Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Balto, Jan 20, 2020.
It is true -- the Will of Majority elects politicians to implement the Will of Majority.
All taxes are theft.
I disagree 100%.
Are the elected politicians forced to implement the will of the majority? Can the courts strike down "the will of the majority"? You are an intelligent person, you already know this.
I am glad that I live in a country that has founding documents which value the individual and protects him from the majority.
I disagree 100% that "taxes are not theft."
Yes. Implement the Will of the Majority or lose the next election.
I also find the Will of the Majority unfair sometimes.
I guess fundamental disagreements can not be resolved. I believe Society has an obligation of caring for all people.
WRONG QUESTION. The right one is How do you get the not so rich to realize that they are already being heavily subsidized by the rich? 10% of the taxpayers are already paying 70% of the total.
Nobody ever says thanks, either- just why aren't you paying all of it?
That just isn't the way it works. It is impossible to know what the majority in this country wants on most issues. The politicians do not have a crystal ball that can be used to scry into the minds of the populace. And what about the courts and the Constitution of the USA and the states?
Does majority rule when changing the Constitution? Throwing a president out of office?
Not forced by any government.
Nothing much to say about the general topic, the OP is so poorly formed and ridiculous that it rebuts itself.
But as for a prevalent LW tax chestnut, dredged up in this thread yet again, please just stop with the "high brackets of the past" happy horseshit that LW blogs and public union newsletters spew with aplomb... even after the lie narrative has been TOTALLY, IRREFUTABLY debunked here and elsewhere thousands of times.
LW, get it through your thick skulls once and for all. NO... ONE (a negligible percentage)... PAID... AT...THOSE... HIGH... 1960-1980s... BRACKETS... DUE... TO... SHELTERS... AND... DEDUCTIONS, loopholes that were CLOSED in the IRC reforms in the 1980s, while the AMT got much sharper teeth.
The only people who paid those brackets were caught unaware with windfalls they didn't anticipate.
The two went hand in hand, loopholes were closed/AMT beefed up... brackets were lowered and streamlined. Anyone who talks about one facet, the brackets, without also talking about the other facet, the shelters, deductions/AMT, is either a) utterly ignorant of U.S. tax policy history, or b) a purposeful liar trying to deceive. NO C) ANSWER POSSIBLE.
If anyone is truly interested in how the shelters and deductions at the time worked to prevent anyone from paying the high brackets with only a teeny modicum of planning, I will be happy to expand.
The wealthiest 1% some 2,153 BILLIONAIRES added 25% to their wealth last year,a sum of $1.2TRILLION which collectively gave them more wealth than the poorest 4.6 BILLION people
The top 1% of income earners pay 40% of Federal income taxes.
The top 10% of income earners pay 70% of Federal income taxes.
The top 50% of income earners pay 96% of Federal income taxes.
The bottom 50% of income earners only pay about 4% of Federal income taxes.
The rich are already paying nearly ALL of the Federal income taxes.
Why do you want to steal more of their money?
Lol They pay no taxes income taxes because they are too poor to pay them . Yet you have some rich people that dont pay any either. Which group should we be concerned about?
The rich or poor not paying taxes?
It would be great if all people that worked earned enough to pay taxes !
I wish I was in the highest tax bracket! For I would be rich! And still rich after I paid my taxes !
I’m guessing you probably don’t pay much if any income tax.
I’m in favor of a flat tax. 10% of your gross income. The paperboy gives 10% of his routes income. The inner city baby mama with 10 kids gives 10% of her welfare check. I pay 10%, you pay 10%, Trump, Bloomberg, Buffett, Gates, Bezos, all pay 10%. No write offs, no deductions, no exemptions.
Liberals aren't really concerned about that, making everyone equally poor is their only goal...
Do you pay more tax than has been required? So you are dodging taxes?
I can GUARANTEE you that if Dirty Donald was paying anywhere near 40% of his income in taxes he would be advertising them for the entire world to see instead of hiding them like he has.
We also know for a fact that Warren Buffet pays a lower tax rate than his secretary because he has told us that and that when Romney showed his tax return when he ran for president he was paying a tax rate just under 14% on his $22 Million retirement income.
If Trump was cheating on his taxes, would the IRS just ignore it?
He has fought divulging them all the way to the Supreme Court.So we know he is not proud of what he's been paying.
Then it's not a loss, plus you write off your interest
Why does it matter how much taxes were confiscated from Trump?
1. Any narrative, chart, claim, statistics, etc. on "wealth inequality" that does not also include the specific definition of the abstract term "wealth" used to create the narrative is a lie narrative specifically crafted to deceive towards statist propaganda. By -excluding- several -mandatory- types of "wealth" from its definition, propagandists of the Complex seek to create the very false impression that some few group of people are getting very rich while the rest of us are not.
2. So how to define "wealth?" Mandatory categories of "wealth" include both very tangible and also intangible forms, but are reasonably easy to discuss.
3. Most people would likely include the general well-being of themselves, their family, their friends and communities as the most important category of "wealth." This is of course intangible, but there are several important tangible indicia of this kind of wealth. I will submit some questions, feel free to add, but -exclusion- of -any- such questions = lie narrative:
Are you safe? are you (will include family, friends and community in "you" going forward) at war? are you able to readily obtain food, clothing, shelter? are you suffering from privation? are you able to move about freely and express yourself freely, are you free to believe as you choose? are you able to worship as you choose or disdain worship? is "learning" available to you if you want it? Are you able to obtain emergency medical care? The answer to these things represents a very important component of your wealth, maybe the most important. Don't let them exclude it.
Before dismissing the above as givens, realize that most of the world's population do not possess all these forms of wealth to the degree we in the West possess them. Do not take them for granted. I claim that they are the most important, most fundamental characteristic of "wealth."
4. Personal property must be included in any reasonable definition of wealth, but is of course hard to calculate. This is so intuitive that it's fair to say that any definition of wealth excluding personal property is specifically crafted towards propaganda. After all, "money" "stocks" etc. are useless abstractions in one sense, personal property is the form of wealth we all use daily. What personal property do you, family, friends, community -own-? What kinds of clothing and are you able to replace it when it wears out? What kinds of innovations including everything from electric light bulbs to the supercomputer/phone in your hand? Do you own an automobile? Do you own things that give you pleasure, knowledge, entertainment?
5. Residential real estate -must- be included in any reasonable definition of the "wealth" of a group or country. More specifically, the amount of -space- you control, even if indebted or leased, is a very important indicia of real "wealth." At all socioeconomic strata, we in the West are immensely, obscenely, vulgarly wealthy in terms of residential real property in world historical terms.
6. Financial assets, the only category usually included in lie narratives on "wealth inequality" are inherently inflated, especially the stock equity in their own companies that comprises a -vast- majority of the "wealth" of the super wealthy as misrepresented by propagandists. YES, a -few- people get extremely wealthy in terms of stock equity, but it is abstract, volatile, inflated by a P/E multiple that does not apply to restricted or "tied up" equity, and subject to change. The average corporate decamillionaire can't just go "cash in" their wealth into tangibles, yet the propagandists want you to form the impression that they can.
I think one needs to be careful about believing it that way. Some people understand financial responsibility and know that it costs money to run things- and though we might want something, we also have to be willing to pay for it or pass.
Others- want something and could care less about how it gets paid for. Now it's not their "will" that the nation collapse out of poor fiscal policy- but they will vote for the man who promises them the things they want free, and ignore the fact they are indeed voting for financial ruin. This isn't their will, it's their ignorance and irresponsibility. Unfortunately, we have a lot of people like that in today's society, more than ever before. They are unqualified to make an informed vote, just as they are unqualified to manage their own affairs well. If they figure at all, they figure that someone else will pay the bills.
Separate names with a comma.