A simple way to have a tunable progressive scheme would be Y = aX + bX^2. Set a and b as you like.
Your proposal is certainly better than what the flat-taxers are gibbering about, but it's still an oversimplification. One obvious example of why: a very large percentage of the income of homeowners goes towards real estate tax and interest on their mortgage, which is currently tax deductable. If you eliminate those deductions, you've now raised taxes (by a lot) on a huge chunk of the population, mostly middle-class. How do you think that's going to fly? Note, I'm not debating whether it's right/wrong, fair/unfair - I'm just saying that it's politically impossible, because a vast majority of the US's population would be against it.
I can see that you extrapolated based on those three columns, but the graphic isn't exactly clear on how they're arriving at those numbers - they could be pulled from two totally different sets of data for all we know. In a clearer statement, "data collected by the FBI show that firearms were used in 68 percent of murders" in 2011.
The difference is, he came to read a discussion about Star Wars, and saw some asshole saying he'll only watch the new movie so that he can complain about it. He didn't come in here specifically to comment on what a huge douchebag you are (nor did I), but after reading that comment, it's the appropriate response to let you know what a douchebag you are. After all, there's a small chance we might help you realize why you have no friends.
That's where your attempt to project your own loser behavior onto him falls apart.
It's you and every other person that thinks things should just stay the same as they were when you were in the prime of your life.
Come to think of it, there's probably millions of you guys, but fortunately you're all more than halfway done with your lifespan.
I actually served in the military, unlike you, so I'll take a stab at this one: because that's the oath that every volunteer takes when they enter. Despite what you think about how they vote, our military is, in fact, for the most part very professional and officers and enlisted alike take their jobs very seriously, including that whole thing about following orders, the chain of command, and that chain ending with the president.
Your fantasy about the military opposing a Democratic president is a product of a mind twisted by right-wing blogs and fed its own opinions in an endless echo chamber. The real military is quite different, I assure you.
The US military, or at least a sizable number of them, would likely have sympathy for a rebellion against tyranny.
You have no idea what you're talking about, and obviously never served in the US military. As a former member, allow me to inform you: the vast majority of military officers AND enlisted are very pro-law-and-order, and don't take their oath to carry out orders lightly. You're living in the same delirious world as those idiots in Oregon - the "once the rebellion starts, the masses will join us!" fantasy.
"Little prigs and three-quarter madmen may have the conceit that the laws of nature are constantly broken for their sakes." -- Friedrich Nietzsche