Rhetorical Analysis Of Why I Shouldn T The Rich Pay More In Taxes

Why Should/Shouldn’t the Rich Pay More in Taxes Values Essay

As income has progressively grown higher for the rich and the incomes for the poor have progressively grown lower, the middle class has started deteriorating. What is this to say about taxes? Can taxes be an influence on saving the middle class? In Julie Borowski’s blog post,”Why Shouldn’t the Rich Pay More in Taxes,” she reveals the value of equal opportunity as she proves her argument of why the rich should not be taxed through her use of ethos, logos, cynical diction and rhetorical questions. While I agree with and support the value of equal opportunity, ultimately I believe the cycle of the rich becoming richer and the poor becoming poorer will not end unless the wealthy are fair about paying their taxes without loopholes.

As it stands today, the American income tax policy is progressive; there are six marginal tax brackets ranging from 10% (lowest income) to 39.6% (highest income).

She claims that raising taxes is counterproductive; the wealthy create jobs and should be encouraged to expand. She discredits Stephen King’s, a high-profile out-spoken millionaire, views on raising taxes on the wealthy by disecting his article the Daily Beast. She uses cynical diction calling his article vulgar and claiming that it is unjust for the government to forcibly take from the rich, or better yet, surrender their money to the federal government. In Borowski’s post she uses logos as a form of persuasion by referring to a 2011 U.S. treasury report that U.S. citizens donated $3.5 million to the U.S. treasury to reduce the debt. She suggests donations were an option that high salary individuals could utilize. She backs up her logic via using a 2012 US News article report that American’s were capable of being generous since they donated a whopping $347 billion to charity in