Framing the tax debate...

[Purrfessor]

Mitt Romney reported $13,700,000 in earnings last year (And he joked on the campaign trail that he was unemployed). A person who earns $100,000 per year would have to work 137 years to earn the same amount that Romney earned in 2011.

Romney paid a tax rate of 14.1% for a net of $11,768,300. Meanwhile, let's assume the person earning $100,000 paid a tax rate of 20% for a net of $80,000.

Instead of working 137 years to equal what Romney earned in a single year with no taxes factored in, the person paying a 20% tax rate now has to work 147 years to catch up to Romney. And Romney calls this fair because he claims to be a job creator. Consumers are the true job creators, not people like Romney who hoard money as if it's oxygen.

I think that framing the tax debate by showing the difference in years a middle class wage earner has to work in order to equal the income of a wealthy individual like Romney, people will begin to see how they are being screwed by the top 1 percent.

[Blue Meany]

1. It's not how much you pay, it's how much you have left after you have paid...n/t