Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Scoobs, I think you mean "44%".
And logic would dictate 'to the remaining 19%' who are currently paying 40% of all taxes.

Percentages percentages percentages. They have all the money. Get it? No, I don't think you do.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Scoobs, I think you mean "44%".
And logic would dictate 'to the remaining 19%' who are currently paying 40% of all taxes.

I know it won't be popular here, but giving the folks in the 80 to 99 percentile of incomes a break doesn't bother me. Note I said "incomes". Those folks are mainly small-business owners with employees and incomes from the business, not trust-fund babies living off investments.

I'm saying this based on siblings with small businesses living it daily.

I'm perfectly OK with taking care of our working upper middle class.

All I ask is this. Let’s not change a thing. Except:

Every New Year's Eve, we gather round the TV with champagne glasses and watch The Lottery. A computer runs simultaneous individual drawings for every person, worldwide. 100 balls: 1 black for every $10M you have in assets, max of 99.

If you draw black, the tiny bomb implanted in your head goes off.

 

[joecct]

I'm perfectly OK with taking care of our working middle class.

I just want this: every New Year's Eve, we gather before the TV with champagne glasses and watch the drawing. Individual drawing for every person, worldwide, with > $10M in assets. 100 balls: 1 black for every %10M you have in assets, max of 99. If you draw black the electrode in your head goes off with a little pop. Think of the suspense.

Kep

I believe you're envious of the wealthy.

 

[alfablue]

Kep

I believe you're envious of the wealthy.

Predictable but stupid reply to such a suggestion.

One that does not understand the economy and how it works.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Kep

I believe you're envious of the wealthy.

Of course you do. But I just want to make a game of it, like the Poors get to play now. The wealthy envy them so.

<img src="http://cdn-static.denofgeek.com/sites/denofgeek/files/styles/article_width/public/scanners-05.jpg?itok=Kh9VfjKN" />

 

[GrinCDXX]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Most likely. Think about it: those most affected are CA, NY, IL, NJ, CT. Those are not states the Rs have much hope in in Presidential races. You can chalk CA's 2020 electoral votes up to a ham sandwich with a D on it right now. <-- That's not political; that's reality.

So, literally, in the eyes of the Rs, so what if hard-core, rank and file, Ds are PO'd about elimination (or capping) of SALT.

What is does is bring out a core conservative issue to the forefront: Why are people in those states paying so much in tax to those states in the first place? It's going to bring the tax and spend conversation in those states out with an advantage to the conservatives. "If you weren't taxed so much this wouldn't be an issue" will be the refrain.

But wait, there's more. Those being affected were people typically (rightly or wrongly) cast as "we should all pay more in taxes" bi-coastal liberals. Well, now they will pay more in Federal tax. Either they merrily pay it or they're hypocrites. (<-- The Rs actually made a savvy move, a move Reagan never could get, that jammed up the Ds.)

And finally, those same bi-coastal folks are being cast in Flyover as having been "subsidized" up to now. Yes. I've heard that word. The bi-coasters never had to pay their fair share of Federal load because of big state deductions is the big, square state Rs' spin.

Sorry. I think I built you a watch there when all you wanted was the time.

Time is: Yup. Intentional.

That was really something. As an independent, the way you were able to channel the thinking of a partisan conservative to come up with all those justifications.

 

[jerphisch]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

The Tax Policy Center did their analysis of what passed. Here's part of a summary I found of the analysis. I'm just getting into the guts of reading the whole TPC report.

Way to dig for some misleading percentages to make your argument. From the abstract:

The plan would cut taxes at every income level, but high-income taxpayers would receive the biggest cuts, both in dollar terms and as a percentage of income.

And on your whole red state blue state BS, uno nailed it, the blue states subsidize the reds. If the reds are feeling screwed, that's because they are living in their fox bubble that can never be penetrated.

 

[mookie1995]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Of course you do. But I just want to make a game of it, like the Poors get to play now. The wealthy envy them so.

the poors heads explode on nye?

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

That was really something. As an independent, the way you were able to channel the thinking of a partisan conservative to come up with all those justifications.

I never said I don't lean libertarian-conservative. You see "partisan".

And re-read the third, fourth, and fifth words of my post. --> It really isn't that hard to decipher what is going on by the Rs.

 

[mookie1995]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

...

isn't that obvious though? cause if you pay the most, or the highest percentage, you have the most to cut?

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

isn't that obvious though? cause if you pay the most, or the highest percentage, you have the most to cut?

Mooks, you used to pay $50 in taxes on $100 income; now you pay $45.
jerphs used to pay $1.25 on $5 and now they're paying $1.
Dat ain't right.

Why?
Because nowhere do we talk about how what used to be a $51.25 budget will be reshaped to be run on $46.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

isn't that obvious though? cause if you pay the most, or the highest percentage, you have the most to cut?

They pay the highest amount of tax in the first place because the policies of the last 40 years have allowed them to overwhelm the rest of the nation in terms of what they rake in. Which was the deliberate aim of those policies. The explosion of inequality and the increase in people living in poverty is not a bug for the people who caused it. It's a feature. It's the feature.

The rigging of our economy to enrich a tiny percentage at the expense of everyone else is not the baseline to compare from. The baseline is a fair economic system in which wealth tends to migrate to the middle. And by that standard The Heist is a gallop in the wrong direction.

You're bemoaning the fate of the slave owner who has to pay to feed his slaves because they have no money to pay for themselves. Yeah, those freeloaders.

 

[unofan]

Mooks, you used to pay $50 in taxes on $100 income; now you pay $45.
jerphs used to pay $1.25 on $5 and now they're paying $1.
Dat ain't right.

Why?
Because nowhere do we talk about how what used to be a $51.25 budget will be reshaped to be run on $46.

And also because instead of $100 and $5 in income, it used to be $15 and $4 in nominal dollars, or the equivalent of $50 and $15 in real dollars. And the massive growth in that disparity was intentionally created by various government policies.

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

And the massive growth in that disparity was intentionally created by various government policies.

Wouldn't the problem then be those who vote on and pass said policies/laws?

Why don't the voters flush out the problems? Why do we sent 95+% of incumbents, both parties, or is it uniparty, back?

 

[mookie1995]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

They pay the highest amount of tax in the first place because the policies of the last 40 years have allowed them to overwhelm the rest of the nation in terms of what they rake in. Which was the deliberate aim of those policies. The explosion of inequality and the increase in people living in poverty is not a bug for the people who caused it. It's a feature. It's the feature.

The rigging of our economy to enrich a tiny percentage at the expense of everyone else is not the baseline to compare from. The baseline is a fair economic system in which wealth tends to migrate to the middle. And by that standard The Heist is a gallop in the wrong direction.

You're bemoaning the fate of the slave owner who has to pay to feed his slaves because they have no money to pay for themselves. Yeah, those freeloaders.

then please do something about it!! didn't you just have bho and dems in power?

wealth goes up to people who earn it. give people incentive to earn, but let them know stuff needs to be paid for.

mookie has offered you many ideas for when you get in office. please feel free to read again and put to use

start taxing income over $75k
have a federal property tax (the federal gov does protect the country's property ) ((kep wants to tax 'wealth' ))

you want to gear incomes.....
don't allow any salary over say ..... 6x median wage to be deducted from a company's tax returns.

do away with the socsec tax cap on income (why didn't the D gov do that in 2008?). then leave the irs rates alone and just hit the 1% with that 6.5% rise ... or where the D too ascared?
truth be told that should be pochahontas' rally point now. get the old retirees on board immediately to pay for their retirement and medicare.

many many more ways to get revenue and push an agenda.
but if you think "80% top rates" is a winner.....

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Wouldn't the problem then be those who vote on and pass said policies/laws?

Why don't the voters flush out the problems? Why do we sent 95+% of incumbents, both parties, or is it uniparty, back?

You forgot the punchline.

So vote Republican!

 

[unofan]

Wouldn't the problem then be those who vote on and pass said policies/laws?

Why don't the voters flush out the problems? Why do we sent 95+% of incumbents, both parties, or is it uniparty, back?

Because:

<img src="https://i.pinimg.com/originals/9f/15/03/9f15035587e8a13d34bc9b05aff93778.jpg"></img>

 

[mookie1995]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

lot of D looking out for themselves and their rich friends too these last 40 yrs

<img src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Combined--Control_of_the_U.S._House_of_Representatives_-_Control_of_the_U.S._Senate.png" />

 

[jerphisch]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Mooks, you used to pay $50 in taxes on $100 income; now you pay $45.
jerphs used to pay $1.25 on $5 and now they're paying $1.
Dat ain't right.

Why?
Because nowhere do we talk about how what used to be a $51.25 budget will be reshaped to be run on $46.

This example does not follow with reality based on YOUR link. The top earners get the largest $ AND % savings. You are showing the low earners getting a larger %. You can't even make up stupid examples correctly.

And to your why, that has absolutely nothing to do with anything you've posted about up to this point. Trying to change the narrative now that your first one has been shown to be bunk?

 

[Kepler]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

lot of D looking out for themselves and their rich friends too these last 40 yrs

Yes, this is true. The older I get the more I think it's a two-headed monster. The GOP is the face they use for the ignorant, Dem is the face they use for the educated, but their game is to play us off against each other while they farm us like the taille of old.

We have to get one of the parties back somehow. Our best bet is the Dems. There are more ignorant than educated but the educated are more effective plus, you know, right.