hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 658 of 735 FirstFirst ... 158558608648655656657658659660661668708 ... LastLast
Results 13,141 to 13,160 of 14682

Thread: US Politics Thread, 2.0

  1. #13141

    Join Date
    November 5, 2011
    Posts
    13,818
    Quote Originally Posted by Shiodome View Post
    began having heart-complications linked to “problems with his cardiovascular system.”
    began having heart problems linked with his heart. great sentence, would read again.
    Truly the most important thing about this.

  2. #13142
    Donor Pattern's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    7,175
    Quote Originally Posted by Isyel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Shiodome View Post
    began having heart-complications linked to “problems with his cardiovascular system.”
    began having heart problems linked with his heart. great sentence, would read again.
    Truly the most important thing about this.
    Shiodomes critique isn't even factually accurate.

  3. #13143

    Join Date
    November 5, 2011
    Posts
    13,818
    https://abc7.com/fire-intentionally-...cials/7155522/

    Fire intentionally set inside ballot box in Baldwin Park, officials say
    Firefighters say someone purposely tossed burning newspaper into the official drop box.
    This is fine.

  4. #13144

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    15,417
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    You don't need a regressive flat tax to make the rich pay it lmao
    Who cares if the flat tax is regressive, if the public welfare benefits are appropriately progressive.

    Tax Policy and Welfare Policy shouldn't be linked. They're two different purposes.

    For the individual, it's the net result that counts.
    Last edited by Alistair; October 19 2020 at 09:43:44 PM.


  5. #13145
    Ruri's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Exclamation, USA
    Posts
    2,405
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    You don't need a regressive flat tax to make the rich pay it lmao
    Who cares if the flat tax is regressive, if the public welfare benefits are appropriately progressive.

    Tax Policy and Welfare Policy shouldn't be linked. They're two different purposes.

    For the individual, it's the net result that counts.
    10% of someone's salary if they're making $50k has a disproportionately negative impact as compared to 10% of someone's salary if they're making $500k. The first family will struggle to own one house and send their child to college, the second will have to possibly put off buying that yacht they've had their eye on for another year, that is if they actually pay anything close to what their tax rate is on paper. Unless you're willing to means-test whatever theoretical benefits this inequity produces to the point where they're no longer truly benefits, there's no way to make up for the loss to poorer families.
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot
    Do you even lift? Do you even post.

  6. #13146
    Totally Not Larkonnis's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 25, 2012
    Posts
    1,588
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruri View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    You don't need a regressive flat tax to make the rich pay it lmao
    Who cares if the flat tax is regressive, if the public welfare benefits are appropriately progressive.

    Tax Policy and Welfare Policy shouldn't be linked. They're two different purposes.

    For the individual, it's the net result that counts.
    10% of someone's salary if they're making $50k has a disproportionately negative impact as compared to 10% of someone's salary if they're making $500k. The first family will struggle to own one house and send their child to college, the second will have to possibly put off buying that yacht they've had their eye on for another year, that is if they actually pay anything close to what their tax rate is on paper. Unless you're willing to means-test whatever theoretical benefits this inequity produces to the point where they're no longer truly benefits, there's no way to make up for the loss to poorer families.
    Flat tax can go hand in hand with a wealth tax and adjusted VAT on certain products.
    Job done.


  7. #13147
    Movember 2011Movember 2012 Nordstern's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    12,002
    "Holy shit, I ask you to stop being autistic and you debate what autistic is." - spasm
    Quote Originally Posted by Larkonis Trassler View Post
    WTF I hate white people now...
    Johns Hopkins CSSE COVID-19 Dashboard

  8. #13148

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    15,417
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruri View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    You don't need a regressive flat tax to make the rich pay it lmao
    Who cares if the flat tax is regressive, if the public welfare benefits are appropriately progressive.

    Tax Policy and Welfare Policy shouldn't be linked. They're two different purposes.

    For the individual, it's the net result that counts.
    10% of someone's salary if they're making $50k has a disproportionately negative impact as compared to 10% of someone's salary if they're making $500k. The first family will struggle to own one house and send their child to college, the second will have to possibly put off buying that yacht they've had their eye on for another year, that is if they actually pay anything close to what their tax rate is on paper. Unless you're willing to means-test whatever theoretical benefits this inequity produces to the point where they're no longer truly benefits, there's no way to make up for the loss to poorer families.
    I don't think you read my post Ruri.

    Let me walk you through it:

    1. Flat 10% Tax.

    2. Mr. $50K pays $5,000 in taxes. Mr. $500k pays $50,000.

    3. Mr. $45K after taxes qualifies for $20k in Welfare Benefits. His net is $65k.

    4. Mr. $450K qualifies for no benefits. He stays at $450k.

    If we the voting public think Mr. $45K deserves more, then give him $30k in benefits. Or $40k in benefits. Or however many thousands you like.

    Still pays the flat tax. Gets more than they paid back. Two separate policies, one tax policy, flat, everyone pays, regressive, one welfare, progressive, the less you make, the more you get in aid.

    Tax policy designed to generate revenue first, and have everyone paying something in.

    Welfare policy designed to help those in need, the more in need, the more help they get.

    Looking only at the tax policy misses the forest for the trees in what I would propose here.


  9. #13149
    Paradox's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 24, 2011
    Location
    Deepest Darkest Devonshire
    Posts
    8,681
    That still overwhelmingly benefits Mr $500k vs Mr $50k regardless of how many bones you throw him

    And anyway it's not Mr $500k that's the problem, it's Mr Bezos and Mr Zuckerberg for whom the concept of salary is a decoy to make the tax man think he's getting a fair slice


    Poland treats me like shit and I hate them as a result of it

  10. #13150
    Jack Coutu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 9, 2011
    Location
    marketjacker
    Posts
    1,642
    Hopefully one day someone will grow the balls to seize Amazon from that dumb fuck, hand him 2 mil and say "thanks for all the bullshit you pulled to get here, now get the fuck out". So tired of the leniency handed to someone who's working their employees into the ground and ruining the fabric of the American economy even further.

  11. #13151

    Join Date
    April 12, 2011
    Posts
    2,810
    How about the flat tax proponents actually show a figure that raises anywhere near the required amount for even our 2019 welfare spending without crippling poorer people? It's all well and good to say "well, we'll just increase welfare for the poor" except that would just require raising even more taxes.

  12. #13152
    Duckslayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 23, 2017
    Posts
    2,543
    flat taxes are bad for everyone but the very wealthy 101. Baby steps on fhc

  13. #13153
    Donor
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruri View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    You don't need a regressive flat tax to make the rich pay it lmao
    Who cares if the flat tax is regressive, if the public welfare benefits are appropriately progressive.

    Tax Policy and Welfare Policy shouldn't be linked. They're two different purposes.

    For the individual, it's the net result that counts.
    10% of someone's salary if they're making $50k has a disproportionately negative impact as compared to 10% of someone's salary if they're making $500k. The first family will struggle to own one house and send their child to college, the second will have to possibly put off buying that yacht they've had their eye on for another year, that is if they actually pay anything close to what their tax rate is on paper. Unless you're willing to means-test whatever theoretical benefits this inequity produces to the point where they're no longer truly benefits, there's no way to make up for the loss to poorer families.
    I don't think you read my post Ruri.

    Let me walk you through it:

    1. Flat 10% Tax.

    2. Mr. $50K pays $5,000 in taxes. Mr. $500k pays $50,000.

    3. Mr. $45K after taxes qualifies for $20k in Welfare Benefits. His net is $65k.

    4. Mr. $450K qualifies for no benefits. He stays at $450k.

    If we the voting public think Mr. $45K deserves more, then give him $30k in benefits. Or $40k in benefits. Or however many thousands you like.

    Still pays the flat tax. Gets more than they paid back. Two separate policies, one tax policy, flat, everyone pays, regressive, one welfare, progressive, the less you make, the more you get in aid.

    Tax policy designed to generate revenue first, and have everyone paying something in.

    Welfare policy designed to help those in need, the more in need, the more help they get.

    Looking only at the tax policy misses the forest for the trees in what I would propose here.
    It has been said in posts below why this is silly but there's also another caveat, where's the break in salaried postions vs mandartory overtime pay?

    There are a whole lot of middle class people about to hit that threshold due to job losses and grabbing service industry management jobs without a lot of perks. Including people who used to work at financial instutions. Let's keep drawing this line while the Fed keeps pumping cash into private assests for now.

  14. #13154
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    22,194
    The biggest problem for much of the American working class is getting their billionaire corporate employers to actually pay them the shit wages they are legally due anyway.
    Look, the wages you withheld from the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of Hosts. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves for slaughter.

  15. #13155

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Pizza delivery van
    Posts
    7,650
    And americans thinking that healtcare or social security costs nearly the amounts they get billed for.

  16. #13156
    Duckslayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 23, 2017
    Posts
    2,543
    Americans in the main seem to be running first in the international retardation league, followed closely by my lot.

  17. #13157

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    15,417
    Quote Originally Posted by Paradox View Post
    That still overwhelmingly benefits Mr $500k vs Mr $50k regardless of how many bones you throw him
    The purpose is to make Mr. $50 as well off/supported as possible, net. Mr. $500k is irrelevant to that, he pays his share, gets nothing back, and moves on.

    Designing a system specifically to fuck Mr. $500k for being Mr. $500k and provide less to Mr. $50k net is a poorly designed system.

    And anyway it's not Mr $500k that's the problem, it's Mr Bezos and Mr Zuckerberg for whom the concept of salary is a decoy to make the tax man think he's getting a fair slice
    Flat Tax shouldn't be/isn't just on salary. It's on all forms of income. Corporate. Individual. Salary. Investment. Inheritance. Etc.

    No loopholes. No exceptions. No ways to avoid it. No social-policy-via-the-tax-code handouts. No sin-penalties-via-the-tax-code takeaways.

    And no tax preparation complexity, nor benefit for who can afford the highest paid accountants.


  18. #13158

    Join Date
    May 25, 2011
    Posts
    381
    This is the latest piece I've read (in the UK press, ofc) about how to resist Trump, if he refuses to relinquish power:
    https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...art-preparing?

    But these pieces never seem to define the actual concrete steps Trump could take to retain power. Obviously just locking the White House doors and refusing to come out on inauguration day isn't really a threat. But what effective steps might the republicans take to unfairly retain power, how likely are they to succeed and how could they be combatted. I'll start the ball rolling:

    1. Voter intimidation on the day. Highly likely. I have limited faith that law enforcement would enforce laws banning this uniformly. Moderately effective.
    2. Not counting mail-in votes. If Trump leads on the night, then republican state governors and assemblies might decide that mail-in votes are too fraud-prone, stop counting them and give the electoral college votes to Trump. I can't assess this one.
    3. Faithless electors. Even if Biden wins, could republican state governors and assemblies instruct their electoral college voters to vote for Trump, citing BS irregularities? Again, I don't even ...

    Or maybe the whole coup thing is a lefty fever-dream.

    (BTW I'm only asking about events on of after election day. I'm aware of the long history of voter suppression, gerrymandering and the electoral college itself.)
    Last edited by duckduck; October 20 2020 at 01:58:49 PM.

  19. #13159
    Malcanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 12, 2011
    Posts
    17,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Isyel View Post
    https://abc7.com/fire-intentionally-...cials/7155522/

    Fire intentionally set inside ballot box in Baldwin Park, officials say
    Firefighters say someone purposely tossed burning newspaper into the official drop box.
    This is fine.
    "It makes me very mad because I've never seen it, I've never seen this," said John Rios. "I'm 80 years old, I've been voting since I was 19, I've never seen something like this."
    Activate the Marlona Voter Fraud Squad, we've got a CODE RIO GRANDE!
    Quote Originally Posted by Isyel View Post
    And btw, you're such a fucking asshole it genuinely amazes me on a regular basis how you manage to function.

  20. #13160
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    16,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Coutu View Post
    Hopefully one day someone will grow the balls to seize Amazon from that dumb fuck, hand him 2 mil and say "thanks for all the bullshit you pulled to get here, now get the fuck out". So tired of the leniency handed to someone who's working their employees into the ground and ruining the fabric of the American economy even further.
    If you mess up 2 day free shipping, the pitchforks will come for you next!
    meh

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •