American Politics Discussion Thread

[Mjmd]

Its not an insult, it is really in bad taste. I'm just stating a fact. It definitely wasn't an argument from you or at least shouldn't have been.

Its about targeting a section of the population that has an ability to pay and that currently pays less in taxes % wise than many people with less. I will add on corporate tax side that businesses benefit from infrastructure and systems in place, they should pay for them. For instance one of the strongest arguments for having a strong navy and air force is to keep international commerce flowing, yet its a huge cause of our deficit.

You can also simplify it as government needs money, where can it get it? Lets stay in political reality and realize spending isn't going to dramatically drop even if I think we both would like it to (if I suspect in wildly different areas).

Taxes go to the government doing things. Its fascinating hearing Charriu say things like "I'm happy to pay taxes because I know it goes towards things that make a functioning government". Willingness to pay taxes is a mark of high trust societies. I'm not saying America is one certainly though.....

[Charriu]

Taxes go to the government doing things. Its fascinating hearing Charriu say things like "I'm happy to pay taxes because I know it goes towards things that make a functioning government". Willingness to pay taxes is a mark of high trust societies. I'm not saying America is one certainly though.....

Well I should add that by functioning government I mean things like common infrastructure, welfare programs, healthcare system, police and the list goes on. Basically things we all need for a living in this modern world of ours.

[Miguelito]

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

talk about nuance  

Actually your argument had been that taxing rich people was unworkable, not that it would get us all in camps.
On that note, the argument for that bill as I understand it is not to First come for the billionaires. Rather that they (tax collectors) are already coming for everybody else - because if you work for your income you generally have little options available re loopholes and are probably paying a higher marginal tax rate. So that bill would attempt to also have people pay some taxes who can afford a lawyer team just for evasion, however unlikely that is to succeed given the political environment.

[superdeath]

a flat rate across the board is my opinion. Its really that simple.

[Mjmd]

Both Mig and SD are correct. Currently we are a system where we pretend we are in a progressive tax model, but actually its regressive. There are a lot of valid arguments for progressive tax policies; however, a flat tax where the rich don't have loopholes might actually make the government more tax revenue (again I would fall into making a progressive model not be corrupt instead of just giving up).

[Amicalola]

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.

This isn't only in bad taste, it's also just a really shitty argument. There are so, so many reasons that taxing billionaires is nothing resembling the holocaust. Let's start with the victims. Billionaires are:

- the least vulnerable people in a society that values wealth above most else.
- able to move/immigrate far more easily than others.
- able to take advantage of tax loopholes far more easily than others.
- hold massive sway in US governmental systems.
- able to avail themselves of the US legal system with far better defense than others.

There's probably dozens of other things I could list, but that's a start. Comparing the least vulnerable members of a society to the most vulnerable in another is a terrible way to draw parallels - they are essentially incomparable. Your anti-mask/vaxx shit is ludicrous enough, and even that is far more valid than this.

[Mjmd]

Don't worry I'm sure his paranoia about government power and slippery slopes of power surely goes as far as realizing the majority Republicans have sided with someone who tried to overthrow a democratic election. Surely right? 

[AdrienIer]

a flat rate across the board is my opinion. Its really that simple.

What I found really interesting in the 2017 presidential election in France was that the candidate proposing Universal Basic Income was proposing to pay for it with a 25% flat tax (but also by keeping in place other progressive income taxes). In that case you're literally redistributing wealth in the simplest way possible.

[Jowy]

Ironically T-Hawk would probably be in favor of "coming for" communists, socialists, trade unionists and perhaps even the jews (since he's into those conspiracy theories, and they almost always include the jews as the cause of all evil).

[darrelljs]

What I found really interesting in the 2017 presidential election in France was that the candidate proposing Universal Basic Income was proposing to pay for it with a 25% flat tax (but also by keeping in place other progressive income taxes). In that case you're literally redistributing wealth in the simplest way possible.

I'm still unsure with UBI.  The Finnish experiment seems open to interpretation as to its benefits.  Andrew Yang was the only presidential candidate that had UBI as a cornerstone of their platform, his rationale being essentially:

• Good jobs are becoming more and more scarce and Americans are already working harder and harder for less and less.
  
• Many Americans are stuck in the wrong jobs because of a need to survive.
  
• Technology is quickly displacing a large number of workers, and the pace will only increase as automation and other forms of artificial intelligence become more advanced. ⅓ of American workers will lose their jobs to automation by 2030. This has the potential to destabilize our economy and society if unaddressed.
  

All of those are true, but there are plenty of studies that show meaningful work is at least as important as compensation for job satisfaction.  I'd prefer a New Deal style work program, even if the benefits are more symbolic than real.  People want to work, despite negative portrayals of the unemployed as lifelong leeches.

Darrell