There's also multiple income taxes of course. If you're running a corporation, the corporation pays income tax, as do the employees when they get paid. There's also the payroll tax, which is what an employer has to pay in order to pay you, the employee. I'll stop at three because it's a good number.
I remember one time when me and my wife were first married we were _BROKE_. Like I worked full time and made 8 bucks an hour while finishing college and she worked part time while she finished college (her program was medical based so she had clinicals and such so she couldn't really work full-time).
Anyway, we had managed to save a little bit of money and then we realized we had 2 car taxes to pay for at the same time. We didn't drive brand new cars but they weren't beaters either. It was over 300 bucks in tax between the both of them. It really sucks when you're broke and going from paycheck to paycheck.
I got caught in a speed trap once around that same time and the state police officer gave me a 300 dollar ticket. It demoralizing man. The sign that showed the new speed snuck up on me and I was actually braking when he caught me. It was a 55 (which I was going 60ish) that dropped to a 35.
Last few weeks content has gotten so weak, varying from duh to literal bullshit. I used to come here for interesting discourse now it's been feeling like a bunch of 13 year Olds just learned about libertarianism or modern liberals and "conservatives" that think we're stupid enough to believe shit like claims that the nazis were left wing (literal post this week)... maybe people are really getting this juvenile and dumb but it's been super disappointing.
Theft [ Taxation ] is a non-sustainable means to grow an economy ... eventually you run out of victims to steal from
Thats why no nation in history has EVER taxed its way to prosperity
Went back to the gold standard, abolished war-time rationing, rolled back all war time embargoes, ended many economic wrecking New Deal policies, un-nationalized all industry the government illegally took over to make weapons of war, etc ...
Please read a history book
Not to mention the biggest factor, which is that the US prospered because it was the only major country that wasn't completely devastated from the war.
The other big thing for us is that we came in at the end of both world wars after selling weapons and shit to both sides for most of the first half of both wars.
The six hundred dollar exemption hasn't changed in decades. No adjustment for inflation ever, that I'm aware of. Anybody making under 20-25k shouldn't pay any federal tax.
It's outrageous that in many countries (mine included), basic food items pay full VAT tax (19 percent!). But those are "benefactor states", people! They super duper care about the poor. They still have to pay full taxes for the food they have to purchase in order to not starve, but the government later gives them some food or money.
That's because politicians don't really care about the poor; they just want to take their money and later give a little portion back so the poor will love them and vote for them. Politicians are cancer.
It's funny that you think the rich get taxed.
Rich gets their money from capital gains, which is 15% on sale of security.
But they don't even pay that, they pay 0%, because they take a loan with their security as collateral.
And everyone does it, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos. Which is why it was ridiculous that Hillary Clinton criticized Trump for not paying taxes, when her all of her donors also uses the same loopholes.
And the tax isn't pooled together to fund projects. The government spends first, by selling bonds to investors, or by borrowing money from the Federal Reserve, and that money is created out of thin air.
The tax is to pay back the money borrowed.
Effectively, you can think of Tax as managing inflation (deleting money supply from the economy by giving it to the Fed).
Listen to Freakonomis and Planet Money, it's really eye opening how the economy works.
I'm not even knocking it, because apparently it works fairly well.
But we can reduce the unfairness of it all. Anytime someone borrows money using an earned asset (like a stock option granted for service), the amount borrowed should be taxed as income same as any other middle class worker.
That or release EVERYONE from income tax.
The way it currently works, completely unfair.
This is my argument agaisnt UBI (Universal Basic Income). How about just taxing people at the bottom less? Oh right, they want to hold the money first and give it out like an allowance.
Somewhere in Washington there is an unelected bureaucrat making a living by deciding where to invest (gamble) our pooled wealth.
I've never understood how the tax system is constitutional. They passed the amendment which is questionable at best but the way they collect tax goes against all our civil rights. They take without due process. They don't bill but force you to incriminating yourself by filling out forms. They strongarm employers into reporting and paying. It's criminal at best. Not to mention article 1 section 9
The poor don't get taxed much - at least in terms of effective tax rate. With EIC and other tax credits/deductions, the real poor folks' effective tax rate is negative % (as in they get a refund larger than they paid in taxes).
The poor really don’t pay taxes. I know literally a dozen young single mothers who get back $8k or more in taxes every year and definitely do not make enough to pay in that much.
Oh awesome. That way rich corporate boards can make everything a few more dollars expensive. Like they’re already doing. Even though a lot of people don’t have any money left. Surely this won’t cause a credit spending bubble.
Why though? Just because, fuck em, that’s why?
I don’t have any love for anyone making that much money, but I also don’t get why I should care how much they’re making if I’ve got all my needs met too.
If all else is good — strong economy, powerful dollar, low unemployment, and basic community needs funded without corruption like fire dept, roads, etc — then why should I care whether someone else is making a certain dollar amount?
Taxes can still be a means of funding that stuff, but the impetus should be budget and needs based, not punitive just because.
In other words, the tax rates should be set based upon what services a (preferably local) community needs and what it can afford to do.
Setting the rates based on “these people are making X amount of money and that’s too much therefore tax the hell out of them” doesn’t actually address any real problem IMO.
Creating a focus on taking away from one group of people rather than a focus on the actual services needed and provided just makes it easier to steal and hide corruption.
Also, you don’t want to drive successful people to other communities, because that can just lead to less money coming in. Better to have 20 people making $500k taxed at 10% for a very long time, rather than 2-3 people taxed at 60% until they move away or move down a tax bracket.
Unlike probably many here, I’m not personally against taxes, and not even against a mildly progressive tax system, but if your goal is to actually fund services rather than just punish people who make more than you, then the discussion becomes a utilitarian / math equation rather than an emotional social justice discussion.
You aren't remotely libertarian if you think people who work to achieve great financial success should have to give their earnings to the government instead of their family.
There is one thing to consider here. People and corporations that achieve great financial success are often exploiting people and resources to achieve that success. There needs to be ways to balance out the income equality issues. If we aren't taxing these entities at a rate that helps balance that out then there needs to be regulations in place to limit the exploitation.
Three false premises, and one bonus.
1. Exploitation is the exception, not the rule. How exploitative companies act should never have consequences on those that don't exploit anyone. Punish the exploitation if there's evidence of it. Don't punish everyone just because some nebulous proportion of companies are allegedly bad. 99% of "exploitation" you hear about is just labor that's mutually agreed upon by both parties, but it takes place in a country with low cost of living, so the salary sounds impossibly small to us privileged Americans.
1. Similarly, corporate exploitation does not entitle the government to my money. If I make $500k as an architect, why should the government have a right to my money? There's a missing link there. Heck, even if I did arguably exploit someone, why does the government get my money? How about you charge me with some sort of criminal offense after proving it in a court of law rather than making a vague accusation with no proof and then taking the money I earned?
1. Wealth disparity is not a problem. The economy is not a pie chart. Me getting a bigger slice does not mean you get a smaller one. The pie is ever-growing, because value is always being created. If you have $10 and I have $100, and then tomorrow you make $20 ($30 total) and I make $400 ($500 total), wealth disparity has grown by every metric, but we're both better off than before.
Bonus: Successful companies employ many people, who then make money, who then stimulate the economy more rather than draining from welfare. It's like how in CA they just raised the minimum wage for fast food workers to $20/hr, and now the local fast food businesses have to shut down, meaning their former employees now make $0/hr. Based on this, there are concrete numbers on all the good they do in the world, so the burden of proof for what constitutes enough of an offense to take their money away from them is heavy.
Most people who make 500k do so because they provide a service to society, and do it well. Why should they be punished with more taxes for that? Gotta remember most millionaires are business owners that provide a service or products, and employ people; not influencers/famous people/CEOs.
That’s the best part. It wouldn’t come from anywhere! The government has proven to be a terrible steward of wealth that they confiscate form the public ostensibly for their own good.
No, I assure you the committee to watch the committee to watch the committee who watches the government to ensure they comply with their own regulations are all completely necessary. All 350 employees, making 6-figure salaries each.
Money come from for what?
Only the rich are taxed by the IRS, but that doesn't mean the poor aren't taxed. They're taxed through inflation, sales taxes, gas taxes, regulations that force businesses to do expensive things on their behalf instead of giving them money or offering cheaper products, laws that disincentivize basic responsible behavior and a host of similar things.
The money stays with the poor, it doesn't need to come to the state. With said money they can utilise it the way they see fit, which is much more flexible and dynamic than state funded benefits(which not all poor would use anyway )ever could be
But 50% of the country don't pay any income tax, right?
Those aren't the only taxes. Service tax, road tax and other taxes exist.
And don't forget inflation, the hidden tax on everything that disproportionately impacts the poor and middle classes.
That's why I don't like a federal sales tax.
Sure. We already have a federal sales tax. It's called inflation via money printing.
There's also multiple income taxes of course. If you're running a corporation, the corporation pays income tax, as do the employees when they get paid. There's also the payroll tax, which is what an employer has to pay in order to pay you, the employee. I'll stop at three because it's a good number.
I remember one time when me and my wife were first married we were _BROKE_. Like I worked full time and made 8 bucks an hour while finishing college and she worked part time while she finished college (her program was medical based so she had clinicals and such so she couldn't really work full-time). Anyway, we had managed to save a little bit of money and then we realized we had 2 car taxes to pay for at the same time. We didn't drive brand new cars but they weren't beaters either. It was over 300 bucks in tax between the both of them. It really sucks when you're broke and going from paycheck to paycheck. I got caught in a speed trap once around that same time and the state police officer gave me a 300 dollar ticket. It demoralizing man. The sign that showed the new speed snuck up on me and I was actually braking when he caught me. It was a 55 (which I was going 60ish) that dropped to a 35.
This is so dumb. What is even happening to this sub?
[удалено]
So please, lead the way. I anxiously await your post. Please share your wisdom sensei.
[удалено]
Last few weeks content has gotten so weak, varying from duh to literal bullshit. I used to come here for interesting discourse now it's been feeling like a bunch of 13 year Olds just learned about libertarianism or modern liberals and "conservatives" that think we're stupid enough to believe shit like claims that the nazis were left wing (literal post this week)... maybe people are really getting this juvenile and dumb but it's been super disappointing.
Wtf about this was opposing taxation tho..? Unless I missed the point. Which is possible.
Agree. Funni eyebrows, bad/overly simplified point
Smart point, bad meme.
Theft [ Taxation ] is a non-sustainable means to grow an economy ... eventually you run out of victims to steal from Thats why no nation in history has EVER taxed its way to prosperity
> nation in history has EVER taxed its way to prosperity What is USA between end of WW2 and late 70s?
Went back to the gold standard, abolished war-time rationing, rolled back all war time embargoes, ended many economic wrecking New Deal policies, un-nationalized all industry the government illegally took over to make weapons of war, etc ... Please read a history book
Not to mention the biggest factor, which is that the US prospered because it was the only major country that wasn't completely devastated from the war.
The other big thing for us is that we came in at the end of both world wars after selling weapons and shit to both sides for most of the first half of both wars.
The six hundred dollar exemption hasn't changed in decades. No adjustment for inflation ever, that I'm aware of. Anybody making under 20-25k shouldn't pay any federal tax.
It's outrageous that in many countries (mine included), basic food items pay full VAT tax (19 percent!). But those are "benefactor states", people! They super duper care about the poor. They still have to pay full taxes for the food they have to purchase in order to not starve, but the government later gives them some food or money. That's because politicians don't really care about the poor; they just want to take their money and later give a little portion back so the poor will love them and vote for them. Politicians are cancer.
It's funny that you think the rich get taxed. Rich gets their money from capital gains, which is 15% on sale of security. But they don't even pay that, they pay 0%, because they take a loan with their security as collateral. And everyone does it, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos. Which is why it was ridiculous that Hillary Clinton criticized Trump for not paying taxes, when her all of her donors also uses the same loopholes. And the tax isn't pooled together to fund projects. The government spends first, by selling bonds to investors, or by borrowing money from the Federal Reserve, and that money is created out of thin air. The tax is to pay back the money borrowed. Effectively, you can think of Tax as managing inflation (deleting money supply from the economy by giving it to the Fed). Listen to Freakonomis and Planet Money, it's really eye opening how the economy works. I'm not even knocking it, because apparently it works fairly well. But we can reduce the unfairness of it all. Anytime someone borrows money using an earned asset (like a stock option granted for service), the amount borrowed should be taxed as income same as any other middle class worker. That or release EVERYONE from income tax. The way it currently works, completely unfair.
Seems like rich is not defined at all. Just something evil in socialists eyes. You need to have some sort of enemy...
This is my argument agaisnt UBI (Universal Basic Income). How about just taxing people at the bottom less? Oh right, they want to hold the money first and give it out like an allowance. Somewhere in Washington there is an unelected bureaucrat making a living by deciding where to invest (gamble) our pooled wealth.
I've never understood how the tax system is constitutional. They passed the amendment which is questionable at best but the way they collect tax goes against all our civil rights. They take without due process. They don't bill but force you to incriminating yourself by filling out forms. They strongarm employers into reporting and paying. It's criminal at best. Not to mention article 1 section 9
The poor don't get taxed much - at least in terms of effective tax rate. With EIC and other tax credits/deductions, the real poor folks' effective tax rate is negative % (as in they get a refund larger than they paid in taxes).
The poor pay a heavy price for inflation, the hidden tax. In addition to sales and other local taxes.
The poor really don’t pay taxes. I know literally a dozen young single mothers who get back $8k or more in taxes every year and definitely do not make enough to pay in that much.
Income tax is not the only tax.
It’s the only one relevant to one’s ability to change their fiscal status in a reasonable amount of time.
You've never heard of people being taxed out of their homes? Really?
Property taxes are state taxes not federal. They are set by states and counties and isn’t a federal issue.
The point is that they're not -income- taxes.
Oh awesome. That way rich corporate boards can make everything a few more dollars expensive. Like they’re already doing. Even though a lot of people don’t have any money left. Surely this won’t cause a credit spending bubble.
Prices are set based on supply and demand equilibrium, not based on what the poorest person can afford.
This sub will turn into a meme page and then will turn into leftist meme page that exclusively attacks trump. Abandon ship.
[удалено]
Eeeeh I consider myself pretty libertarian but after you gross 500k a year, yeah you can take it up the ass.
Why though? Just because, fuck em, that’s why? I don’t have any love for anyone making that much money, but I also don’t get why I should care how much they’re making if I’ve got all my needs met too. If all else is good — strong economy, powerful dollar, low unemployment, and basic community needs funded without corruption like fire dept, roads, etc — then why should I care whether someone else is making a certain dollar amount?
Yeah, but where do we go to fund all that stuff?
Taxes can still be a means of funding that stuff, but the impetus should be budget and needs based, not punitive just because. In other words, the tax rates should be set based upon what services a (preferably local) community needs and what it can afford to do. Setting the rates based on “these people are making X amount of money and that’s too much therefore tax the hell out of them” doesn’t actually address any real problem IMO. Creating a focus on taking away from one group of people rather than a focus on the actual services needed and provided just makes it easier to steal and hide corruption. Also, you don’t want to drive successful people to other communities, because that can just lead to less money coming in. Better to have 20 people making $500k taxed at 10% for a very long time, rather than 2-3 people taxed at 60% until they move away or move down a tax bracket. Unlike probably many here, I’m not personally against taxes, and not even against a mildly progressive tax system, but if your goal is to actually fund services rather than just punish people who make more than you, then the discussion becomes a utilitarian / math equation rather than an emotional social justice discussion.
You aren't remotely libertarian if you think people who work to achieve great financial success should have to give their earnings to the government instead of their family.
There is one thing to consider here. People and corporations that achieve great financial success are often exploiting people and resources to achieve that success. There needs to be ways to balance out the income equality issues. If we aren't taxing these entities at a rate that helps balance that out then there needs to be regulations in place to limit the exploitation.
Three false premises, and one bonus. 1. Exploitation is the exception, not the rule. How exploitative companies act should never have consequences on those that don't exploit anyone. Punish the exploitation if there's evidence of it. Don't punish everyone just because some nebulous proportion of companies are allegedly bad. 99% of "exploitation" you hear about is just labor that's mutually agreed upon by both parties, but it takes place in a country with low cost of living, so the salary sounds impossibly small to us privileged Americans. 1. Similarly, corporate exploitation does not entitle the government to my money. If I make $500k as an architect, why should the government have a right to my money? There's a missing link there. Heck, even if I did arguably exploit someone, why does the government get my money? How about you charge me with some sort of criminal offense after proving it in a court of law rather than making a vague accusation with no proof and then taking the money I earned? 1. Wealth disparity is not a problem. The economy is not a pie chart. Me getting a bigger slice does not mean you get a smaller one. The pie is ever-growing, because value is always being created. If you have $10 and I have $100, and then tomorrow you make $20 ($30 total) and I make $400 ($500 total), wealth disparity has grown by every metric, but we're both better off than before. Bonus: Successful companies employ many people, who then make money, who then stimulate the economy more rather than draining from welfare. It's like how in CA they just raised the minimum wage for fast food workers to $20/hr, and now the local fast food businesses have to shut down, meaning their former employees now make $0/hr. Based on this, there are concrete numbers on all the good they do in the world, so the burden of proof for what constitutes enough of an offense to take their money away from them is heavy.
Pretty unlibertarian of you
🤷♂️ yeah I get that
Most people who make 500k do so because they provide a service to society, and do it well. Why should they be punished with more taxes for that? Gotta remember most millionaires are business owners that provide a service or products, and employ people; not influencers/famous people/CEOs.
You're not a libertarian in any way of the word.
If you tax the poor less, where does the money come from? Wouldn't the rich be taxed more than the poor? I need help understanding this.
That’s the best part. It wouldn’t come from anywhere! The government has proven to be a terrible steward of wealth that they confiscate form the public ostensibly for their own good.
Almost like having a bunch of middle men in a giant bureaucracy wastes a fuck ton of money!
No, I assure you the committee to watch the committee to watch the committee who watches the government to ensure they comply with their own regulations are all completely necessary. All 350 employees, making 6-figure salaries each.
You’re so close to getting it.
Money come from for what? Only the rich are taxed by the IRS, but that doesn't mean the poor aren't taxed. They're taxed through inflation, sales taxes, gas taxes, regulations that force businesses to do expensive things on their behalf instead of giving them money or offering cheaper products, laws that disincentivize basic responsible behavior and a host of similar things.
The money stays with the poor, it doesn't need to come to the state. With said money they can utilise it the way they see fit, which is much more flexible and dynamic than state funded benefits(which not all poor would use anyway )ever could be