Does anyone here not understand....

... a tax on the wealthy is a tax on everyone?

The wealthy tend to be employers and producers and providers of services and goods. They did not get wealthy by not being cagey with their money and being good at math. That's how they stay wealthy. Or at least in part...

So my argument is if you raise the taxes on them to the point that Democrats want to raise them..... They end up passing the "savings" on to you and I.... By simply increasing the cost of the services and goods they provide to the everyday consumer.

They're not going to just say oh well and eat the loss. So if you stick it to them they're going to stick it to everyone else.

Now I'm no CPA or tax expert but in my opinion a flat tax rate would be best.

But I do understand that wealthy people are going to pass the cost down to the consumers. Do elected Democrats not get this concept? Then in actuality it raises taxes on everyone in the form of final cost?

I believe they do understand that but they're banking on most of their voters not knowing that. And hey.... Nothing inspires the layabouts more than catchy and edgy phrases like "eat the rich "

You know one of the main differences between a third world country and developed Nations? There are very few wealthy producers in third world Nations. And there are reasons for that.

Are you not a fan of outsourcing? Well just tax the hell out of domestic producers and watch what happens. That's it.... Raise their cost of production and then act surprised when they find more friendly areas to operate in.

Somewhere between the extremes of both parties ( in regards to this subject ) there is a happy middle ground. Elements on the far right would basically tax them not at all or very little..... Elements on the far left would tax them to the point where they would move overseas or simply raise the hell out of the cost of all of their goods and services..... Which means all of us little people end up absorbing the cost.


Just food for thought.

 

It's the envy and jealousy tax policy. Designed to whip up their base by creating the evil rich.

"Wealth" is a dog whistle. We don't tax wealth, not even real property, at the federal level. There is no way possible to tax "wealth" since the value of wealth can be a very subjective matter. And it fluxiates constantly. To try and assess the total wealth of someone for tax purposes would be folly and constantly embattled in court. Just look how long it takes to probate a will.

And of course the fact that the highest earners already pay by huge margins the most tax revenue and highest share of taxes.

Taking capital out of the market limits the growth of that market. There is inherent efficiency lossnin "government investment". What has been proven over and over is the best way to grow government tax revenue is to grow the economy and get everyone working and earning money so they become taxpayers and provide for themselves instead of being a government expense. Couple that with spending restraint and platry deficits and even surpluses are the result.

 

America was most prosperous when taxes were very high for the very wealthy and none of what you are saying happened.

Now we have the worst income inequality we have ever experienced and highest rates of national corporations profits.

You are basically arguing the rich are too big to be taxed — that sounds like we shouldn’t have allowed them to get to that point instead of a reason to let them gain more wealth.



Horse and sparrow economics is one of the biggest items of propaganda the Republicans have ever successfully pushed.

 

Oh yes we never had any outsourcing here....

And raising the cost of productions never raises the cost of goods....

And I am not arguing nothing of the sort. So please don't put your words in my mouth and if you did not understand what my argument is try reading my original post again.

 

Can you show a single instance of a large corporation passing “savings” unto the consumer?

The last bailout we did they did stock buybacks which went to their wealthy shareholders (and the people with 10 grand in stocks got some peanuts also).

The years our CPA gives up huge tax savings from one of the businesses it goes into my pocket — not our customers. We only lower prices when competition mandates it.

Have you ever ran a business?

 

The Democrats aren't going to place extra taxes on rich folks. That's just a talking point they use to get their followers stirred up.

 

So, here goes the "easy to understand" GOP narrative:

-Increase taxes, and the corporations will just pass the costs incurred by the increased taxes on to the customer, leading to a price increase.

Now, if that's correct, one could argue that a tax cut should reduce cost for the corporations, which they then should pass on as lower prices to the customer.

Wait, why has the second part never happened when the GOP cut taxes for the rich "job creators" or corporations? This tells me that something is wrong with your simplistic hypothesis.

 

Neither of which makes a difference - higher income and profits means a growing, prosperous economy. "Income inequality" means people get paid for performance and obtaining valuable skills.

Your chart negates your claim.

 

So you feel we have a growing prosperous economy?
I wasn’t aware you thought Biden was doing such a great job.

 

I suppose this is the part where you tell me that you run a business?

I would think someone that runs a business would understand that making it cost prohibitive to operate in a certain area would motivate that business to find a new business friendly area.

I would also think anyone running a business would understand that increasing the cost of production would necessarily mean that the end results would cost more as well.

 

. Biden is merely a bump in the economic road.

 

No, I run two businesses. Well my partner really “runs” one of them but I am more active in it than I would like to be. I also have a degree in business and accounting. Super boring stuff

And you, what is your business experience?
You seem to indicate a certain knowledge base that doesn’t line up with what I have learned over the past 15 years.

It absolutely is, we see this with site selection for new businesses and relocation plans for existing ones. Smaller businesses have less ability to move typically, especially if they are based on local customers.

That is a case for corporate taxes not individual. Increasing taxes on the individual as well as having minimum taxes would not usually impact the cost of operating the business itself.

Increasing compensation to these individuals would be that would allow smaller business more of a chance to compete.

One of the biggest issues however is how income is taxed, I take a small distribution that is taxed much lower than my mtr — very wealthy people live off of these distributions or use structured loans tied to assets so their income is very small.

That is why you see billionaires paying lower tax rates than middle class families and pay nothing many years. Do you not agree that is an issue?

 

For 6 more years until Newsom?

 

Not like Newsom will wait that long.

 

I doubt that unless Biden’s approval (or cognitive ability) decline pretty rapidly within the next two years.

 

Biden's approval is in the crapper. 70% feel we're moving in the wrong direction. He'd be gone now if Harris and Pelosi were the next two in line.

 

I think we are in a place where the president’s approval rating means less than the person he is running against. I think ‘24 is going to be a very interesting election.

 

That's great but I'm not sure what that has to do with the topic.

After all this is an anonymous message board and for all anyone knows we could both be more full of it than a Christmas turkey. The great thing about the nature of an anonymous message board on the Internet is anyone can be anything they wish to be.

Anecdotes aside.... You don't have to have an advanced degree to have common sense and observe logical math in action.

And if you reread my original post you will see that I said that there is a problem.

On one extreme you have a side that wants virtually little or no taxes and on The other extreme you have a side that wants to basically tax businesses into bankruptcy or outsourcing.

Obviously somewhere in the middle of the answer is to be found.

My entire argument is the increasing the regulations and taxes and costs of operating a business is going to be passed on to the consumer. That's just bottom line common sense.

 

You asked. Thus introduced it into the topic.

My degrees are far from advanced but there are very few that want to tax businesses into bankruptcy. There are a ton of people that believe the wealthy should pay less.

But the topic is individual taxes, not regulations and not corporate taxes.

Regulations exist for a reason, companies exist to maximize profits and that will come at the expense of many things — some with disastrous consequences.

 

You think Dems are going to take that chance? Not likely for Trump to be a factor by then. No more abortion vote.

 

I don’t think either of those two issues are going away.
Republicans will likely try to walk back the topic that they forced on the nation but I hope the nation keeps them accountable.

And young people don’t seem to be as forgiving and as forgetful as the older groups.

 

Possibly, but I doubt it

You don't know young people very well.

 

fixed typo

 

~ I agree. However there are many who think you do .

~ This may be true. However looking at the recent election results it appears 70% of Americans have their brains in the crapper ...

 

Actually I was being facicious after you volunteered that. Internet anecdotes don't impress or convince me. Like I already said... It's the internet.

That does not make you more of an authority on the subject than anyone else.