because I am capable of understanding divergent opinions
We're not really talking about divergent opinions so much as we're talking about raw envy. Yeah, I can understand envy, but that isn't exactly a tough one to get.
As for why this sort of thing lends popular support to taxing the rich more heavily, are you really claiming not to understand why that would be so? It's incomprehensible to you all why a person who is struggling to make ends meet would look at folks who's biggest concern is that their kid's nanny would not inculcate an early love of quinoa and not be particularly heartbroken over the idea that they would be subject to a higher marginal tax rate?
What I don't understand is why this particular issue is the big problem. Paying $2,500 for your nanny to take a cooking class? Okay, the folks who are doing that are obviously not worrying too much about money (assuming they aren't just living on credit). Why does this example drive the class warfare bus more than multimillion dollar homes, yachts, cars that cost far more than my house, private jets, bottles of booze that cost more than my family's monthly grocery budget, etc? What is it about these folks wanting their kids to be food snobs that makes this such a particularly good example for those "others" to point to when trying to prove why the rich's fair share should be so much larger?
If you make $20k a year, then a relatively low tax rate will be burdensome to your basic ability to live. If you make several million a year, then a fairly high tax rate will in no significant way impact your daily life. Many people view this as a fairly compelling logic in favor of tax rates increasing with income.
At this point, the conversation isn't about taxes going up a little bit for everyone or a little bit more for the rich. Our poor (say your $20K a year example) don't pay net taxes
at all, and indeed receive direct redistribution from the rich (and the not so rich). But I'll play along. The theoretical person who is going to lose all their worldly possessions if they have to pay more taxes isn't going to see much of a difference between this and someone who never sees combat spending thousands of dollars on guns, training, hunting trips and ammo. They are going to see anyone not living hand-to-mouth as being a suitable target for taxes. That's the pernicious thing about envy; everyone is capable of it and it can be directed at everyone that might be perceived as doing better.
Again, I am not advocating taxing the rich more. I’m merely saying that it’s not an unreasonable reaction.
I guess that depends on what you consider to be reasonable. It is a reaction that requires a variety of false assumptions and is based on the belief that it is your business how others spend their money. Moreover, it requires the utterly backwards presumption that someone else spending extra money causes harm to others rather than providing opportunity.
How often do we preach personal responsibility on here?
Let's not pretend that the desire for people we don't like to pay more is about personal responsibility.
And if you get articles written about your horror at the plebeian culinary standards of your kid’s nanny it’s not terribly surprising if normal people don’t give a sht if your taxes go up.
If people have more money than they "need" then it doesn't matter what they do with it short of giving it away, people will find fault with them. Hell, even if they give it away folks will complain that the wrong people got it.
