This is one of those times where they said the quite part out loud. Radical progressives dance with the idea of Socialism/Marxism

 https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/here-s-why-middle-class-must-pay-more-taxes-not-ncna805606

This is one of those times where they said the quite part out loud. Radical progressives dance with the idea of Socialism/Marxism, in order for that to work there can’t be a middle class. They disguise this idea of Marxism, funding and consolidating power within the federal government by saying the middle class will have to pay more to fund “infrastructure”, “training”, “education” & “the federal budget deficit”. 

After they get you to swallow that horse pill they then diminish you by talking about the “Me? I’m Not Rich!” problem. My wife and I barely make over the median household income listed in this article, we are not rich. A radical raise of taxes on the top 20% of American’s would create two groups of people. Those that can afford it and those that can’t. Those who can’t afford it and the middle to lower class American’s would drown in the drastic raise in taxes creating a poor class that would become reliant on the government. In fact this poor class would have no other option but to turn to the government and beg for bread lines. There would be almost NO room for advancement in society and the great American dream would be dead.

Direct Quotes:

To properly fund infrastructure investments, tax credits, training and education, and seriously tackle the federal budget deficit, we will need the top 20 percent of Americans to pay more in taxes.

I call this the “Me? I’m Not Rich!” problem. The more money people get, the more they think they would need to get in order to quality as “rich.” That is why “tax the rich” rhetoric from the left (and occasionally the right) currently fails; nobody thinks the increases should include them.

This perception forces progressives to focus their attention on an ever-narrower slice at the very top of the distribution: not just the top 1 percent, but the top 0.1 percent or 0.001 percent.

take January 2015, when President Barack Obama proposed removing the tax benefits available for the college saving plans known as 529s. Those plans disproportionately help affluent families, with almost all of the benefit going to those at the top of the income distribution. But the negative reaction of the mathematically rich — the liberal rich, just as much as the conservative rich — was so virulent that Obama had to ditch the idea, fast.

We can and should tax the top 1 percent, and the top 0.1 percent, more than we do today — but we can’t simply confine tax reforms to rich people who acknowledge the privilege of their wealth. One obvious reform is to remove some of the “upside down” deductions that primarily help America’s affluent, including the ones on mortgage interest, state income taxes and local property taxes, which have a disproportionate impact on the tax burdens on the top 20 percent of households.

This math indicates that the U.S. government could collect more than $1 trillion a year more in taxes from the top 20 percent of American households each year.