How Wealth Inequality Spiraled Out of Control

Correct. Just add "impoverish the middle class." Now ask yourself who has written that 150,000+ page tax code over the decades. I'll answer for you: The deeply entrenched, profoundly corrupt political class, aka "the swamp." Red, Blue, Donks, Elephants, 50,000 fingers in 50,000 pies, the best slices reserved for their cronies at the country club and Martha's Vineyard. Do you actually expect those same people to fix it? There's a word for that...

A flat, exemption-free, entity-agnostic excise tax in lieu of all other taxes combined with proper restraints on spending would be even better. A balanced budget amendment with real consequences would be even better still. The inefficiency, waste, fraud, and corruption enabled by the current tax code is criminal.

Lastly: Corporations don't pay taxes, they only collect them. You're just moving decimals around.

 

Republicans, more than democrats, are into neoliberalism.

Clinton was, Obama to a lesser extent, and Biden doesn't appear to be applying neoliberalism.

It's hard to reverse because of a filibustering senate. That is the problem.

 

incompetent rebuttal; weasel words are a non argument.

More info on non arguments:

 

a flat tax will be gamed as easily as any other.

"corporations are people too" romney

and i pay my taxes because i collect wages from my clients. so i "only collect taxes" and "move decimal points around" as well.

all overhead, including taxes, is paid by the customer. should i write a monthly check for their rent as well? i can choose not to pay wal mart's taxes by not being their customer.

the difference between me and a large corporation is that army of lawyers, accountants, and lobbyists on their payroll (all tax deductible) that uniquely qualifies the inc to be taxed at lower rates than the working class. .

 

Concession accepted.

 

Nope .. not for the customers - and no one said anything about businesses flourishing without customers and income.

So 1) wrong 2) incoherent strawman fallacy

but thank's for playing

 

Filed in the wishful thinking file.

 

Please cite your evidence in support of your claim.

Corporations are legal entities comprised of people who've come together for a common lawful purpose through the leverage of combined resources. Bow To The Robots.

Sounds like you are a business owner. And you've just made my argument. Where do you get the money to pay your taxes?

And when your costs go up, you just absorb them, right?

How much did you make last year? How much went to taxes?

Thus proving my argument.

Once again, you've made my argument brilliantly.

See: Flat excise tax as I stated above. Problem solved.

 

You can say that, but in reality, Democrats are currently in control of the worlds 5th largest economy and results show otherwise. Dems get everything they want in CA while reps have no voice. All you are proposing is that the rest of the nation becomes California. Just know that the beast you are feeding will end up under the control of someone like Trump.

 

Your argument is based on a false premise. You chose not to defend it. I accepted your concession. Seems we're finished here.

 

A flat tax would lower taxes on the rich, and increase taxes on the poor.

No can do.

 

Your comparison is specious.

California is just as much victimized by national neoliberalism, even more so.

What democrats do in CA is do their best they can in a national neoliberal environment.

Here's an anology: Imagine the US is a large swimming pool. It has a pool manager, and 50 individuals swimming in it, representing the states.

Neoliberalism has made the pool deeper and made it harder for each of the 50 individuals swimming in the pool to tread water, however the bigger kids and thus heavier require more strength to stay afloat and more problems staying afloat. Thing is, we all are treading water in the neoliberal swimming pool. Each individual, can do nothing about the water level, (only the managers can do that) they can only cope within it.

Not a perfect analogy, but it's kind of like that.

 

False. It would normalize the tax code and virtually eliminate one of the most inefficient bloated federal agencies in existence.

 

You'll have to provide a competent rebuttal for your claim be correct. Weasel words are a non argument, when the salient feature of your rebuttal are weasel words, your rebuttal is incompetent.

You didn't correct your rebuttal to make it competent.

The rest is just wishful thinking.

 

Sorry, my point stands. Just because it's simplified doesn't alter the fact that the poor would be taxed more, and the rich less.

The agency's size and budget as a percentage of GDP is insignificant.

 

Bill Gates would lose the ability to write off his corporate jet, and the 650 other tax freebies (aka corporate writeoffs) "the poor" don't get access to.

Flat excise is the only truly fair way to levy tax. Anything else is social engineering and based on your feelings, not facts.

 

Your party has the power to change things, but chooses not to. I believe no politician would bite the hand that elects them.

 

I'm not saying the tax code can't be revised so it's more fair, loopholes closed, etc.

But, a flat tax is NOT fair.

This isn't about feelings it's about fairness.

 

First thing we have to do is fix the filibuster, but until then, what dems can do is limited by an obstructionist Senate, and two stubborn democratic Senators whom many our brethren have been trying to persuade them to vote yes on getting rid of the fiiibuster, but they don't seem to want to do it.

I find it rather odd that you can't see that.

 

Far from correct. I see results. Dems enjoy unobstructed power over 40 million and results speak for themselves. We need to go the opposite direction and reduce the ability for politicians to inflict harm on workers while working in the interest of big contributors. Your kind heart is being exploited by corrupt politicians promising to help the less fortunate and the working class. Results show that these people are worse off, while big contributors receive no-bid government contracts and enjoy an uninterruptible supply of your money.

What you propose is nothing more than attempting to reduce theft by providing thieves with more victims.

 

A flat excise tax is the definition of fair. It treats every dollar spent by every taxpayer exactly the same.

fair·ness | \ ˈfer-nəs \
Definition of fairness​

the quality or state of being fair especially : fair or impartial treatment : lack of favoritism toward one side or another​

The current tax code picks winners and losers based on cronyism, carve-outs, set-asides. It is the antithesis of fairness. It is what allowed Trump, for example, to legally not pay taxes for half a decade. Trump himself even remarked about how whacked out that was. Warren Buffet famously quipped he paid a rate half what his secretary did, illustrating the insidiousness of a 150,000+ page set of laws that even experts could never fully comprehend.

If you truly believe in fairness, you would advocate a flat excise tax with zero exemptions. And I mean ZERO. No corporate jets, no scout troops, no political action committees exempt from their fair share. The Catholic Church is one of the wealthiest institutions the world has ever seen. And it pays not a penny to our treasury. We subsidize all that treasure hidden behind the marble walls of the Vatican. Flat excise solves all those problems.

If you believe in fairness, you believe in flat excise. Period.

 

A flat tax creates an immediate problem, it punishes the poor and rewards the rich.

I repeat, your arguments for overhauling the tax code are valid.

But none of that has anything to do with a flat tax.

A flat tax increases taxes on the poor, and lowers it on the rich.

Given that fact, it is not just.

There is no counter argument to that fact.

A progressive tax isn't about rewards or punishment, it's about fairness.

Given that the upper 50% own 98% of the nation's wealth, they should pay 98% of the tax burden, in a progressive scale according to ability to pay, and that is just.

Now, the tax code has a lot of rewards and punishments in it, and their is room for reform, but that doesn't alter the above statements.

 

I was not looking for validation. I already knew my argument was correct.

Of course it does. Replacing the current tax system based on favoritism and political influence with one that treats every dollar spent by every taxpayer the same is the essence of an impartial, dispassionate administrative state that treats every stakeholder the same. Please see the definition of fairness I posted above. Worth noting it was you who introduced the word fair into the discussion.

That is simply a fallacy. Reductio ad absurdum. A flat excise tax treats every taxpayer the same. A "poor" who buys a pack of cigarettes with his welfare check pays the same rate as Bill Gates when he fuels his G3 Longrange Business Jet to go party with hookers in Thailand. For sake of math, 20% of $10.00 is $2.00 on that pack of smokes. 20% of $20,000 in jet fuel is $4,000. How does a poor pay more tax than a billionaire??? What color is the sky in your world.

Moving the goalposts. We've gone from fair to just, eh? What's next? Equity? I'll lay good money on that one.

The fact is that you pretended to be interested in fairness when it was clear from the outset that you are not. You have just played your hand and revealed that your position has nothing to do with fairness.

 

You see specious reasoning.

I showed you the results, which refutes your claim.

there are 50 states, did you bother to look at conditions in many of the red states?

No, you did not.

 

My position remains unchallenged. Your claim that dems wielding unobstructed power is better for the poor and middle class is not only false, the opposite is true. Society is far worse off under your party's unobstructed control and your only argument is to have more of the same. This is not my opinion. Of all the 50 states, CA leads the nation in poverty. Your party exploited your good intentions and got your support, but you have not held them accountable. CA is the perfect petri dish for your party.


I am not defending red states and would not want to live under unobstructed republican control either.