Joe Biden Presidency thread *Please read OP - Threadbanned Users Added 4/5/21*

Cody montana

Eric Cartman wrote: »

well aside from the wealth tax act just being a cheap jibe at JD rockerfeller to drain a mans pockets .

The creation of the welfare state in the US at that time has had intergenerational effects creating ghetto's , welfare dependence and combined with pro union acts hurt American business and productivity.

The new deal could have been an uplift for everyone but instead it was a cheap shot at rebooting the American economy by taking a swipe at business owners and relieving them of capital.

Can’t run a trillion dollar deficit forever.

Wanderer78

Cody montana wrote: »

Can’t run a trillion dollar deficit forever.

depends on the state of the economy, but sometimes you actually can, and it ll be fine

everlast75

Eric Cartman wrote: »

well aside from the wealth tax act just being a cheap jibe at JD rockerfeller to drain a mans pockets .

The creation of the welfare state in the US at that time has had intergenerational effects creating ghetto's , welfare dependence and combined with pro union acts hurt American business and productivity.

The new deal could have been an uplift for everyone but instead it was a cheap shot at rebooting the American economy by taking a swipe at business owners and relieving them of capital.

Elon Musk when the tax act is enacted...

Leroy42

Eric, I'm interested. Do you happen to know the income distribution stats in the US? Has the split be getting better or worse, relatively, for the richest 1% over the last number of years?

If the distribution is becoming more skewed, then unless you are in the very highest portion (5% or so) then the current taxation policies are actually working against you. Why would you argue for that to continue on?

There won't ever be a point when the rich actually start to hand the money back, unless they are forced to, through taxation.

With such massive amounts needed for, and even Trump accepts the need for massive infrastructure investment but was unable to work out how to do anything about it, infrastructure in the US that will benefit everyone in the US, how do you think it should e paid for?

Wanderer78

Leroy42 wrote: »

Eric, I'm interested. Do you happen to know the income distribution stats in the US? Has the split be getting better or worse, relatively, for the richest 1% over the last number of years?

If the distribution is becoming more skewed, then unless you are in the very highest portion (5% or so) then the current taxation policies are actually working against you. Why would you argue for that to continue on?

There won't ever be a point when the rich actually start to hand the money back, unless they are forced to, through taxation.

With such massive amounts needed for, and even Trump accepts the need for massive infrastructure investment but was unable to work out how to do anything about it, infrastructure in the US that will benefit everyone in the US, how do you think it should e paid for?

i ll give him a hand!

everlast75

Certain posters, who are by luck born where they are born, which helps them to be achieve a privileged position often have no empathy for others who were simply born in a different part of the world, or didn't have the opportunities they were presented with.

ohnonotgmail

Leroy42 wrote: »

Eric, I'm interested. Do you happen to know the income distribution stats in the US? Has the split be getting better or worse, relatively, for the richest 1% over the last number of years?

If the distribution is becoming more skewed, then unless you are in the very highest portion (5% or so) then the current taxation policies are actually working against you. Why would you argue for that to continue on?

There won't ever be a point when the rich actually start to hand the money back, unless they are forced to, through taxation.

With such massive amounts needed for, and even Trump accepts the need for massive infrastructure investment but was unable to work out how to do anything about it personally benefit from it, infrastructure in the US that will benefit everyone in the US, how do you think it should e paid for?

FYP.

everlast75

everlast75 wrote: »

Certain posters, who are by luck born where they are born, which helps them to be achieve a privileged position often have no empathy for others who were simply born in a different part of the world, or didn't have the opportunities they were presented with.

Helps when Mommy and Daddy pay for everything. Often has the unfortunate outcome of raising a gob****e however.

ancapailldorcha

Deleted User wrote: »

You're a tad obsessed with looking down at poor people. Meanwhile iirc you approve of wealthy people engaging in tax avoidance and evasion...

For some people, all that matters is seeing people they don't like getting brutalised. The cruelty is the point.

Muahahaha

everlast75 wrote: »

Certain posters, who are by luck born where they are born, which helps them to be achieve a privileged position often have no empathy for others who were simply born in a different part of the world, or didn't have the opportunities they were presented with.

At this point I think any poster who constantly rants and raves about the evils of socialism whilst advocating for corporates to dodge tax on here shouldnt have the license to do so until they can show us their cheque to the Irish government repaying the 18 years of childrens allowance they themselves benefited from. They're fierce quick to criticise the very system that paid them out for 18 years but not so quick to put their hand in their pocket and repay the money they think others shouldnt have.

Will we be seeing any of these exteme neo liberal types repaying the 18 years of childrens allowance they got? I wont be holding my breath

stefanovich

Muahahaha wrote: »

At this point I think any poster who constantly rants and raves about the evils of socialism whilst advocating for corporates to dodge tax on here shouldnt have the license to do so until they can show us their cheque to the Irish government repaying the 18 years of childrens allowance they themselves benefited from. They're fierce quick to criticise the very system that paid them out for 18 years but not so quick to put their hand in their pocket and repay the money they think others shouldnt have.

Will we be seeing any of these exteme neo liberal types repaying the 18 years of childrens allowance they got? I wont be holding my breath

Good job perpetuating false stereotypes. I certainly got nothing from my parents and came from a very disadvantaged background. I worked for everything I have.

Pit the working class against the middle class. Meanwhile the very rich employ every tax loophole afforded to them.

Child allowance? This is one case where the squeezed middle get a little back - they pay for everything in this country.

stefanovich

Muahahaha wrote: »

Will we be seeing any of these exteme neo liberal types repaying the 18 years of childrens allowance they got? I wont be holding my breath

The child allowance is funded by taxation. I consider it a tax rebate. Why am I paying back? Myself?

Eric Cartman

Cody montana wrote: »

Can’t run a trillion dollar deficit forever.

This is it, drastically cut non infrastructure and essential service federal spending until you can pay down the debt. Government has been spending too much the world over, a smaller more efficient model is needed.

Wanderer78

Eric Cartman wrote: »

This is it, drastically cut non infrastructure and essential service federal spending until you can pay down the debt. Government has been spending too much the world over, a smaller more efficient model is needed.

...and default to the usual, over dependence on the private sector money supply!

ancapailldorcha

Eric Cartman wrote: »

This is it, drastically cut non infrastructure and essential service federal spending until you can pay down the debt. Government has been spending too much the world over, a smaller more efficient model is needed.

I prefer the idea of billionaires paying tax.

MisterAnarchy

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Ahh would that be white privilege ? :rolleyes:

Do you think being fiscally privileged isn't a thing too? You can do the sarcastic responses etc but I think it's good to reflect on the fact that people came from poorer backgrounds than me and that I'm lucky in scheme of things. So definitely not gonna be looking down at anyone because they're economically disadvantaged and am happy for state supports being a thing.

Smee_Again

Eric Cartman wrote: »

This is it, drastically cut non infrastructure and essential service federal spending until you can pay down the debt. Government has been spending too much the world over, a smaller more efficient model is needed.

You only have an issue with government debt when its being used to better the lives of people instead of being funnelled into corporations.

stefanovich

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you think being fiscally privileged isn't a thing too? You can do the sarcastic responses etc but I think it's good to reflect on the fact that people came from poorer backgrounds than me and that I'm lucky in scheme of things. So definitely not gonna be looking down at anyone because they're economically disadvantaged and am happy for state supports being a thing.

People should strive to be net contributors to society. I'm all for support for people when they need it. A leg up.

That said, if I work all my life and save and invest my money, I'm doing that for my kids. To help them out. I am going without so they have a better chance at a good life.

Seizing that money to redistribute to those who were obviously less conscientious is wrong.

Wanderer78

stefanovich wrote: »

People should strive to be net contributors to society. I'm all for support for people when they need it. A leg up.

That said, if I work all my life and save and invest my money, I'm doing that for my kids. To help them out. I am going without so they have a better chance at a good life.

Seizing that money to redistribute to those who were obviously less conscientious is wrong.

so you re for wealth taxes also?

stefanovich

Wanderer78 wrote: »

so you re for wealth taxes also?

I'm against my hard earned money being used to fund people's irresponsibly or idleness.

I'm not against taxation but I believe it should be simple. A single rate across the board. No loopholes.

Smee_Again

stefanovich wrote: »

I'm against my hard earned money being used to fund people's irresponsibly or idleness.

I'm not against taxation but I believe it should be simple. A single rate across the board. No loopholes.

You’ll fare a lot worse than you think in such a scenario.

Wanderer78

stefanovich wrote: »

I'm against my hard earned money being used to fund people's irresponsibly or idleness.

I'm not against taxation but I believe it should be simple. A single rate across the board. No loopholes.

its arguable that the wealthy have been so!

flat rate of taxes have been tried, and have failed, it ends up worsening inequality issues

an interactive graph of American taxation, to aide the conversation

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/10/06/opinion/income-tax-rate-wealthy.html

Tony EH

everlast75 wrote: »

Certain posters, who are by luck born where they are born, which helps them to be achieve a privileged position often have no empathy for others who were simply born in a different part of the world, or didn't have the opportunities they were presented with.

Such a thing requires thinking and a little reflection in a self critical manner which many people are simply incapable of.

Eric Cartman

Smee_Again wrote: »

You only have an issue with government debt when its being used to better the lives of people instead of being funnelled into corporations.

Im against government debt and most government spending all the time. Taxes are too high and theres no other solution except small government with low spending

Smee_Again

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Im against government debt and most government spending all the time. Taxes are too high and theres no other solution except small government with low spending

You’re wrong, and the only evidence we need to show that is by pointing at the US.

Crumbling infrastructure, massive and widening inequality, little to no healthcare for a significant chunk of the population.

You know all this but you think that you could beat the system if only taxes were lowered, and that’s the saddest part of all your posts, the complete lack of self awareness.

Eric Cartman

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Im against government debt and most government spending all the time. Taxes are too high and theres no other solution except small government with low spending

What is your evidence for that? Like what peer reviewed papers have you read in accredited journals that have suggested that?

Are you aware of what a Laffer curve is? And how it's shape is determined? What models have you found that suggests that the maximum revenue point would occur for a lower tax rate?

A poll was done in 2012 asking dozens of experts from Harvard, MIT, Yale etc. the following question:

"A cut in federal income tax rates in the US right now would raise taxable income enough so that the annual total tax revenue would be higher within five years than without the tax cut."

Not one of those dozens of experts agreed with that statement. So why are you right and they are all wrong? Or do you just believe that we should not try to maximise total tax revenue?

https://www.igmchicago.org/surveys/laffer-curve/

Leroy42

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Im against government debt and most government spending all the time. Taxes are too high and theres no other solution except small government with low spending

Taxes are too high? That is a very sweeping statement.

What taxes, on whom? Should all taxes be lowered?

How big is big government? What parts of the government would you remove? Military obviously. Law enforcement, the legal system? Should the entire Federal government be done away with or maybe get rid of local government?

Denmark and Sweden both have 'high' taxes and continue to be prosper and seem to have relatively content and stable citizens.

Smee_Again

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Im against government debt and most government spending all the time. Taxes are too high and theres no other solution except small government with low spending

Oh, and it’s fairly clear from all your posts that your real issue is with helping people you just hide that behind claims that taxes are too high.

francois

stefanovich wrote: »

I'm against my hard earned money being used to fund people's irresponsibly or idleness.

I'm not against taxation but I believe it should be simple. A single rate across the board. No loopholes.

Ah the old idlesness strawman appears, from the epi report,

Among families or individuals receiving public assistance, the majority (66.6 percent) work or are in working families (families in which at least one adult in the household works). This number grows to 71.6 percent when focusing on non-elderly recipient families and individuals (those under age 65).

https://www.epi.org/publication/wages-and-transfers/

Eric Cartman

francois wrote: »

Ah the old idlesness strawman appears, from the epi report,

Among families or individuals receiving public assistance, the majority (66.6 percent) work or are in working families (families in which at least one adult in the household works). This number grows to 71.6 percent when focusing on non-elderly recipient families and individuals (those under age 65).

https://www.epi.org/publication/wages-and-transfers/

From your own link :

About 69.2 percent of all public assistance benefits received by non-elderly families or individuals go to those who work.
Nearly half (46.9 percent) of all working recipients of public assistance work full time (at least 1,990 hours per year).

So over 30% on benefits are not working at all and are not elderly
Less than half of the 69.2% who work are in full time employment .

So 32.4% of those in receipt of benefits in the state work full time, so over 2 thirds either dont work, or only work part time .

Sounds like 2/3rds of these people need to get themselves a full time job.

Also looking at that link , of the ‘benefits’ most are on , most full time workers are just in receipt of the EITC earned income tax credit, its just a tax rebate for those earning under 25k a year , its hardly a benefit. Who knew... lower taxes also help the poor