The Atlantic: Americans are Starting to Sour on Tax Cuts

12,493 Views | 205 Replies | Last: 2 days ago by BigRobSA
aggie93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Francis Macomber said:

shack009 said:

Francis Macomber said:

rgag12 said:

Ok, raise taxes broadly across the spectrum then. See if that gets you a "win" with the electorate.



I do not want to raise them across the spectrum, i just want to raise them across those making $100 million or more a year.


Bro, almost nobody makes that in a year. There are less than 30,000 people in the world who have a net worth of $100,000,000.


So? Tax the **** out of the ones that do. In case you've not noticed, we have concentrated wealth more than just about anytime in our country's history.

Obviously you are catching a lot of heat for your comments but I won't insult you, let me try to educate you instead. This is a topic I have studied extensively for decades.

Tax increases often have minimal impact on income except short term. Long term they have a negative impact. Lower taxes create economic activity and lower the incentive to avoid taxes through finding deductions and otherwise and that increased activity more than makes up for the revenue. That's why the massive Reagan tax cuts in the '80s resulted in a doubling of revenue in 8 years. Another example where it worked short term was when they lowered capital gains taxes under Clinton and we had a massive surge of revenue as people cashed in investments and reinvested them paying the lower tax rate but that is the primary reason we went from deficits to surpluses much faster than expected at that time. Thus "taxing the rich" has nothing to do with raising income, it actually works against it. The only reason for progressive taxation is social justice.

Income tax rates are also irrelevant to people like Musk, Zuck, etc because they don't make their money on regular income. They own stock. When they want money they simply take out a loan at a very low rate with their stock as collateral and then they take out another loan to pay off the first loan, essentially recylcling the money and paying a very small amount of interest and no tax. That's just one of many methods the truly wealthy can use to avoid taxes because they have enough wealth and equity to do things normal people can't think or or have the ability to do.

You also don't really want to "tax the ****" out of them because inevitably that means they have to sell stock or equities to get it. So that lowers the value of the stock for one which hurts other investors. More importantly it means that companies have less money to invest or worst case they actually sell assets and a new owner ends up cutting costs for more profit and laying off workers. Or the company simply ends up dying. Realize that this is also taking money that could be invested by the most successful businesspeople on the planet who would otherwise be reinvesting virtually all of it and creating more jobs and economic activity. When you are talking about Musk he doesn't even have much in the way of material possessions outside of a plane to get him around, he has a modest house he lives in with his kids when he's home in South Texas. He puts everything into his businesses. So that means for instance maybe Neuralink doesn't have the money to invest in bringing Blindsight to market next year which has the potential to literally cure blindness for people. Or maybe Space X doesn't go to Mars.

Worst off the tax revenue and spending are disconnected almost entirely. We don't have balanced budgets. If we need money the Fed just presses a button and creates it out of thin air (they don't even have to print it anymore). It's all a mirage. The real taxation is inflation by currency created out of nowhere that devalues your money. BTW, that doesn't hurt the wealthy either because they have equities and property that have inherent value.

So stop trying to figure out how you can get money from the truly wealthy. It won't solve the problems you think it will and it won't work anyway. Focus on growth and reducing government spending. If you want you can give more of your own money to charity to help those in need (that's also something the truly wealthy do in a big way).

"The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help."

Ronald Reagan
Ag87H2O
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
halfastros81 said:

Why do you want higher tax rates for the highest earners?

Because libs are eaten up with envy and want to stick it to the "rich" guys instead of leaving everyone else alone and worrying about themselves. C.S. Lewis called them the omnipotent moral busybodies.
aggiegolfer2012
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm starting to sour on cuts for the mega corporations.
These guy get billions in tax cuts, but then don't turn around and pay employees enough to get off of government entitlement programs. Companies like Wal Mart are gaming the system. They've got 14;000+ employees on SNAP and 10,000+ on Medicaid. They are using the government to supplement their employee pay, while saving billions from tax cuts.
Tom Fox
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aggiegolfer2012 said:

I'm starting to sour on cuts for the mega corporations.
These guy get billions in tax cuts, but then don't turn around and pay employees enough to get off of government entitlement programs. Companies like Wal Mart are gaming the system. They've got 14;000+ employees on SNAP and 10,000+ on Medicaid. They are using the government to supplement their employee pay, while saving billions from tax cuts.


Easy solution. End the government entitlements.
aggiegolfer2012
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Well, that's not gonna happen, so it's not that easy.
Ulysses90
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Tom Fox said:

aggiegolfer2012 said:

I'm starting to sour on cuts for the mega corporations.
These guy get billions in tax cuts, but then don't turn around and pay employees enough to get off of government entitlement programs. Companies like Wal Mart are gaming the system. They've got 14;000+ employees on SNAP and 10,000+ on Medicaid. They are using the government to supplement their employee pay, while saving billions from tax cuts.


Easy solution. End the government entitlements.


Exactly. Obamacare was the biggest giveaway to companies like Walmart that saved billions on health insurance for kicking their employees onto Medicaid and foodstamps. End those entitlements and the employers will have to determine whether they can replace entry level labor with robots or pay them better wages. End the entitlements, eliminate the illegal alien labor pool, and let the market forces sort out the rest.
rausr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ag87H2O said:

halfastros81 said:

Why do you want higher tax rates for the highest earners?

Because libs are eaten up with envy and want to stick it to the "rich" guys instead of leaving everyone else alone and worrying about themselves. C.S. Lewis called them the omnipotent moral busybodies.


Great C.S. Lewis explanation. His full quote on this:

Quote:

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

agwrestler
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Nitro Power said:

Flat tax rate for everyone or do away with income tax and go to a straight sales tax


EOT. + blue parachute for you!
AgBQ-00
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I've said this before, but the only morally justifiable tax is a sales tax.
Property tax makes you a renter/serf of the state. If they can take your land for non-payment of taxes, then you don't really own the land.
Income tax makes you a literal slave to the state. If you can be imprisoned for not paying income taxes, then your labor is not yours and you are being forced to work for the state.

The only morally justified tax is a sales tax. Because a person controls their spending. They freely take part in the market by buying their needs/wants and the government creates the environment for the market to work freely. But that tax would have to be capped and split between the state and the fed gov. If it was uncapped the government would just keep raising it to levels that are oppressive and unlivable. The state would collect and send to the fed gov, not the other way around. This would lead to reigning in the feds to a degree as well.
God loves you so much He'll meet you where you are. He also loves you too much to allow to stay where you are.

We sing Hallelujah! The Lamb has overcome!
Tom Fox
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aggiegolfer2012 said:

Well, that's not gonna happen, so it's not that easy.


Well, that is the correct answer to address your concerns. Not raising taxes on businesses.
redcrayon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Francis Macomber said:

Superfreak said:

Yeah except someone making $600000 AGI is not paying the same rate as an Elon musk. Why are effective tax rates so hard for people to understand?



Explain.

Since my post keeps getting deleted for unknown reasons, I'll just quote OP.
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Francis Macomber said:

shack009 said:

Francis Macomber said:

rgag12 said:

Ok, raise taxes broadly across the spectrum then. See if that gets you a "win" with the electorate.



I do not want to raise them across the spectrum, i just want to raise them across those making $100 million or more a year.


Bro, almost nobody makes that in a year. There are less than 30,000 people in the world who have a net worth of $100,000,000.


So? Tax the **** out of the ones that do. In case you've not noticed, we have concentrated wealth more than just about anytime in our country's history.

Apparently, you've never heard of the Gilded Age when the top 1% owned over 50% of the country's wealth...
BigRobSA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Tom Fox said:

aggiegolfer2012 said:

I'm starting to sour on cuts for the mega corporations.
These guy get billions in tax cuts, but then don't turn around and pay employees enough to get off of government entitlement programs. Companies like Wal Mart are gaming the system. They've got 14;000+ employees on SNAP and 10,000+ on Medicaid. They are using the government to supplement their employee pay, while saving billions from tax cuts.


Easy solution. End the government entitlements.

Yep.

Can't game a "system" that doesn't exist.

Liberal fiscal policy is always a LOLFail. Always!
aggiegolfer2012
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Tom Fox said:

aggiegolfer2012 said:

Well, that's not gonna happen, so it's not that easy.


Well, that is the correct answer to address your concerns. Not raising taxes on businesses.


I'm not saying raise taxes on businesses, I support tax cuts.
Im saying these mega corporations that are pretty clearly gaming the system need to be incentivized to pay employees enough to get them off those government programs.
MemphisAg1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiegolfer2012 said:

Tom Fox said:

aggiegolfer2012 said:

Well, that's not gonna happen, so it's not that easy.


Well, that is the correct answer to address your concerns. Not raising taxes on businesses.


I'm not saying raise taxes on businesses, I support tax cuts.
Im saying these mega corporations that are pretty clearly gaming the system need to be incentivized to pay employees enough to get them off those government programs.


Except most of them are on the programs because the programs are too damn generous. That's not the companies' fault. The handouts need to be dialed back.
YouBet
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ag with kids said:

Francis Macomber said:

shack009 said:

Francis Macomber said:

rgag12 said:

Ok, raise taxes broadly across the spectrum then. See if that gets you a "win" with the electorate.



I do not want to raise them across the spectrum, i just want to raise them across those making $100 million or more a year.


Bro, almost nobody makes that in a year. There are less than 30,000 people in the world who have a net worth of $100,000,000.


So? Tax the **** out of the ones that do. In case you've not noticed, we have concentrated wealth more than just about anytime in our country's history.

Apparently, you've never heard of the Gilded Age when the top 1% owned over 50% of the country's wealth...


Somebody should tell him that the top 1% cover 50% of government spend in California and New York and 40% at the federal level.

The far left can't ever seem to remember that fact.
shack009
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ag with kids said:

Francis Macomber said:

shack009 said:

Francis Macomber said:

rgag12 said:

Ok, raise taxes broadly across the spectrum then. See if that gets you a "win" with the electorate.



I do not want to raise them across the spectrum, i just want to raise them across those making $100 million or more a year.


Bro, almost nobody makes that in a year. There are less than 30,000 people in the world who have a net worth of $100,000,000.


So? Tax the **** out of the ones that do. In case you've not noticed, we have concentrated wealth more than just about anytime in our country's history.

Apparently, you've never heard of the Gilded Age when the top 1% owned over 50% of the country's wealth...


He also is neglecting that the poorest also have giant televisions with NFL redzone and a supercomputer in their pockets. Rising tides…
Tom Fox
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aggiegolfer2012 said:

Tom Fox said:

aggiegolfer2012 said:

Well, that's not gonna happen, so it's not that easy.


Well, that is the correct answer to address your concerns. Not raising taxes on businesses.


I'm not saying raise taxes on businesses, I support tax cuts.
Im saying these mega corporations that are pretty clearly gaming the system need to be incentivized to pay employees enough to get them off those government programs.

But you are focused on the effect and not the cause. Government programs will always be gamed and loopholes will always be exploited. The government is skewing the market by setting minimum wages and setting the floor through entitlements where people decide whether or not to even enter the job market. Of course business is going to take advantage of ways to recoup from the government inserting themselves into the business market.

Whether welfare, healthcare, PPP loans, or tax avoidance, people will always try to work around it.

Get the government out of the business of providing for individual needs and focused on core constitutional government functions and you largely eliminate most of this gaming. Remove the cause and you do not have to later correct for the natural effects of handouts. The government spending should never be 1/3 of our GDP. It is lunacy.
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiegolfer2012 said:

Tom Fox said:

aggiegolfer2012 said:

Well, that's not gonna happen, so it's not that easy.


Well, that is the correct answer to address your concerns. Not raising taxes on businesses.


I'm not saying raise taxes on businesses, I support tax cuts.
Im saying these mega corporations that are pretty clearly gaming the system need to be incentivized to pay employees enough to get them off those government programs.

You clearly don't understand that wages are merely prices.

Wages are the price that an employer is willing to pay for the labor services of an employee. The employer makes that decision on the price based on the amount of value that the labor services of the employee provides.


That's it. It's not rocket surgery.

What you're demanding is CORPORATE welfare. And you want consumers to pay for it.
aggiegolfer2012
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm all for that
But there's also a reality that it isn't happening.
Tom Fox
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aggiegolfer2012 said:

I'm all for that
But there's also a reality that it isn't happening.


Anything else is just mental masturbation.
chris1515
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Remember that one time when someone shared an article from The Atlantic and the folks on here read it in its entirety, gave it deep consideration and agreed with it?

Yeah, me neither.
Who?mikejones!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I read the Atlantic all the time and find their material to be rather hyperbolic mixed with lots of projection.

I long ago stopped taking anything they published seriously
Ulysses90
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
chris1515 said:

Remember that one time when someone shared an article from The Atlantic and the folks on here read it in its entirety, gave it deep consideration and agreed with it?

Yeah, me neither.



You could substitute Pravda or Izhvestia and neither the truth or the level of facetiousness would change. They are all propaganda rags.
Ellis Wyatt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
chris1515 said:

Remember that one time when someone shared an article from The Atlantic and the folks on here read it in its entirety, gave it deep consideration and agreed with it?

Yeah, me neither.

The Atlantic is leftist trash. It is not a serious publication.

Liiberals have abandoned free thought entirely.
Brother Shamus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Tom Fox said:

Francis Macomber said:

rgag12 said:

Ok, raise taxes broadly across the spectrum then. See if that gets you a "win" with the electorate.



I do not want to raise them across the spectrum, i just want to raise them across those making $100 million or more a year.


You should pay the same rate as them. If that is 60% for you, then I respect that. See if you can get that passed. I am not paying 60%.

And the bottom earners have to start paying at least net 10%.


Well or, if we go tarriff, then you get rid of the income tax. Or - you just charge 1-2% as when it was originally intended and you just figure out how to make the spending work. We still have a ridiculous progressive tax system yet the right wants to chest bump because we extended an existing progressive system.

Whatever.
Tom Fox
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Brother Shamus said:

Tom Fox said:

Francis Macomber said:

rgag12 said:

Ok, raise taxes broadly across the spectrum then. See if that gets you a "win" with the electorate.



I do not want to raise them across the spectrum, i just want to raise them across those making $100 million or more a year.


You should pay the same rate as them. If that is 60% for you, then I respect that. See if you can get that passed. I am not paying 60%.

And the bottom earners have to start paying at least net 10%.


Well or, if we go tarriff, then you get rid of the income tax. Or - you just charge 1-2% as when it was originally intended and you just figure out how to make the spending work. We still have a ridiculous progressive tax system yet the right wants to chest bump because we extended an existing progressive system.

Whatever.

So a consumption or flat tax? I support either of those choices. What I do not support is having the top few percentile fund everything.
double aught
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
the most cool guy said:

Exactly nobody who pays taxes is souring on the idea of tax cuts. ****ing morons.

Ehh...I don't need a tax cut, as long as you also cut spending. And use both to pay down the debt/balance the budget.

Wishful thinking, I know.
Artorias
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Can we ban articles from The Atlantic here? Complete propaganda rag.
oh no
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Communists have their useful idiots going online to try to convince you to read a Pravda article that concludes "tax cuts are a political loser" in its entirety, give it deep thought and consideration, and agree with it.

Haha. No.
BigRobSA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Brother Shamus said:

Tom Fox said:

Francis Macomber said:

rgag12 said:

Ok, raise taxes broadly across the spectrum then. See if that gets you a "win" with the electorate.



I do not want to raise them across the spectrum, i just want to raise them across those making $100 million or more a year.


You should pay the same rate as them. If that is 60% for you, then I respect that. See if you can get that passed. I am not paying 60%.

And the bottom earners have to start paying at least net 10%.


Well or, if we go tarriff, then you get rid of the income tax. Or - you just charge 1-2% as when it was originally intended and you just figure out how to make the spending work. We still have a ridiculous progressive tax system yet the right wants to chest bump because we extended an existing progressive system.

Whatever.

No.

MAGA sycophants, not the right.

"The right" wants to stop stealing, not steal at the current levels.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.