Fairness Is Always In The Eyes of The Beholder.

Here's what I don't understand. If Republicans in congress are so against anything that even smells of a tax increase, they're against it, so how come they don't see cuts to entitlements as a form of tax
 increases on the poor and middle class? Look, if a modest family of four is currently living on ,say $20,000 a year which includes a few subsidies like a small amount of food stamps as an example, if you take that away, that family actually has less spendable income to live on. Now you can say what you will, but that's no different then an increase in taxes for someone else. Oh, I know, some folks believe we shouldn't be giving food stamps to anyone, but then how do you justify a special loophole in the tax code that gives a tax break to a corporation that has a jet plane for it's CEO to fly around in? I guess if I had to justify something, I think it would be a whole lot easier to justify some food for a family then it would be to justify a private jet for the boss. Buy him a first class ticket and a new set of luggage and let him struggle with the embarrassment of not having his own plane. And I'm sure I could make a case for eliminating the special treatment of hedge fund manager who pay a much lower tax percentage on the multi-millions they make each year then the average guy pays on his hard earned thousands. Why is it that some folks can't see the fairness in requiring those who have most , to pay most? That's why a flat tax is so unfair. If you set a flat percentage rate of tax on everyone, the poor would pay far more then they can afford while the rich would get away with paying far less then they can afford. Here's a simple example; if you assume a ten percent tax, a family making $20,000 pays $2,000 leaving only $18,000 to live on, but the family making $1,000,000 pays $100,000. That's a lot, but they still have $900,000 to live on. Most folks could eke out a bare existence on that. I'm not anti-success. What I am is pro-fairness. Now if there wasn't such a wide disparity on income between those on the top rungs and those near the bottom rungs, we wouldn't be having these conversations.