Trump: The First Year

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
2729

We definitely need tax reform but extremes on either side are bad. Too high taxation has negative effects but if you do too low you get what we have in Kansas. Decimated services, roads, and a budget situation that will take years to fix (see Jindal in Louisiana for more examples). This is how you turn red states purple.

Bill Self the highest paid public employee in Kansas paid zero income taxes when he switched to an LLC and he would hire no one with more money in his pocket.

As in all things moderation is the key

1 Like
2730

Well, I do wonder how otherwise intelligent people can think that a certain group of people should be punished simply because they make more money. And in most instances actually help drive the economy with that money.

When we hand it over the government what do they do with it?

Edit: I do understand why politicians might think this. It is called pandering for votes.

2731

There should be no high paid public employee’s. Certainly not to such an extent.

And I have no argument with moderation. I am not calling for people to pay zero taxes. I am simply calling for a system that does not punish the job creators. Most people work for small business
something like 65% of the job force. If the govt. takes more of their money how can they expand their business? How can they increase workers pay? How can purchase more goods and services?

A flat tax is the answer. Flat and fair to all.

2732

I have been tooting this horn since 2012 when I started posting in PWI! How can I take you over the edge?

Money doesn’t win elections and the more people’s minds you can change about the evils of the two party system. You can see some momentum with ideas like no labels. It’s going to be a slow process but I believe in time it will pick up even more steam as people begin to realize the drawbacks of only having two choices and blind party loyalty.

2733

There are drawbacks to the two party system. But two things, the first I already mentioned above. It would take massive amounts of money to actually launch a successful third party. The second speaks to a point that I have not heard mentioned as yet.

What happens if we get multiple parties and there ends up being 5 people running for President? If you think Donald Trump is wacky just imagine what 21% of the people might elect. We could get a Black Lives Matter leader, or Klu Klux Klansman for participant for President.

What are your thoughts?

2734

Or looked at another way: If someone makes 1M they will have 800K to live on, whereas if someone makes 40K they will only have 32K to live on. Doesn’t seem equitable to me.

Sorry, color me unimpressed.

Again, your attitude toward taxation–‘punishment’ for being a member of the ‘evil’ rich–suggests a serious (and self-serving) misunderstanding of the system.

Your example isn’t even in the same ballpark. Taxation is not a punitive action intended to discourage unlawful behavior, or to compensate for damaging behavior; rather, it is payment for services rendered (eg, the security blanket you sleep under; the roads you drive on; etc).

Yet again, your conflation of taxation with punishment is telling.

2735

What? It is completely fair. The government should not be choosing winners and losers. All they should be doing is creating opportunity that people can either take advantage of or not. Anything beyond a flat tax the govt. punishes those who succeed.

Quick story, I had an Uncle back in the day who used to work construction. He made a lot of money but at a certain time in the year he would drastically cut back his hours saying that working more would put him in a higher tax bracket and he didn’t feel like making however much it was on a dollar (I don’t recall). How many working class people have done that? This current tax system actually helps no one other than the US Government.

Of course you’re not impressed you are fully immersed in a losing tax system which punishes those who achieve and actually help drive the economy.

It is telling of a logical look at money and the real world.

We use money to reward and punish people in our society in case you have not noticed. I gave two examples above which demonstrates how people are punished. I will give you one for reward. When someone wins the lottery does the lottery commission take a certain amount of money from them? No. They award them a large check. Money has been used for century’s for reward and punishment. Simply because the word we use to steal people’s hard earned money is called “taxes” does not change that.

Also, your example above of roads, and let’s throw in bridges and sidewalks, does not wash as we also pay local and state taxes which cover most of that. Why does someone have to pay almost 50% of everything that they make to the feds, state and local authorities? You think that’s fair? That is outrageous!

The progressive tax system is actually regressive as it takes money away from those who are contributing to the economy. Thus harming the economy in the name of “fairness”. But it does grow an already bloated and wasteful government.

Also, if you feel strongly about paying taxes how come you don’t pay more than you are supposed to? I am willing to bet that you don’t throw in an extra thousand bucks on tax day. Why is that?

2736

Taxation is not punishment? Tell Joe Doe that he can’t purchase an $80,000 sports car that he wanted because he has to write an $80,000 check to the IRS that he is not being punished.

I bet it feels like punishment to him. He looks in his garage and there is no $80,000 sports car. And he thinks
“that sucks. All those overtime hours for what? Next year I won’t work them.”

2737

“Fair”? When libs use that word, don’t conservatives mock them for it?

Just as it isn’t ‘evil’ or ‘punishment,’ being taxed at a higher marginal rate is not tantamount to ‘losing.’ And it is patently absurd to call someone making 40K a year a ‘winner’ because they get to keep a slightly higher proportion of their income than someone making 1M.

Also, I would point out that you’re in luck–you are free to join the ranks of ‘the winners’ anytime you’d like. Simply drop your income to their level, and you’ll be a winner too. (Although something tells me that, despite your kvetching and protestations, when it comes down to it, you’d rather be what you describe as a ‘loser.’)

The history of our country would seem to make that argument a nonstarter.

Rich people don’t drive the economy; working people do.

The fact that money is sometimes used to punish/reward does not mean that all exchanges of money can/should be considered examples of punishment/reward. When you buy a loaf of bread, I seriously doubt you think you’re doing it to ‘reward’ the baker.

Just the opposite, actually.

That’s like me pointing out a bus has been driven into a ditch, and you asking me why I’m not trying to pull it out by myself. Given the size of the budget, me throwing in a couple of thou extra will have zero effect. In order to move the budget needle, everyone must participate.

Correct, taxation is not punishment.

Tell it to John Doe who buys the 80K sports car, and then ruins it the first time he drives over the unpaved fields where there are no streets (because of the absence of taxation). Now, that’s a guy who’s gonna feel punished.

2738

I would say the chances of a BLM or KKK participant being elected President are so miniscule it is not a thought worth pursuing.

As for the money yes it would help. However the more people come to the movement or work to reduce the influence of the major two parties the less money it would take. More people moving away from D’s/R’s equals less money for them.

At the very least it makes zero sense to support a system that has the two major choices being Hilary (strongly disapproved by a ton of voters) and Trump (even more strongly disapproved by a ton of voters).

2739

Fair in a sense that everyone pays the same percentage. How can that be anything else but fair?

They only pay 8-k. That is quite a bit less than the guy who is paying 200-k. Come on ED.

You are twisting the topic around but that does not change the end result. Obviously I worked hard to get where I am and do not want to change places. I never said that someone paying less than me has it better than I do and I think you know that. My point is simple. Why should someone be punished for making more money? Why should I pay almost half of all I make? Do you think that is proper?

Ah
but the baker feels rewarded when he sells enough of his product. And if he grows his bakery to say 12 locations he is now considered part of the evil rich and will have to give up almost half of everything that he makes to an unfair tax system. So he has now been both rewarded and punished for his success.

I would think that someone who believes in big government and higher unfair taxes would want to contribute more. So, you just want me and “my kind” to pay more
I see.

Incorrect. Taxation IS punishment. And if one decides not to pay the unfair taxes the people come to that persons house with guns to force him to pay it. And if he refuses he gets further punishment with jail time.
It’s a corrupt unholy system.

But you used a word that I never used. The word “absence”. We have already determined that we need taxes. It’s that I want a flat tax that taxes everyone equally and still forces the rich to pay more. Also, the road old Joe is going to drive down has been paid for by his state and or local taxes. The federal government probably had nothing to do with that particular road. Although some highways were built and are maintained by the feds.

2740

I used a drastic example to be sure. But something like that could happen with 5 candidates in a race. It would only take a small minority of people to put a real nut in the White House (insert Trump joke here).

Anyway, I do like the concept of a third party. But it has been tried in the past by a very bright billionaire and he only received 19% of the vote (Ross Perot 1992).

How many people voted for Gary Glitter
 what his name? He was a third party joke. If there is to be a viable third party Presidential candidate he/she needs billions and needs to be a “real” candidate.

I think it would be a cool idea but I don’t see it happening in the near future.

2741

Not disagreeing but the simple fact of the matter is Brownback gave him an incentive to create an LLC which became tax free money. Many wealthy farmers and other people followed suit. They didn’t increase hiring (Bill Self is not really a job creator) or did so to such a miniscule amount as to not even remotely offset the massive cuts to social services, education, roads, mental hospitals, etc. In fact Kansas lagged behind other states and we now have a budget situation that is pretty well fucked for the near future.

I believe the arguments for higher taxation are not focused on taxing small business owners more but the extremely wealthy more. Unfortunately the extremely wealthy are the best at avoiding taxes because they can hire people who understand the convoluted tax code or they can lobby for special treatment that you and I cannot.

I can 1000% get on board with tax reform though. Most importantly making it easier and requiring less red tape. However I do not view taxation as punishment but a necessary evil. Like most things the devil is in the details though and that is what hangs people up.

2742

Near future no. The more people start to talk and start to say we don’t like this system and it isn’t working the sooner it will happen.

2743

Well, that would be fine. But unfortunately the end result is that small business people are being punished by having to pay higher taxes. And people like Warren Buffet who makes most of his money through stock investments pay only a miniscule 15% in capital gains tax. So he can talk all he wants about “the rich” paying more as he knows he will never have to. He is a big mouth blowhard. Perhaps not at Trump’s level but nonetheless he is one.

Well said.

2744

Well, I would like to be the first to say that I don’t like this system and it isn’t working. One example is Trump’s tax cut proposal. Sure I love the idea after paying through the nose for 8 years. But you and I both know that if he is going to increase military spending, have urban renewal projects and at the same time cut taxes that in the end we are going to once again (as Obama did) raise the national debt. That is a very, very bad idea.

But yes in the short term tax relief sounds mighty good.

2745

Well, it’s that time of the day again
off to the gym. Nice talking to you ED and H. Have a great day I’ll be back later.

Enjoy All.

2746

In order to head the “taxation= theft” argument off at the pass, and because I am not that much of an An-Cap, we do indeed give govt the power to tax. I was speaking in practical philosophy terms rather than anarcho-capitalist terms.

2747

Based on what I know about LLCs, this sounds like misinformation. I don’t know how that can possibly be accurate. I think you may have been had.

2748

Well, that’s the marketing line but there are problems with this outlook: firstly that even if you took every red cent from all the “billionaires” in the country, including their investments, it wouldn’t be enough to do what needs to be done.

Second, because the vast majority or small business owners are LLCs and S corps they are treated as pass through entities for tax, which means that even though they are putting immeasurably more back into their businesses to keep them afloat they are officially part of the so called “billionaire class” (which of course is not actually something that exists except as political rhetoric, but the top 0.1% - %1 as a tax bracket does).

So essentially these folks look like the “super wealthy” to the tax code when in fact they do not have golden parachutes.

2 Likes