A group of US billionaires is calling for a wealth tax

Thank you for establishing that ONLY the wealthy would have access to this asinine "privatized legal system" of yours.

Furthermore you are WRONG when it comes to believing that private enterprise is always better than the government. Healthcare alone debunks that BS allegation as do things like the Interstate system of roads, social security and investing in the future of the nation with space exploration and the internet.

 

No, it is NOT "their money"!

Taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized society. Oliver Wendell Holmes.

The wealthy are NOT entitled to pay LESS taxes than they receive in benefits from our society.

 

When you OWE money then it does NOT belong to you, it belongs to the entity that you OWE the money to. Keeping that money is known as theft of services.

 

They DO OWE money to the government of We the People for the benefits and services that they enjoy at TAXPAYER EXPENSE!

In essence they are just FREELOADERS who are SHAFTING taxpayers.

 

To set the example for all the other liberals who claim tax deductions for their dirty underware at tax time

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...d-his-old-underpants-to-inflate-tax-write-off


A new review of Clinton tax returns by a taxpayer watchdog group has revealed that Bill Clinton overpriced the value of his old, used underpants and several other clothing items donated to charity that boosted his tax write-off.

 

The rich pay the vast majority of the taxes.

The poor are the only people shafting the taxpayer.

 

What fantasies you may have in your head notwithstanding, what I actually said illustrates a couple of ways private arbitration could be supplied to people that aren't wealthy or even to indigent people. In the case of an actual private law society there would undoubtedly be many other possible solutions since any arbitration company could come up with their own solutions independent of any centralized authority.

You're welcome to your opinion but unless you can establish some evidence to support it that is all it is, unsupported opinion.

Healthcare has been heavily regulated since the 60s so where is the comparison between a free market healthcare system and the government controlled one we've had to live with for the last half century. Here are some illustrations of how free market healthcare can work better than the government controlled alternative:
This is a search site for finding a direct primary care clinic - https://mapper.dpcfrontier.com/
Here is an example of a direct primary care clinic - https://www.healinghopefamilymedicine.com/about-2/

As for interstate highways, social security and space exploration, those are good examples of expensive, inefficient government boondoggles that cost way more than they should have and provide questionable and substandard benefits that could have been done better and at less cost by private industry. The internet specifically is a good example, where it was originated as a result of some government funding for a very limited purpose and was thereafter thoroughly underutilized until private enterprise was able to access and develop it.

 

In no way will it improve inequality. As a rate, they already pay more and no matter how much they pay, it won't enable anyone to pay less. They can always write the IRS a donation if they feel they don't pay enough and you know it so this is pure BS.
BTW - who are they? Anonymous?

 

America needs to raise revenue to cover our spending

We are at our Lowest Tax Levels in 50 Years............ putting his spending on the USA Credit Card

Trumps Tax Cut for the Rich was wrong

Trump is Borrowing a $ Trillion Dollars this year during a time of Full Employment

Trump is slated to Borrow $ 2.5 Trillion Dollars before 2020 is up

 

When the government cuts income taxes, it results in them taking less of MY money away from me, NOT other people's money.

When you choose to live somewhere, you make a choice when you pick one that comes with such expenses. One of the requirements when I was searching for this house is that it NOT be an HOA neighborhood. Been there, done that, not about to do it again. Regardless, you are right when pointing out that it is YOUR money to begin with. My original point was that cutting the taxes of the rich is not just allowing them to keep OPM.

 

Playing the BLAME THE VICTIMS card again?

Sad!

 

In 2017 Disneyworld had 152 million people attend their amusement parks.

Public libraries in America have 1.5 BILLION attendees each year.

http://www.ala.org/aboutala/sites/a.../content/quotable facts.2017.downloadable.pdf

Medicare covers the most expensive healthcare in the nation for a FRACTION of the overhead that the INEFFICIENT private sector does for the LEAST expensive healthcare in the nation.

But don't let FACTS get in the way of your rose colored illusions that have no basis in reality.

 

It is NEVER your money when you OWE money to other entities.

Your mortgage and car loans are money that rightfully belong to the banks that loaned you the money to make those purchases. You OWE them that money and therefore it is NOT yours.

Same thing applies when it comes to TAXES. You OWE taxes for the services provided by the government. If you don't pay your taxes that is equivalent to THEFT of SERVICES.

 

The victim? LMFAO!

No. I'm blaming fat lazy stupid people.

 

How many of these billionaires voluntarily pay more in taxes tan they have to?
Zero?
/Thread

​

 

What does this have to do with anything? These two things have no basis for comparison. Disney World is one place that charges substantial fees for every service they provide. Libraries are innumerable and charge nothing to their attendees. Disney World is a distant destination that requires budgeting and planning to visit while local libraries are available for most people within a few minutes drive. Looking at the cost/benefit of libraries without trying to force an untenable comparison, libraries do a terrible job of serving the public. Their selection of books is dated and limited and their hours are frequently limited. If they were required to fund themselves they would go out of business in very short order.

Worthless reference from an overtly biased advocacy source.

Medicare provides their services on the back of the private sector. Because they can force their pricing model, that doesn't actually cover the costs of the services provided, the service providers must engage in cost shifting, charging more for privately insured clients to cover the shortfall in Medicare payments. This skews the numbers to make Medicare look better than it is and private payers look worse. Additionally, Medicare has a substantial problem with fraud and corruption, which they ignore in their claims of efficiency. They pretend that all their payments are for legitimate services when any accurate analysis will show that a significant percentage of their payments are not for legitimate services.

Your "facts" are suspect at best and more accurately, government propaganda that fails to address the actual costs and consequences of government intervention.

 

Basic conceptual error. When you earn money it is your money. When you owe an individual, be it person or entity (business or government), part of your money does indeed convert into that entity's money.

In the context of taxes and tax rates: let's say you make $100,000. The tax rate is 10%. Therefore $10,000 is converted to the government's money. The tax rate is then dropped to 9%. Now only $9,000 is converted to the government's money. You get to keep $1,000 more of your money because it was never converted to the government's money.

The conversion point is important. At one point the employer's money can be said to be the employee's money. Or even skip the middle man and call it the government's money even though it. But hey let's skip another middleman and call it my money that he business is holding since I work for the government (for the example) and the government owes it to me for my pay. As you can see it can get rediculous given how money circulate. Therefore the easiest way to deal with is that the money is the entity's upon receipt, and then converts to what is owed to another. When more is own than before, less of their money is kept. When less is owed, then more of their money is kept.

Thus a tax cut means less owed and more.of their money kept.

 

Thank you for establishing that ! was 100% CORRECT that you are BLAMING THE VICTIMS!

 

Kneejerk DENIALISM does not alter the FACT that I exposed your FALLACIES about the private sector.

 

The CONCEPTUAL ERROR is believing that because you provided WELFARE to the WEALTHY in the form of massive taxcuts that the government services that were provided to them are now going to paid on the national CREDIT CARD that your children and grandchildren will still be burdened with long after you are gone.

 

No kneejerk or denialism here. I clearly explained why your position is incorrect. To expose any alleged fallacies you would have to address the things I actually said. You've failed to do that.

 

Fat lazy stupid people are NOT victims.

 

Oh come on. In progressive heaven, everyone's a victim.

 

You have FAILED to prove that any of your BOGUS allegations can be substantiated whereas I have provided fact based sources to support mine.

 

Kneejerk denialism does not alter factual reality.