The real question is why you think her making more money is cause for her to have to pay more than half the time as well as him making less renders paying less than half the time acceptable.

“Might want to do some research. We have a progressive tax system too (way more progressive then yours actually).” 

“Corporations will pocket the net profit, and it will take decades for salaries to be pushed up by the market.”

“Because we pay taxes.”

“And, if you want to pay more, you may have even more choices, as you do today if you are willing to pay out of pocket above and beyond your insurance.”

“yes, it costs money in taxes, but then is absolutely free”

Isn’t this the same sort of “free” GMG’s readers and writers go crazy for? The kind where you don’t pay for the good or service when you receive it but ultimately get a bill the April after you consume it?

I guess it’s good that we deal with income taxes in April and not “on a moment’s notice” isn’t it?

The idea that some people are “hoarding money” is far more indicative of why our financial state is where is is than you realize.

Like many other progressive “ideas” it’s a financial shell game that will likely fall apart whenever real numbers on who gets to pay what come out.

10 miles in my car or 10 minutes on public transportation and I’m picking 10 miles in my car.

“What could you do with a sky-high credit limit?”

The purpose of that is the fact that it’s hard to convince people to pay into a program beyond that program’s maximum benefit. Social security already has negative ROI for people in that income range. Politicians can’t afford to make the situation even worse.

When most people mention payroll taxes they’re talking about FICA.

I’d take a 100% perpetual payroll tax cut in exchange for giving up 100% of my future SS/Medicare benefits. That sort of cut does not create a future liability.

“There has to be a balance between living life and being responsible.”

That stat about wage growth relative to the cost of living is about a subset of workers. Rank and file workers if you will. If you are a college educated, salaried, worker it probably doesn’t apply to you. The “average” American and the “average” college educated worker aren’t the same hypothetical person. Not even…

Even if it’s off by a full order of magnitude it’s still tens of millions of people away from OP’s “most people” claim. Also, until someone comes up with a better metric for counting the number of people working > 1 job the BLS one is what we have.

People working more than one job make up a tiny percentage of the labor pool. The U-3 unemployment rate is calculated by taking the number of employed people divided by the number of people in the labor force. You don’t get counted more than once for working multiple jobs. AOC made a similar statement some time ago…

I suppose your solution is that “the government” aka people that have non-zero/non-negative tax liability should swoop in and provide these services at below market prices?