American Politics Discussion Thread

[Mjmd]

I see that the 15% min global tax was agreed to, but I don't think* the US has actually passed yet.

I would also love seeing BEAT tax actually get reworked (even though it would mean more work for me personally). For those who are unaware its basically a way to stop companies moving profits that was implemented as part of the Trump tax cuts, to give them something to say they did....... However, as was to be expected, its pretty worthless.

While I'm dreaming campaign finance reform? Which would just be the bestest thing.

[Miguelito]

The effect of that wouldn't be that billionaires start paying 20%.  The effect would be that billionaires arrange their assets in business structures and holding companies so that their personal wealth doesn't register as the billion threshold.  It's also yet another push to move money overseas.

Sounds like something a billionaire would say. Are you one?

I recognize the immaturity and oversimplification of my comment. However I will maintain that the position of "can't close tax loopholes, the rich will just use other loopholes" is equally silly. Basically, if companies (and by extension their owners) want to do business on the American market (or the EU, for that matter), of course it is possible to tax their profits.

[T-hawk]

First they came for the billionaires, and I did not speak out, because I was not one.

[Amicalola]

First they came for the billionaires, and I did not speak out, because I was not one.

I have to assume that this is a joke in poor taste, or else your grip on reality has deteriorated even further in the last year...

[Mjmd]

I mean its top level Americanism. Protect the rich and powerful because that is what I want to be and think I can become. Also, jump straight to the nearest nazi comparison because about all we understand about history is Nazi's are bad. Everything about the other party = nazi.

There are some valid capital contribution arguments that at least have to be taken into account when writing tax laws. T-Hawk you just skipped all of that and went straight to the gutter. Don't ever make another Nazi comparison. You keep doing it and it really is in bad taste.

[Mjmd]

Now that I'm half a glass of wine in here is some random thoughts.

American banking system and access to cash that way doesn't get nearly enough historical credit or attention (I would argue its been far more important that equity investment). At least until it causes problems..... then we just let them keep doing it while continuing to be consolidate and just look the other way for a while.

Watching way too many historic videos since covid a consistent theme you'll hear a lot when they get to the golden age of whatever nation is "then leader x redid the tax system to be more equitable". Although to be fair strong leaders had additional incentive back then (you know other than preventing peasant revolts, encouraging peasant productivity, and funding their empire). Usually there was a power struggle of ruler vs aristocracy. If you were able to tax your elite without them rebelling it made you stronger and any potential rebellion from them less likely to succeed. In the US if you are elected official you were either A) already in our aristocracy or B) were financed by them to get elected.    While its a good talk to talk about trying to write actual good effective tax laws, its not a terrible surprise tax loopholes keep getting written in. Mind you that just means their should be more awareness made of this, not that we just give up. History can be seen as a slow crawl of the common man not being ground underfoot quite as much over time by the elite telling them that is just the way it has to be.

[Amicalola]

Mind you that just means their should be more awareness made of this, not that we just give up. History can be seen as a slow crawl of the common man not being ground underfoot quite as much over time by the elite telling them that is just the way it has to be.

I do love History Chat, but I'm not sure I agree with that sentiment. One can make a reasonable argument that the common man (and woman) has never been more free from the elite than they were as hunter-gatherers, for a whole host of systemic reasons that have cropped up since. I would strongly recommend Sapiens for a good introductory read on the topic.

[Mjmd]

I would very much classify that as PRE-history. But yes I would agree generally there was less class structure; however, even amongst hunter gatherers their treatment of women could be abysmal (just based off of still existing societies mind, as I don't know how much this could be studied from bone record of ancient). I made mention of this recently in my PB63 thread, but historical treatment of women is actually pretty consistently awful. It may have been better under some societies than others, but modern day western societies is definitely currently the best there. As that is 50% of the population its hard not emphasize this factor. Edit: I realize there have been a handful of exceptions (I know of some matriarchal societies), but I'll say 98% of history.

[Amicalola]

I would very much classify that as PRE-history.

That's fair. It depends a lot on whether we are talking about history or History, and how we are defining both. Which I'm guessing is a conversation too academic for either of us to have much authority.

I guess what I'm poking at is the sentiment that history should be seen as humans moving forwards, or progressing. In particular that there is a consistency to that process, even if it exists. There are plenty of regressive periods in history, which I'm sure you'd agree with. There's no reason that we couldn't be in one of those (and FWIW, I would strongly suspect that the pressures of oncoming climate change are about to put us in one, if they haven't already).

If we count History as post-Agricultural Revolution, I'd be a little more inclined to agree with you, yeah. We modern humans are definitely better off than the farmers of 8,000 years ago, and so on. It's just that those 8,000 years are a tiny period of human existence, relatively speaking, and even within them there are peaks and valleys.

[T-hawk]

Don't ever make another Nazi comparison. You keep doing it and it really is in bad taste.

That's not an argument, that's a dismissive insult. Make an argument if you wish to engage.

Anyway, I'll spell it out since you guys can't read nuance. No, taxing billionaires is not literally the equivalent of the Nazi holocaust, obviously. But there is a parallel, in how it starts with targeting a minority segment of the population. My point all along has been to resist and stop that right away before it gets bigger.

As for the following post, there's no such thing as "fair" or "equitable" for taxes. Every use of those words is a made-up justification for "take from those with more than me".