"So if they aren't concerned then it has to be legislated. I don't see another way. The rich were still rich even when they were being taxed at 75%."
Bingo. Of course they weren't rich by today's standards... to see that you'd have to go back to the last gilded age, which was pre-income tax.
In the fifties the top tax rate was somewhere around 91%. When people talk about the baby-boomers retiring, and how the population won't be able to afford their upkeep, no one mentions that a small population of workers supported them as children, and we were a nation of far fewer means. The WWII generation did more than win a war. They came home and built a nation; with highways, bridges, schools, hospitals and a thriving middle class. They raised a generation that threw all that away in 50 years or so.
I realize of course that Paris Hilton works much harder than I do, but is it so much harder that a large portion, if not all of the Republican party dedicates themselves to seeing that she gets to keep more of her "hard-earned" wealth? At the expense of a country once known as the greatest and most respected on earth? Apparently she does.
Progressive taxes built America. That same nation now deteriorates as we debate whether Bill Clinton's extra nickle or so on each dollar over a quarter million was too onerous a burden for the fortunate to bear. Future generations, should there be any, will see us as a pathetic bunch of selfish, short-sighted, faux patiotic, money-grubbing swine. And well they should.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
