There's a law in the states that citizens are not required to carry identification. Thus all a foreigner has to do is state that they are a resident and there's not much an officer can do about it.
There is a big difference between "resident" and "citizen." In the United States, citizens are technically not required to carry any sort of identification, although it makes things generally easier if you do. On the other hand however, Permanent Residents AKA Green Card Holders are required by federal law to have their identification document (Green Card) on their person at all times. I believe the same goes for non-immigrant visa holders (H-1B, B-1/B-2, J-1, F-1,
You beat me by a few seconds...
The reason for the progressive tax rate is simple. If everyone had to pay the same amount across the board, most of us would have to pony up more than we make in an entire year.
Who ever suggested that everyone pay the same *amount*?
Everyone should pay the same *percentage*. Wealthy people will pay more, less wealthy people will pay less, as a function of their income. The scale itself shouldn't slide. This is what is patently unfair.
I'm all for doing away with income tax altogether and going to a national sales tax where the amount of sales tax would be graduated based on the category of item purchased (i.e. food would be taxed at a much lower percentage rate than a yacht).
This still isn't fair. Why should the percentage be higher? Why can't everyone be on a level playing field? The tax on a yacht will be higher simply by virtue of its higher price. Why do we need to increase the tax rate? Doing this effectively punishes people who work harder.
Ability to pay is irrelevant. In your original post you implied that cutting the already absurd taxes on the wealthy is somehow wealth redistribution in their favor. It isn't wealth redistribution when it is your own money! It is wealth redistribution when a person with lesser money gets money from the government (money that was taken from people with more money). It is wealth redistribution when we take wealthy people's money and use it to buy health insurance for those who can't afford it.
Also, the statements that the administration has made regarding this issue have been very arrogant. For example: "We can't afford to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy." You don't "pay for" tax cuts. The money belongs to the person who earns it, not the government. You "pay for" government services (and waste). How about we drastically decrease federal government services that we can't afford? How about we quit subsidizing the corn industry (one of the biggest, most corrupt industries in the nation)? How about we abolish a few useless government agencies. We can start with the Dept. of Education (which has overseen the recent nose-dive in American educational quality), the ATF, the EPA, and any number of useless agencies.
The system was down for backups from 5am to 10am last Saturday.