That sounds about right based on the quotes I got last year

The person you responded to said they breeze past cars at red lights, not that they breeze through red lights.

And drivers need to also follow the rules of the road, like stopping at red lights, not turning on red when there's a sign forbidding it, following the speed limit, not parking in active traffic lanes (like bike lanes). I could go on for quite awhile. If what you truly care about is folks breaking the rules, then drivers are where you should start.

You have some weird ass friends then

Right? Like that's obviously Clark Kent, standing alone

I'm sure we'll get this ironed out someday

Oh cool, moving the goal post

Sure. The answer is quite a few. Most of these millionaires started as small business owners who weren't making much money but they needed to hire people to grow their business. Every single farmer these ads claim to care about was likely not very well off when they hired their initial staff. If you think I'm wrong, feel free to provide examples.

Taxes are paid where they're earned. Anyone who works in MA will still pay MA taxes. You seem unfamiliar with our tax code.

>I don't sit here and covet the wealth of other men.

Weirdly sexist, and red herring

>I don't believe we should punish success by taxing people at a higher rate just because they're successful.

Red herring

>I think it's obscene to demand that people pay more just because they have more.

That is literally what any flat tax does.

>I'm sure that Bill Gates doesn't think twice about me.

Yup

>But Bill Gates created an industry that has employed tens of thousands of people in mostly high-paying jobs

Unrelated to the issue

>and has created a business that increases productivity across the globe.

Is your argument that people would only be motivated to improve society because they could eventually be worth $100B+ and only making a billion wouldn't motivate them? Weird take but ok.

>We should be thanking him but instead the opinion is "he has a lot of money and he should give it to us."

Well, good ole Bill would disagree with you. That's why he started the foundation. Even he thinks he shouldn't have as much as he does.

You seem to have confused this personal tax increase with a business tax increase. The only businesses that would move because of this tax are ones that are taxed/owned by unincorporated entities. Will some businesses move? Maybe. But there will always be a race to the bottom. None of the corporations that generate the majority of the jobs/income in MA will be moving as this won't even remotely affect them.

It seems you've picked a position and are now trying to find facts that support it instead of the other way around. My condolences.

Answer my question first.

Peter is happy about it. If he wasn't, he'd set his business up somewhere with lower taxes and fewer services, like Alabama. Peter never wants to pay though, because no one ever wants to pay.

Everyone needs to be compelled. Literally everyone. You must have skipped econ 101, where they taught that an economy is a collection of self interested individuals.

Weird red herring

I've never seen Peter complain about Paul being well educated, skilled, and able to come to work due to the services that government provides.

The rich are the rich, regardless of your personal perception of their industry.

Having worked as a farmhand, I can confidently say any "farmer" who is making over a million per year is not a farmer themself.

Why do you care how much a millionaire pays in taxes, when he wouldn't think twice about you?