts weren’t even in effect when the shortfall occurred.

In short, moonbat talking points like “the rich are getting richer” and “the rich don’t pay their fair share” are as credible as claims like “9/11 was an inside job” or “Obama was born in Kenya.”

If moonbats truly cared about taxpayers paying their fair share, they would opt for a flat tax system where everyone paid at the same rate regardless of their income. Instead, they continue to advocate for their “progressive” tax system where, the more you earn, the more you pay in taxes, thus unfairly shoving the entire tax burden on the rich.

But then again, moonbats don’t care about paying fair taxes. They only care about class warfare and wealth redistribution. Their only desire is to drain the evil, evil rich of their hard-earned money; and if they get what they want, they’ll end up like the old couple in the fairy tale: with no eggs, no goose, and a bloody hatchet.
Add a Comment:
Paulthored Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2014
“The rich” aren’t paying their fair share in taxes? Wrong. The richest 1% pays nearly 40% in total income tax while the richest 10% pays over 70%. Meanwhile, the lowest 20% pay less than 2%."

If that Richest 1-10%,  Receive over 70% of the income, then yes they aren't paying their fair share. simple math.---Ie: If the bottom 20% received only 2% of total income, than 2% of the income tax is fair if steep for people for whom that income may be their sole liquid assets. If the top 10% received 80-90% of the total income then their taxes should be 80-90% of the total regardless of any tax loopholes. remember TAXES don't take more than a Percentage of the total income, so if 70% is in any way a lower percentage than what the took in income, then the 'rich' are indeed Not paying a 'Fair' share.

Even if it is fair, there is still the fact that the rich 1-10% are MORE likely/easily able to dodge reporting taxable income, simply because they can move their money oversea's.

EclipticSpectre Featured By Owner Aug 1, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist

It's funny because the ones who support increased and higher taxation for the "rich" are generally more often than not people who have little to nothing to begin with. Seems like a case of jealousy that the rich have something that the poor want a piece of. We have a similar problem in the UK except the tax burden falls upon the minority of us working class folk, given our enormous welfare state. Rich elites move their money offshore, and the "poor" take, and ever day there's more of them since people know they can make a living in this nation by doing nothing.

Pocket-fulla-shells Featured By Owner Jul 17, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
Bear this in mind - tax the rich too much and they'll scurry off to tax haven countries such as Switzerland and all that tax that they were paying will be gone, I'd say the rates for the rich are fine as they are.
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Jul 20, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Funny thing is that Switzerland is one of the freest economies in Europe. It’s #5 overall. Low taxes and regulation. High GDP and living standards.
2CYN Featured By Owner May 17, 2012  Student Filmographer
Sorry if I come off as a fool, but can someone explain what the big deal is?

Isn't this just plain old supply and demand? Of course the rich have to pay more money than the poor because they can afford to pay more for goods, so the markets can drive the price up and so the stuff the rich buys naturally costs more than it does for the poor. Part of being a capitalist society is that everything is worth what its purchaser will pay for it. And if you're rich, why buy a $5 hat when you can buy a $5000 hat?

I admit I'm not some kind of economic expert, but I think it's taken as read that a diamond-encrusted I-Pod is going to cost more than a plastic-cover I-Pod, or what have you.

I hope you don't think I'm attacking you; I just want to better understand where you're coming from.
plzwork112234 Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Why tax those who give us jobs? Who WORKED for a living... Who lived and Worked then the parents gave them the power...
TheAnonymousZ Featured By Owner Mar 10, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Let's do a little role reversal.

99%- Goose
1%- Elderly couple
Government- The bloody hatchet

the goose is constantly attacked by the hatchet to feed the elderly couple so they can continue to attack the goose (The US government is controlled by the 1% which constantly attempts (if not succeeds) in doing things that harm the 99% to gain more money for themselves). Harming others to progress oneself, isn't that basically the definition of greed?
El-Drago-800 Featured By Owner Oct 24, 2011
I've got an idea, stop putting so much money into you're military! You guys have the highest military budget in the world, in fact you guys alone make up nearly half the worlds' military budget. Look: [link]
In 2010 alone you guys spent £698,105,000,000, the second highest military budget that year was China, who spent 114,000,000,000. That's 500,000,000 more than the runner up.
So, maybe it won't completely save your economy, but it will help a lot to at least half your military spending.
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Oct 25, 2011  Hobbyist General Artist
Agreed! We spend way too much on the military, and the wars have been a real drain on our economy.
PortalGuardian18 Featured By Owner Sep 22, 2011
I agree with some of your points about the whole 'eat the rich' deal that everyone is so eagerly for. Because what defines rich?? If what my mom makes as a dialysis nurse with my dad out of work qualifies as rich....Then that's a huge load of crap. Now what I define as rich is two categories. one is the hardworking entrepreneurs who brought us things like Microsoft, KFC, McDonald's and so on. and the second category is those hypocritical big-headed idiots running the country who jet to and from their vacation homes and DC...And then turn around and preach about global warming to us when we cut back as much as we can.

Now I'm not saying we should tax the rich more....But we should look into other strategies like maybe pulling the federal government out of some things to cut back spending. Don't bit my head off please, I'm just my opinion.
Add a Comment: