Neat philosophical thought, Mason, but it still doesn't really relate to what I was discussing.   In principle I am opposed to DISPROPORTIONATELY higher taxes for those who earn more.  I am in favor of a uniform tax for all.  If someone works harder/smarter, and thereby earns more money, why should he/she be penalized for that by paying a higher tax?  With a uniform tax they of course will still be paying more, based upon income, but their fair portion.  I know this point of view is not popular with many of us who feel the rich should be footing the bill for those who earn less, but that is my view nonetheless.  Based upon currently established tax brackets, this and many previous' governments definition of "rich" clearly falls into very middle class income brackets.   In fact, the extremely wealthy can out -restructure the middle class, and with enough loopholes actually pay LESS tax than the middle class.  Thus, it is usually the middle class wage earner who ends up bearing the burden of these "lets tax the rich" notions.  So when President Bush wants us to cough up another 80 BILLION dollars for what amounts to literally MORE WAR, and more military action/presence (make no mistake about it, not one dime will go to the poor people of Iraq), I was shocked when most of the Democrats on TV last night agreed.  Their notion.."sure, the RICH will pay for it anyhow".  No they won't, I doubt it. It's gonna come out of blue collar and white collar "middle class" pockets.   And we'll feel the bite pretty soon, cause they still have to come up with the 200 BILLION they already spent on this mess.

Yes, somebody who earns one dollar or one penny more than you is wealthier than you, but how does that relate to what I am discussing???  Please enlighten me, if you will.

Gene