Trump

[WuDrWu]

nm

[CBB_Fan]

You just named a whole bunch of taxes that nobody has to pay, and others that only a select few have to pay.

And you say that the majority is Income Tax, where a good percentage pay zero, and a smaller percentage take in the form of EIC.

So what's your point?

You said you prefer a Nordic model for taxes...I assume you support a similar Nordic model for the percentage of poor and the military...expenses in general?

And you're full of bs about people thinking taxes are less progressive than most people think, unless you're skewing your "opinion" with percentages.

Certainly a person that doesn't work and spends his welfare money only on cigs, liquor and lottery is taxed at an insane %. Of course, that person is CHOOSING to pay those taxes.

How much of the pie do you want the wealthy to pay? Clearly you like redistribution, so I'm not even sure your opinion is going to mean much to me, but how much of the pie?

Don't try and compare someone TAKING from govt and giving back 10% in taxes with someone paying 6 figures in taxes. It make you look silly.

Please state your point more clearly. If your point is that we should continue acting as if income taxes are the only taxes that exist, you are wrong and this discussion can go no further. And if you think no one pays for the taxes I listed, you are also wrong. Have you ever bought a product from a store? If you paid in credit in some states, that credit is counted as an asset and is taxed under the accounts receivable tax. That store needed a building permit, which was taxed (and that cost is passed on to you for the store to make a profit). If that store was large enough to be publicly traded then the owner's had to pay capital gains taxes, which again get passed to you for the company to make money.

The product was delivery by semi, whose license was taxed. Again, passed to you (abbreviated as PTY from now on). Bought cigarettes at the store? Taxed. The store made money, which is taxed and PTY. Bought food or seafood? Taxed, PTY. Stopped by the Dillon's gas station outside to make use of the discount? Taxed. Bought liquor? Taxed. Most people get married (heck, nowadays multiple times). Taxed. Own a house or property? Taxed. Bought literally anything? Taxed. Have a job? In addition to your income tax, there's the payroll tax, social security tax, and unemployment taxes. Own a telephone? You are getting taxed multiple ways. Drive on roads? Those roads were built with specific taxes. Buy your own energy, water, gas? Taxed on the companies, PTY. Own a vehicle? The license is taxed, and when you sale it you'll pay a special sales tax.

You could pay all of those taxes and still not make enough for the federal income tax. Here are the national averages for the larger taxes. Income taxes are not the majority. They are the largest tax, but they make up a small plurality. Discounting employer's shares of taxes (which in reality are simply deducted from salary), pseudo-taxes, and inflation you get an average "real" tax rate of 30%. Including those the average American has a tax rate of 40% or more.

I favor redistribution and social safety net policies for several reasons. First, because poor people spend a higher percentage of their incoming money. If they receive a tax cut or a check, that money tends to go directly back into the economy, increasing the velocity of money and sending a decent percentage of the money back in taxes. In other words, it is almost always more efficient to cut taxes or give money to the poor. Secondly, because of the concept of log utility, developed in 1738 by Daniel Bernoulli. In his words:

The determination of the value of an item must not be based on its price, but rather on the utility it yields. The price of the item is dependent only on the thing itself and is equal for everyone; the utility, however, is dependent on the particular circumstances of the person making the estimate. Thus there is no doubt that a gain of one thousand ducats is more significant to a pauper than to a rich man though both gain the same amount.

Which goes back to the tax problem. If a poor person is taxed at 20%, it might represent $4,000. A rich person taxed at the same rate might lose $100,000. And yet a person making $20k a year will lose much more utility from that $4k than the person making $500k would lose from getting taxed $100k. That $4k is much more likely to stop them from making rent, more likely to force them to dip into credit to pay for groceries, etc. This is why we have a progressive tax system to begin with.

Where I differ from many liberals is that I would be perfectly willing to give up taxation as a vehicle for wealth redistribution. I still believe in log utility, but I also think that the current tax policy might discourage enough business to be a net negative, while being so complex as to lose whatever efficiency is gained through the progressive rates. I would be perfectly fine with eliminating many taxes (essentially every tax not paid by an individual) and getting rid of the income tax for an equivalent consumption tax, as long as we continued to utilize log utility through social services.

The libertarian approach to this would be to replace the current safety net with a negative income tax, which I am in support of. This is a system where people earning below a certain amount receive supplemental pay from the government instead of paying taxes to the government. We currently spend about $20,000 for every poor person in the form of our 100+ welfare programs; achieving our social goals in this manner dramatically reduces the size and scope of the federal government while doing an equal or better job at satisfying the goal of a minimum standard of living. And as opposed to current welfare, where you can lose most of your income by going to work, this would let you keep most or all of the income.

[jdshock]

I don't propose to know what the value of X and Y should be in this equation, but a tax decrease of x% for a middle income family may be more significant than a Y% change to the wealthy. A thousand dollars means more at some level than $10,000 at a higher level. Thus the middle class may feel like it gets a bigger cut than the wealthy becuse the each dollar is more significant.

That's definitely true. $10,000 is a lot more to a middle class person than Bill Gates. I'm also a big proponent of a progressive system, so I have to believe 1% to a middle class person is a bigger deal than 1% to Bill Gates.

Maybe that's what Trump meant when he said the biggest cuts would be for the middle class, but I don't think so.

[wufan]

That's definitely true. $10,000 is a lot more to a middle class person than Bill Gates. I'm also a big proponent of a progressive system, so I have to believe 1% to a middle class person is a bigger deal than 1% to Bill Gates.

Maybe that's what Trump meant when he said the biggest cuts would be for the middle class, but I don't think so.

I don't believe Trump is going to come through on the quote that the middle class will receive a 35% tax reduction.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

I normally love to debate in detail, but right now, all I feel like adding is:

Clinton sucked
Trump sucked/sucks
I voted for Evan
I sleep well at night (when the little kiddos aren't waking me up)

[pinstripers]

With his despicable move in the U.N., President Barack Hussein Obama has just earned the title of “Most Anti-Semitic President” ever.

[jdshock]

With his despicable move in the U.N., President Barack Hussein Obama has just earned the title of “Most Anti-Semitic President” ever.

Did you hear any of the things Nixon said about Jews?

You aren't an anti-semite just because you don't 100%, fully support Israel, just as you are not a racist just because you don't support more immigration.

[pinstripers]

Good heavens, how would the spoken word ever compare?

[MoValley John]

Did you hear any of the things Nixon said about Jews?

You aren't an anti-semite just because you don't 100%, fully support Israel, just as you are not a racist just because you don't support more immigration.

Nixon was on Laugh In.

Sock it to me.

[Walker]

I think this tweet by Dave Rubin sums it up pretty good. It's amazing how openly hostile the UN is towards Israel and how complicit this administration is to that hostility. It's amazing to me that the UN has the audacity to throw it's weight around to force a nation to not build within it's own borders. How would any other nation react to this? Israel is the only nation in the region with Western values, one of our most important allies and this is yet again another stab in the back.

Ever since it became a nation again in 1948, there have been two-state solution proposals that Israel has agreed to but with the Palestinians it has been all or nothing. They are hellbent for the destruction of Israel and the Jewish people.

Recently I've heard Trump, Cruz and a few others suggest de-funding the UN until this anti-Israel aggression continues. About damn time. I think we should have stopped paying for the UN long ago, but this just another reason to do so. I hope manage to do it. It does nothing but fund BS and chip away at our sovereignty.

[jdshock]

Good heavens, how would the spoken word ever compare?

My point is that you might be a racist that doesn't support more immigration and you might be an anti-semite that doesn't support Israel, but you aren't an anti-semite just because you don't support Israel. What Nixon said was actually anti-semitic.

[pinstripers]

My point is that you might be a racist that doesn't support more immigration and you might be an anti-semite that doesn't support Israel, but you aren't an anti-semite just because you don't support Israel. What Nixon said was actually anti-semitic.

opposing Israel is anti-semitic

[jdshock]

opposing Israel is anti-semitic

In the same way building a wall is, in and of itself, racist.

[pinstripers]

In the same way building a wall is, in and of itself, racist.

how in the **** is that racist?

[SB Shock]

With his despicable move in the U.N., President Barack Hussein Obama has just earned the title of “Most Anti-Semitic President” ever.

Really not surprising since his administration is full of Muslim brotherhood.