<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NotSoSilentBob</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoeburnCane</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That's $10K less that's sitting stagnant in a bank/mutual fund</div></div>
Therein lies the fallacy of your argument. That $10K isn't being 'stagnant' in a bank account or mutual fund. That money is being invested in something that actually benefits people. That $10K is part of your mortgage loan or someone's vehicle loan.
The economy isn't a zero-sum game. I would much rather my money go into my bank account (or sit stagnant, if you prefer) than go to the federal government to pay for any social spending.
Stagnant indeed... [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif[/img]</div></div>
If the middle class had more financial flexibility there wouldn't be as much need for vehicle/mortgage loans (Read: more people could pay more cash down, less years to a term, less money borrowed, etc...), or at least ones that put the middle class in a bad spot...but that's a whole another story.
Plus--the weakness of your argument is assuming their investments are commercial & stateside ones--the major trend in investing now are overseas markets, especially Japan & China--so tell me where the rich investing these extra dollars in global markets helps us stateside, when they could be going towards the national debt/education?
Now--I'm not talking about "your money". You're middle class, otherwise you wouldn't live in Dungannon. I'm talking the rich who aren't going to be bankrupted by another percentage point or two of their money going from a stagnant account to aid us on the national debt/education (NOT necessarily social programs like welfare which is abused). You shouldn't feel threatened by what I'm talking about here because "you" aren't rich and it's not going to affect "your money" adversely--probably will help you out, actually.
Bookmarks