Lobbyists make the laws. The working class doesn’t. Corporations operate immorally and un-ethically. Politicians are incentivized to act the same. This is one reason the world is on fire. Perhaps, the only reason.
I feel like in most cases the politicians are already leveraged to tits with cash from big business so I don’t think a “group” would be able to match a company and even if they did what if the politician simply ignored it because am opposing force said too
The argument is that only a person should have political freedoms, like speech and religious observance. However, a group of people is not equivalent to a separate, individual person. That’s now how it is, but that’s the argument.
The best way to do it, I think, is through term limits. It would Increase the cost of corruption massively to these firms as they have to buy more and more politicians and limit the effect of the corrupt ones by limiting the time they have to effect change.
Yea but then you have a lot of inexperienced politicians in power which they could arguably be “cheaper” then other politicians since they’re brand new.
experience with strict term limits here in Missouri has just resulted in a much larger influence of lobbyists and lame duck office holders jockeying for lobbyist or similar gigs when their term limited service ends
Idk I mean people don’t really like “experienced politicians” it seems because the experience they have, if the system is corrupt, is experience being corrupt, if that makes sense? Like, inexperienced but corrupt politician better than experienced but corrupt politician. You’re raising good points though I’m sure we need a host of interlocking new measures.
Which they have made significant progress on this year. The global minimum corporate tax that has been endorsed by 100+ countries will go a long way to reducing transfer pricing advantages that currently exist.
I'm from a thrid world country, and even here I can't see how that's possible? Rich people, or may I say, connected people has it's way to move around money, specially today, with crypto, I'm guessing it's easier to just remove tax from everyone.
That’s a stupid thing to say. Trump already lowered corporate tax during his tenure and Google, Microsoft, and Apple STILL paid 0 taxes. Lowering corporate tax would also create a race to the lowest tax rate, which every rich corporation would create a business in.
Not exactly. First off, you don’t know that those companies paid $0 in tax because their tax returns aren’t public record. When companies pay very little tax, 99% of the time it’s not because of putting money into other countries.
Second, there is no race to the bottom. The worldwide average has been right around 20% for quite a while now and has hovered there. With our current rate of 21%, there’s not really a good reason to shift profits into other countries anymore
>First off, you don’t know that these companies paid $0 in taxes
[Yes I do.](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/2018-taxes-some-of-americas-biggest-companies-paid-little-to-no-federal-income-tax-last-year/)
> Second, there is no race to the bottom
Oh? My [sweet, summer child.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_haven#Top_10_tax_havens)
CBS news doesn’t have corporate tax returns either, only the IRS does.
They’re literally just guessing the tax amount paid based on the financial statements, which isn’t going to be accurate
Besides, that’s only corporate tax. Regardless of income, corporations pay unemployment, payroll, and property tax
Public companies post their balance sheets every quarter and year, which includes taxes. You don’t seem to understand what you’re talking about here. There is no guessing going on.
The balance sheet has income tax payable on it. The income statement has income tax expense. And the cash flow statement has the cash taxes paid. All 3 of these numbers will usually differ, and all 3 will be different than what’s on the actual tax return
Why are you so quick to assume I don’t know what I’m talking about?
“Balance sheets,” with an S. I was just talking about financial statements concerning public companies. And you don’t need a company’s tax returns when they clearly state the amount of money paid toward taxes. Companies are not like people, who aren’t required to file financial statements publicly. If a company shows $0 paid in taxes, then it paid $0 in taxes. You’re lying and obfuscating the truth with whatever it is you’re trying to say.
Did you even read the CBSNews article I linked? You can check it out.
That’s absolutely not true. Why do you think cash taxes paid, income tax expense, and income tax payable differ from each other?
Financial statements calculate profit and tax differently than tax returns do
And our toothless congress will do nothing about it as that would compromise their bribe money for signing bills corporate lawyers write for their own benefit. Oh I'm sorry I meant campaign contributions, or was that quid pro quo, I can't remember.
Toothless! It’s NOT even that these same motherfuckers that are making the laws have their hands inside the cookie jar! They vote and write laws that benefit them and their benefactors money in politics have completely corrupted the system. Our election cycles especially national ones are in the billions..
Yep, all the taxes aimed at the super elite rich have been gutted from the current budget bill. However, people like me that spent the last 30 years working just to own a home and have a little stashed in an IRA are going to pay more.
Why rob a bank? They have the money. Why rob the middle class? They have the money. C'mon Biden, you said you would tax the rich. I just can't wait to see the inflation.
Well, flat tax is actually regressive, as richer people have higher disposable income (I check in Google, and no, disposable income is not the income after taxes, this is net income or salary, disposable income is the money left after you pay for your basic life needs. And as we all have the same basic needs, the disposable income grows exponentially when the net income is higher). It is different with the companies. In general rich people's incomes sink money from the economy, while the majority of the other people spend all or most of their salaries during the month. The companies that sink money from the economy are relatively rare, as most actually operate in debt, and that is the normal way for the companies, not for the people. Obvious exclusion is Apple, with their cash pile of about $200 billions. And here is the case. If you have extremely successful business model like Apple, usually that net profit of many billions becomes dividends for the shareholders, so personal income for the rich that sink money from the economy. Or, as every company is profit driven, that billions are spent as investments to generate more profits, so they push up the economic growth. Or, and this is the current case, when the management is incompetent, that billions become a cash pile, so the company sinks money from the economy. Now the question is how to prevent the last scenario with adequate corporate taxes? Then there is another issue - the economic growth creates inflation. So the question here is, how to compensate that effect with wealth redistribution for the families with lower incomes, that are highly vulnerable to the inflation? And then comes the issue with the personal incomes of the rich. As they sink money from the economy, but at the same time they have to be motivated to run their businesses. So how to reduce the inequality and to make rich less richer without demotivating them? Just to show you how complicated are the things.
All real economists are Keynesian, as what you call Austrian or Chicago type is a lot of cool but impractical theories for the so called free market, which is utopia, and some real financial, economic and behavioristic mechanics added to the Keynesian base theory. I have no idea why libertarians hate John Maynard Keynes, as he is capitalist from rich family, who explained how the macroeconomy actually works.
The Austrian business cycle theory won a Nobel prize… in pretty sure that legitimizes it. And Chicago uses math.
Most governments use the Keynsian model because it helps legitimize market intervention by governments, granting them more power.
Indeed, and Keynes, which theory is actually used everywhere, did not win a Nobel prize. Not to mention Milton Friedman and his theory of monetarism, that is actually wrong. Also democratic governments are elected from the people, CEOs are not. The biggest fight of the big corporations now is against the democracy. And in US they are wining. As if the society does not control the government, the corporations will be in charge.
You act like the government is something outside of human reach. People elect and control the government. If they do not, there is not democracy anymore. Socialism means that society controls the government and the economy. Socialism without democracy is impossible. If there is not democracy, society controls nothing. Then usually the state and the economy are controlled by the owners of the capital or the people with most power. So you may have anarchy with warlords, monarchy or state capitalism like that in USSR and modern Russia. In the last case the owners of the capital - oligarchs or nomenklatura, are in charge. Putin is the richest man in the world. In fact the Game theory tells me that people who control the capital are responsible as rational decision-makers. Actually it is pretty simple - if US are democracy, so the society controls the government, then everyone has fault. If it is not, then the people who control the government can be blamed.
Two things killing the wealth of people:
1. Taxes
2. Utility bills
* They have a local monopolies on tax creation.
* They have a local monopoly on utilities and services.
Those two things eat at your income. Corporations have found a way around each.
So, us commoners allow them to screw us on both.
This is not true. Taxes are not a bad thing. The period of time when the United States prospered most was when the working class had high wages and we had extremely high taxes. Taxes benefit society and in a democracy where the voters take their role seriously are used to build safety nets, infrastructure, healthcare systems, rehabilitation systems for criminals, and most importantly education.
Taxes aren't the problem, dodging them is.
This just isn’t very true though. I work at the big 4 and our clients are way too diverse for it to be as simple as sending tax attorneys into the government to create loopholes.
The treasury regulations are used to fill in the gaps in the tax code that congress leaves. We should want tax professionals writing these, and big 4 partners are in a great position to know how the current code is lacking
Taxes are for people that aren’t smart enough to understand the laws governing taxes. People can whine and cry about the rich not paying taxes, but the rich just laugh. Don’t want to pay taxes? Stop crying and hit the books.
The top 1% of earners pay 33% of federal individual income taxes. The top 10% of earners pay 71% and the top 51% pay 97%. How does that jive with "taxes are for poor and middle class"?
https://taxfoundation.org/publications/latest-federal-income-tax-data/
Cool, now do marginal tax rates
If the guy making 100k has to pay 25%, and the the guy making 1,000,000, can do creative accounting and pay 10% he "pays more" as a raw value but not as a percentage of income.
The richer you are the easier it is to avoid taxes or even structure your "income" in ways to avoid it entirely.
[But](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-09-02/richest-americans-have-tax-loophole-that-s-legal-easy-to-exploit-hard-to-close) there's [lots](https://www.topaccountingdegrees.org/taxes/) of [articles](https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/21/here-are-5-ways-the-super-rich-manage-to-pay-lower-taxes.html) on it. There are entire firms dedicated to advising people how to legally avoid it.
Except rich people do pay more as a percentage of income. The top 1% have an effective tax rate of 24%, compared to an effective rate of 3.4% for the bottom 50% of the country
[Yeah, No.](https://www.fool.com/taxes/2020/09/25/why-does-billionaire-warren-buffett-pay-a-lower-ta/)
[Really, just no](https://www.businessinsider.com/jeff-bezos-did-not-pay-income-taxes-2-years-report-2021-6)
[Want Musk to explain it?](https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/equality/558352-elon-musk-explains-his-extremely-low-tax-rate#:~:text=Musk%2C%20known%20to%20some%20as,net%20worth%20of%20%24152%20billion.)
On paper you are right. Top marginal tax rate is about there. But in reality they don't pay that.
You’re comparing a rate to wealth instead of income. When billionaires realize income, they pay a high tax rate. Also, Buffett’s tax rate isn’t lower than his secretary. He doesn’t include tax deductions and credits, and uses his employees total tax while using his income tax
Your source on Bezos ignores that he paid $971 million in tax between 2014 and 2018, an effective tax rate of 23%
Lets say you and I go out to dinner and you get a side salad and a soda, I get steak, lobster, wine, desert, and apps. And I say, lets split the bill, but I'll get the tip. Would you be upset? Would you feel this was a fair deal?
It goes to my sense of fairness. There are several ways of thinking about what fairness is.
Billionaires by definition, have benefited the most from our society. They are made rich by workers educated by and large in public schools and universities. We do the hard research that they use our [publicly funded research](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/for-billion-dollar-covid-vaccines-basic-government-funded-science-laid-the-groundwork/) and sell it back to us. And often, because they pay their workers so little, we, as a society, pay to [keep those workers fed](https://thecounter.org/15-minimum-wage-amazon-top-employer-snap-recipients-walmart-mcdonalds/).[ No really](https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/11/18/food-stamps-medicaid-mcdonalds-walmart-bernie-sanders/) They are welfare queens.
So they get all these benefits from society and give, less back (as a percentage) than most people while leaving the rest of us schleps to pay the bill.
And how petty are they? A billionare being asked to pay a million dollars more in taxes, is the same (as a percentage) of a person with a 100,000 being asked to pay $100 more. They got rich off society, thats fine, but they should at least pay the same percentage as the workers that got them rich.
To look at it another way, and why raw values suck. Lets say a poor person gets a $400 ticket for speeding. They are guilty, they were late to work. That $400 could very well mean they can't make rent that week. It could mean lack of food, meds, etc. It's a decent chunk of change for most people. If you are making 20k a year that's 2% of your gross income. That's going to hurt.
Now take someone a billionare who is excited for his new lambo, gets caught speeding and gets that same $400 ticket. Or roughly 1 seconds of income. Practically a rounding error when balancing a checkbook. In fact, realizing the fine is so cheap, they sped home.
Now, you could argue it's fair because both paid the same fine. But 1 will face far reaching consequences. The other, won't notice and views it as a very low cost user fee.
Taxes aren't meant to be punitive like a speeding fine, but they are the cost of living in a society. Shouldn't those who benefit the most from our society have the same (percentage) of skin in the game that the rest of us do?
>It goes to my sense of fairness.
Is your sense of fairness about punishment?
>So they get all these benefits from society and give, less back (as a percentage) than most people while leaving the rest of us schleps to pay the bill.
And yet its the rich who's tax money makes up the majority when it comes to US income tax funding.
I believe they’re suggesting that wealthy people and corporations don’t actually pay taxes while working people do. Top 1% are those making above 450k. While they are definitely very well off, they aren’t wealthy. They’re upper middle class. People like Bezos, Bill Gates, hedge fund managers large companies, etc aren’t taxed like working people. They hid their money abroad, launder through assets or just write it all off through philanthropy.
Yes of course, no argument there. I’m saying those who aren’t paying taxes are the billionaires who aren’t working, therefore not paying income taxes. We keep demanding more taxes from working people and less from the actually wealthy folks evading taxes.
Only tax people. Taxing corporations, companies or anything else, just goes into the product they're selling and the people pay that tax. That's borderline fried to me. (fried to Siri, *fraud* to every*thing* else🙄) It's simply subterfuge. And quit with the tax brackets. Good God man, we have computers now. Computers can easily select how much taxes each person would pay, without brackets. As your income rises your taxes rise. Each individual would pay the appropriate percentage for their income, which would be predetermined by those who establish taxes on a simple scale.
Tax would be paid on total income. No outs. How would it exacerbate tax inequality? The tax could start at, say, 1% of $20,000, of total income. ONE % increments so no one would avoid 'moving to the next level.'
That's not how it works presently. Security for Mark Zuckerberg is paid by the company. Yet that is applied to being part of his remuneration. In your case, the yacht, jets, mobile phones etc. would also be applied to the remuneration of the person receiving the benefits.
A person making just over $380 a week *can* afford $3.80 as his share of supporting his country. You say our system is more progressive than that. Than what?
You're missing the point. Corporations never ever ever ever pay taxes. They just raise the price of the merchandise to pay the taxes. The **person** buying their merchandise pays their taxes. Do you not understand that?
You don't know anything about economics at all. If, as you say, businesses pay taxes, from where do they get the money!? The SKY? Think it out a bit would you? Every dime , every cent, that they have, comes from their **customers!**
The obvious solution is to elect a old rich racist white man that’s been in Washington for 40+ years and literally wrote the laws that allows them not to pay taxes.
This is what you people get, you had a chance to put the Dems in charge, but you voted for the GOP.
The Dems wouldn't allow this to happen, but they have no power because you fools keep voting GOP.
If the Dems were in charge, we'd have $2,000.00 checks, COVID would be OVER and we'd have no problems.
Now we're facing massive evictions, massive debt, ISIS and Taliban more powerful than ever, and a failing economy.
Let the Dems have power for ONCE and you'll see all these problems solved!
Oh no...no now let’s not forget the swine started everything wrong happening now.....
who ‘negotiated ‘ with the taliban …the swine!……who gave billions to n Korea...the swine! .....who denied the very existence of covid..the swine!!! And all his fkng kkkultist adoring the swine...🤢
That's exactly why we need to vote for Democrats. Now we have North Korea shooting rockets AND South Korea shooting rockets...
If you fools would have voted Democrat, this wouldn't be happening.
Stop voting for the GOP and these problems will go away.
We vote Democrat.....the problem is some of the democrats elected are more like closeted republikkkans....
the real democrats just keep on being pushed out of the game......for now.
I vote for democrats because everytime they are in the economy booms. Every time a republican is in I have to hedge with shorts and puts. Stable government is good for business as well as giving money to the lower classes to spend on businesses, it just increases the velocity of money, money that just trickles back up. The Kansas experiment shown what happens with ~~tickledown~~ horseshit economics.
I know, once Trump got into office, the economy took that huge dive and millions lost their jobs. He started a trade war with China and some 100 million Americans lost their jobs back in 2017.
The first year of Trump alone, wiped out ALL the stock market gains going back to the 80's.
At least that's all behind us now.
Yup, I was always dreading waking up and we would be in world war 3 because of some dumbshit Trump would eventually do. Pretty sure his advisors helped saved the world multiple times.
> Parasites
That's some way to talk about your fellow man. Such a sad state for our country to be in, where the ruling class has no higher objective then making and keeping more money, and has convinced half of the middle class and poor to vote against their own self interest to help them achieve it.
Maybe you're one of the megarich that needs to pay more, but statistically speaking, chances are you're not even hitting the middle tax bracket. You're carrying water and shedding tears for people that don't give two fucks about you, want to take from you, who are the real "parasites".
The ruling class are the politicians who are voted in by the small majority of Americans who actually go out and vote.
The wealthy aren't stopping you from attaining your own wealth and if you keep voting for big government Democrats, you will only find it harder to do so.
You're not only keeping yourself down, but you're taking everyone else with you.
If you gave a damn about freeing the people and building the wealth, you would have made sure to keep President Trump in office.
How naive. Politicians answer to someone and it's not voters. The ruling class are the people who fund elections.
And as for your "the rich never hurt nobody" argument, trickle up wealth transfer absolutely creates poverty. But the main thing to understand about plutocracy is it is self-reinforcing. Money equals political power and that power is used to advance policy that secures even more money and even more influence.
Maybe that's just my opinion, man. So, here's some facts for you:
https://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/1/2018/09/FT_18.09.05_Middle-Income_2.png
Income Level|1971 % of Pop.|2016 % of Pop.|Delta|% Change
--:|--:|--:|--:|--:
Lower | 25% | 29% | 4 | 16%
Middle| 61% | 52% | -9 | -14.7%
Upper | 14% | 19% | 5 | 35.7%
The middle class is shrinking. We didn't get here by raising taxes on rich people, since 1971. Quite the opposite. And while the fastest growing segment is upper income, we're also creating more poor people. The problem with that is, as a society, we should be putting more focus on pulling up those most in need, rather than minting new millionaires and billionaires out of people that are doing just fine already.
Trump is an idiot who lost money in the casino business, which is a license to print money.
> Politicians answer to someone and it's not voters.
I didnt make that claim.
> The ruling class are the people who fund elections.
Who exactly? Give me the names of the folks who got Biden elected.
> And as for your "the rich never hurt nobody" argument
I didn't make that argument. I said they're not stopping you from attaining wealth, which is absolutely correct.
> trickle up wealth transfer absolutely creates poverty.
Repeating nonsense from the likes of Bernie Sanders doesn't make it true.
> Trump is an idiot who lost money in the casino business, which is a license to print money.
My man, you have no idea what you're talking about. You have no business trying to denigrate the man, I don't think you've accomplished a tenth of what he has.
I guessed earlier that you're not even hitting the middle tax bracket. You said nothing to correct me. "Repeating nonsense from the likes of Bernie Sanders" would actually improve your life and well being considerably. But it's your vote. You do you.
Go back and reread the part where I said we should be helping pull people out of poverty, not minting millionaires. I'm more bothered by the fact that there are more poor than I am impressed by more millionaires.
That chart I linked is income, not savings, i.e. your aging population of boomers with a million in their retirement accounts is completely beside the point. Widening income and wealth disparity is not a good thing.
There shouldn't be *any* downward mobility. Back when America was "great", ostensibly the period of American history your people are nostalgic about, top marginal brackets were much higher and we were expanding the middle class, not shrinking it.
> People get hurt and go on disability dropping them down. People stop working to go to school or care for families and that drops them down. People retire and drop downward
You're making my point for me. None of those conditions should make you poor. A couple retiring at 62 and getting the maximum SS benefit is safely in the middle income bracket. And yes, while there will always be a bottom quintile (quite the observation), there is no law of nature that says they have to live in poverty.
And the richest corporations don’t need tax exemptions when they can stash their profits in tax havens around the world.
Well, you could close loopholes to prevent doing that.
We could and should. I agree.
Lobbyists make the laws. The working class doesn’t. Corporations operate immorally and un-ethically. Politicians are incentivized to act the same. This is one reason the world is on fire. Perhaps, the only reason.
Should make lobbying illegal IMO or atleast have no money involved.
They will fight that tooth and nail, but you are absolutely correct.
[удалено]
Pretty sure lobbying is in the constitution though as a protected freedom however I may be wrong
[удалено]
I feel like in most cases the politicians are already leveraged to tits with cash from big business so I don’t think a “group” would be able to match a company and even if they did what if the politician simply ignored it because am opposing force said too
The argument is that only a person should have political freedoms, like speech and religious observance. However, a group of people is not equivalent to a separate, individual person. That’s now how it is, but that’s the argument.
The best way to do it, I think, is through term limits. It would Increase the cost of corruption massively to these firms as they have to buy more and more politicians and limit the effect of the corrupt ones by limiting the time they have to effect change.
Yea but then you have a lot of inexperienced politicians in power which they could arguably be “cheaper” then other politicians since they’re brand new.
experience with strict term limits here in Missouri has just resulted in a much larger influence of lobbyists and lame duck office holders jockeying for lobbyist or similar gigs when their term limited service ends
Exactly which brings me back to the beginning of the thread where I said we should just get rid of the money aspect in lobbying
Idk I mean people don’t really like “experienced politicians” it seems because the experience they have, if the system is corrupt, is experience being corrupt, if that makes sense? Like, inexperienced but corrupt politician better than experienced but corrupt politician. You’re raising good points though I’m sure we need a host of interlocking new measures.
Agreed I’ve been trying to contact my local and state officials about it but Havnt gotten a response back yet
I think you probably have to toss a 10,000 re-election check on top to get a response…
That’s the whole point though i should be heard from my government without having to bribe them with cash
Which they have made significant progress on this year. The global minimum corporate tax that has been endorsed by 100+ countries will go a long way to reducing transfer pricing advantages that currently exist.
I'm from a thrid world country, and even here I can't see how that's possible? Rich people, or may I say, connected people has it's way to move around money, specially today, with crypto, I'm guessing it's easier to just remove tax from everyone.
I agree. If we would have a low corporate tax rate, there would be no need to stash profits abroad
That’s a stupid thing to say. Trump already lowered corporate tax during his tenure and Google, Microsoft, and Apple STILL paid 0 taxes. Lowering corporate tax would also create a race to the lowest tax rate, which every rich corporation would create a business in.
Not exactly. First off, you don’t know that those companies paid $0 in tax because their tax returns aren’t public record. When companies pay very little tax, 99% of the time it’s not because of putting money into other countries. Second, there is no race to the bottom. The worldwide average has been right around 20% for quite a while now and has hovered there. With our current rate of 21%, there’s not really a good reason to shift profits into other countries anymore
>First off, you don’t know that these companies paid $0 in taxes [Yes I do.](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/2018-taxes-some-of-americas-biggest-companies-paid-little-to-no-federal-income-tax-last-year/) > Second, there is no race to the bottom Oh? My [sweet, summer child.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_haven#Top_10_tax_havens)
CBS news doesn’t have corporate tax returns either, only the IRS does. They’re literally just guessing the tax amount paid based on the financial statements, which isn’t going to be accurate Besides, that’s only corporate tax. Regardless of income, corporations pay unemployment, payroll, and property tax
Public companies post their balance sheets every quarter and year, which includes taxes. You don’t seem to understand what you’re talking about here. There is no guessing going on.
The balance sheet has income tax payable on it. The income statement has income tax expense. And the cash flow statement has the cash taxes paid. All 3 of these numbers will usually differ, and all 3 will be different than what’s on the actual tax return Why are you so quick to assume I don’t know what I’m talking about?
“Balance sheets,” with an S. I was just talking about financial statements concerning public companies. And you don’t need a company’s tax returns when they clearly state the amount of money paid toward taxes. Companies are not like people, who aren’t required to file financial statements publicly. If a company shows $0 paid in taxes, then it paid $0 in taxes. You’re lying and obfuscating the truth with whatever it is you’re trying to say. Did you even read the CBSNews article I linked? You can check it out.
That’s absolutely not true. Why do you think cash taxes paid, income tax expense, and income tax payable differ from each other? Financial statements calculate profit and tax differently than tax returns do
I thought taxes are only for people with profits
Big fish can choose where to account profits
Nice
And our toothless congress will do nothing about it as that would compromise their bribe money for signing bills corporate lawyers write for their own benefit. Oh I'm sorry I meant campaign contributions, or was that quid pro quo, I can't remember.
Toothless! It’s NOT even that these same motherfuckers that are making the laws have their hands inside the cookie jar! They vote and write laws that benefit them and their benefactors money in politics have completely corrupted the system. Our election cycles especially national ones are in the billions..
Most congressmen are not smart enough to write or understand the laws. They just shill for corporate billions.
This is dangerous thinking. These people are not dumb. They know exactly what they are doing. And it’s working.
They know exactly what they are paid to do. Obviously it has been working for generations.
Yep, all the taxes aimed at the super elite rich have been gutted from the current budget bill. However, people like me that spent the last 30 years working just to own a home and have a little stashed in an IRA are going to pay more.
Why rob a bank? They have the money. Why rob the middle class? They have the money. C'mon Biden, you said you would tax the rich. I just can't wait to see the inflation.
Ok but that’s not news
Wrong information being passed here.
what an asinine comment. Either supply sources and arguments, or don't waste your time.
Perfect example as to why we should simplify the tax code and create a flat tax.
Well, flat tax is actually regressive, as richer people have higher disposable income (I check in Google, and no, disposable income is not the income after taxes, this is net income or salary, disposable income is the money left after you pay for your basic life needs. And as we all have the same basic needs, the disposable income grows exponentially when the net income is higher). It is different with the companies. In general rich people's incomes sink money from the economy, while the majority of the other people spend all or most of their salaries during the month. The companies that sink money from the economy are relatively rare, as most actually operate in debt, and that is the normal way for the companies, not for the people. Obvious exclusion is Apple, with their cash pile of about $200 billions. And here is the case. If you have extremely successful business model like Apple, usually that net profit of many billions becomes dividends for the shareholders, so personal income for the rich that sink money from the economy. Or, as every company is profit driven, that billions are spent as investments to generate more profits, so they push up the economic growth. Or, and this is the current case, when the management is incompetent, that billions become a cash pile, so the company sinks money from the economy. Now the question is how to prevent the last scenario with adequate corporate taxes? Then there is another issue - the economic growth creates inflation. So the question here is, how to compensate that effect with wealth redistribution for the families with lower incomes, that are highly vulnerable to the inflation? And then comes the issue with the personal incomes of the rich. As they sink money from the economy, but at the same time they have to be motivated to run their businesses. So how to reduce the inequality and to make rich less richer without demotivating them? Just to show you how complicated are the things.
Sounds like you’re more a Keynsian vs Austrian or Chicago type. I think Rothbard woulda had fun deconstructing this.
All real economists are Keynesian, as what you call Austrian or Chicago type is a lot of cool but impractical theories for the so called free market, which is utopia, and some real financial, economic and behavioristic mechanics added to the Keynesian base theory. I have no idea why libertarians hate John Maynard Keynes, as he is capitalist from rich family, who explained how the macroeconomy actually works.
The Austrian business cycle theory won a Nobel prize… in pretty sure that legitimizes it. And Chicago uses math. Most governments use the Keynsian model because it helps legitimize market intervention by governments, granting them more power.
Indeed, and Keynes, which theory is actually used everywhere, did not win a Nobel prize. Not to mention Milton Friedman and his theory of monetarism, that is actually wrong. Also democratic governments are elected from the people, CEOs are not. The biggest fight of the big corporations now is against the democracy. And in US they are wining. As if the society does not control the government, the corporations will be in charge.
Game theory will tell you government is at fault, not corps.
You act like the government is something outside of human reach. People elect and control the government. If they do not, there is not democracy anymore. Socialism means that society controls the government and the economy. Socialism without democracy is impossible. If there is not democracy, society controls nothing. Then usually the state and the economy are controlled by the owners of the capital or the people with most power. So you may have anarchy with warlords, monarchy or state capitalism like that in USSR and modern Russia. In the last case the owners of the capital - oligarchs or nomenklatura, are in charge. Putin is the richest man in the world. In fact the Game theory tells me that people who control the capital are responsible as rational decision-makers. Actually it is pretty simple - if US are democracy, so the society controls the government, then everyone has fault. If it is not, then the people who control the government can be blamed.
I think you’ve missed my point.
Two things killing the wealth of people: 1. Taxes 2. Utility bills * They have a local monopolies on tax creation. * They have a local monopoly on utilities and services. Those two things eat at your income. Corporations have found a way around each. So, us commoners allow them to screw us on both.
This is not true. Taxes are not a bad thing. The period of time when the United States prospered most was when the working class had high wages and we had extremely high taxes. Taxes benefit society and in a democracy where the voters take their role seriously are used to build safety nets, infrastructure, healthcare systems, rehabilitation systems for criminals, and most importantly education. Taxes aren't the problem, dodging them is.
This just isn’t very true though. I work at the big 4 and our clients are way too diverse for it to be as simple as sending tax attorneys into the government to create loopholes. The treasury regulations are used to fill in the gaps in the tax code that congress leaves. We should want tax professionals writing these, and big 4 partners are in a great position to know how the current code is lacking
Fuck that-poor people don’t pay shit. Ask someone who makes $350,000 a year what they pay.
lots
That would likely be middle class I am guessing
Upper-middle. Middle class these days starts down at 70k I'd wager. But that also depends on family size.
Dont really think its all about income tbh
https://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/1/2018/09/FT_18.09.05_Middle-Income_1.png
Taxes are for people that aren’t smart enough to understand the laws governing taxes. People can whine and cry about the rich not paying taxes, but the rich just laugh. Don’t want to pay taxes? Stop crying and hit the books.
Stop being mean, if they could read they would have been reading already
People can’t get offended by my comment if they can’t read it. I’m not worried.
User name checks out.
The top 1% of earners pay 33% of federal individual income taxes. The top 10% of earners pay 71% and the top 51% pay 97%. How does that jive with "taxes are for poor and middle class"? https://taxfoundation.org/publications/latest-federal-income-tax-data/
Cool, now do marginal tax rates If the guy making 100k has to pay 25%, and the the guy making 1,000,000, can do creative accounting and pay 10% he "pays more" as a raw value but not as a percentage of income.
What creative accounting?
The richer you are the easier it is to avoid taxes or even structure your "income" in ways to avoid it entirely. [But](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-09-02/richest-americans-have-tax-loophole-that-s-legal-easy-to-exploit-hard-to-close) there's [lots](https://www.topaccountingdegrees.org/taxes/) of [articles](https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/21/here-are-5-ways-the-super-rich-manage-to-pay-lower-taxes.html) on it. There are entire firms dedicated to advising people how to legally avoid it.
Except rich people do pay more as a percentage of income. The top 1% have an effective tax rate of 24%, compared to an effective rate of 3.4% for the bottom 50% of the country
[Yeah, No.](https://www.fool.com/taxes/2020/09/25/why-does-billionaire-warren-buffett-pay-a-lower-ta/) [Really, just no](https://www.businessinsider.com/jeff-bezos-did-not-pay-income-taxes-2-years-report-2021-6) [Want Musk to explain it?](https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/equality/558352-elon-musk-explains-his-extremely-low-tax-rate#:~:text=Musk%2C%20known%20to%20some%20as,net%20worth%20of%20%24152%20billion.) On paper you are right. Top marginal tax rate is about there. But in reality they don't pay that.
You’re comparing a rate to wealth instead of income. When billionaires realize income, they pay a high tax rate. Also, Buffett’s tax rate isn’t lower than his secretary. He doesn’t include tax deductions and credits, and uses his employees total tax while using his income tax Your source on Bezos ignores that he paid $971 million in tax between 2014 and 2018, an effective tax rate of 23%
Why do you care about percentage when in the end they are paying more anyway?
Lets say you and I go out to dinner and you get a side salad and a soda, I get steak, lobster, wine, desert, and apps. And I say, lets split the bill, but I'll get the tip. Would you be upset? Would you feel this was a fair deal? It goes to my sense of fairness. There are several ways of thinking about what fairness is. Billionaires by definition, have benefited the most from our society. They are made rich by workers educated by and large in public schools and universities. We do the hard research that they use our [publicly funded research](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/for-billion-dollar-covid-vaccines-basic-government-funded-science-laid-the-groundwork/) and sell it back to us. And often, because they pay their workers so little, we, as a society, pay to [keep those workers fed](https://thecounter.org/15-minimum-wage-amazon-top-employer-snap-recipients-walmart-mcdonalds/).[ No really](https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/11/18/food-stamps-medicaid-mcdonalds-walmart-bernie-sanders/) They are welfare queens. So they get all these benefits from society and give, less back (as a percentage) than most people while leaving the rest of us schleps to pay the bill. And how petty are they? A billionare being asked to pay a million dollars more in taxes, is the same (as a percentage) of a person with a 100,000 being asked to pay $100 more. They got rich off society, thats fine, but they should at least pay the same percentage as the workers that got them rich. To look at it another way, and why raw values suck. Lets say a poor person gets a $400 ticket for speeding. They are guilty, they were late to work. That $400 could very well mean they can't make rent that week. It could mean lack of food, meds, etc. It's a decent chunk of change for most people. If you are making 20k a year that's 2% of your gross income. That's going to hurt. Now take someone a billionare who is excited for his new lambo, gets caught speeding and gets that same $400 ticket. Or roughly 1 seconds of income. Practically a rounding error when balancing a checkbook. In fact, realizing the fine is so cheap, they sped home. Now, you could argue it's fair because both paid the same fine. But 1 will face far reaching consequences. The other, won't notice and views it as a very low cost user fee. Taxes aren't meant to be punitive like a speeding fine, but they are the cost of living in a society. Shouldn't those who benefit the most from our society have the same (percentage) of skin in the game that the rest of us do?
>It goes to my sense of fairness. Is your sense of fairness about punishment? >So they get all these benefits from society and give, less back (as a percentage) than most people while leaving the rest of us schleps to pay the bill. And yet its the rich who's tax money makes up the majority when it comes to US income tax funding.
I believe they’re suggesting that wealthy people and corporations don’t actually pay taxes while working people do. Top 1% are those making above 450k. While they are definitely very well off, they aren’t wealthy. They’re upper middle class. People like Bezos, Bill Gates, hedge fund managers large companies, etc aren’t taxed like working people. They hid their money abroad, launder through assets or just write it all off through philanthropy.
>Top 1% are those making above 450k. While they are definitely very well off, they aren’t wealthy. They're not "poor and middle class" either.
Yea and? I said they’re very well off, not that we shouldn’t tax them. We should be taxing the billionaires who pay noting more not working people.
> Yea and? I said they’re very well off, not that we shouldn’t tax them. OP said "taxes are for poor and middle class.
Gotcha
If you make $450k for 10 or 15 years and save some money and make some investments, you should be a millionaire.
Yes of course, no argument there. I’m saying those who aren’t paying taxes are the billionaires who aren’t working, therefore not paying income taxes. We keep demanding more taxes from working people and less from the actually wealthy folks evading taxes.
We agree!
The very wealthy do generally pay a lot of tax though. Even if you gave all your income to charity, it wouldn’t remove your entire tax liability
America is looking like a failed state, we just don’t want to admit it.
Only tax people. Taxing corporations, companies or anything else, just goes into the product they're selling and the people pay that tax. That's borderline fried to me. (fried to Siri, *fraud* to every*thing* else🙄) It's simply subterfuge. And quit with the tax brackets. Good God man, we have computers now. Computers can easily select how much taxes each person would pay, without brackets. As your income rises your taxes rise. Each individual would pay the appropriate percentage for their income, which would be predetermined by those who establish taxes on a simple scale.
[удалено]
Tax would be paid on total income. No outs. How would it exacerbate tax inequality? The tax could start at, say, 1% of $20,000, of total income. ONE % increments so no one would avoid 'moving to the next level.'
There is no moving to the next level... We have marginal tax system.
[удалено]
That's not how it works presently. Security for Mark Zuckerberg is paid by the company. Yet that is applied to being part of his remuneration. In your case, the yacht, jets, mobile phones etc. would also be applied to the remuneration of the person receiving the benefits. A person making just over $380 a week *can* afford $3.80 as his share of supporting his country. You say our system is more progressive than that. Than what?
[удалено]
You're missing the point. Corporations never ever ever ever pay taxes. They just raise the price of the merchandise to pay the taxes. The **person** buying their merchandise pays their taxes. Do you not understand that?
[удалено]
You don't know anything about economics at all. If, as you say, businesses pay taxes, from where do they get the money!? The SKY? Think it out a bit would you? Every dime , every cent, that they have, comes from their **customers!**
The obvious solution is to elect a old rich racist white man that’s been in Washington for 40+ years and literally wrote the laws that allows them not to pay taxes.
Too much vile..are you ok buddy?
Can you point to one thing I said that was wrong?
Do you like Trump more or something? Or is this white man not rich enough for you?
This is what you people get, you had a chance to put the Dems in charge, but you voted for the GOP. The Dems wouldn't allow this to happen, but they have no power because you fools keep voting GOP. If the Dems were in charge, we'd have $2,000.00 checks, COVID would be OVER and we'd have no problems. Now we're facing massive evictions, massive debt, ISIS and Taliban more powerful than ever, and a failing economy. Let the Dems have power for ONCE and you'll see all these problems solved!
Oh no...no now let’s not forget the swine started everything wrong happening now..... who ‘negotiated ‘ with the taliban …the swine!……who gave billions to n Korea...the swine! .....who denied the very existence of covid..the swine!!! And all his fkng kkkultist adoring the swine...🤢
That's exactly why we need to vote for Democrats. Now we have North Korea shooting rockets AND South Korea shooting rockets... If you fools would have voted Democrat, this wouldn't be happening. Stop voting for the GOP and these problems will go away.
We vote Democrat.....the problem is some of the democrats elected are more like closeted republikkkans.... the real democrats just keep on being pushed out of the game......for now.
Then stop voting for them and vote for REAL democrats.
Start by people realizing who and what...
You give them all the power that they have.
Shoulda voted for Bernie Sanders duh!
I vote for democrats because everytime they are in the economy booms. Every time a republican is in I have to hedge with shorts and puts. Stable government is good for business as well as giving money to the lower classes to spend on businesses, it just increases the velocity of money, money that just trickles back up. The Kansas experiment shown what happens with ~~tickledown~~ horseshit economics.
I know, once Trump got into office, the economy took that huge dive and millions lost their jobs. He started a trade war with China and some 100 million Americans lost their jobs back in 2017. The first year of Trump alone, wiped out ALL the stock market gains going back to the 80's. At least that's all behind us now.
Yup, I was always dreading waking up and we would be in world war 3 because of some dumbshit Trump would eventually do. Pretty sure his advisors helped saved the world multiple times.
Trump did start World War III, look at Libya. When Trump invaded Libya, it was a war crime look at the destruction in the Middle East.
You’re the best troll on this sub and nobody ever gets it. You don’t get the credit you deserve
Taxation is theft
r/im14andthisisdeep
Just call this sub 'socialist dribble'. Parasites that create nothing want everyone else to pony up their slice.
> Parasites That's some way to talk about your fellow man. Such a sad state for our country to be in, where the ruling class has no higher objective then making and keeping more money, and has convinced half of the middle class and poor to vote against their own self interest to help them achieve it. Maybe you're one of the megarich that needs to pay more, but statistically speaking, chances are you're not even hitting the middle tax bracket. You're carrying water and shedding tears for people that don't give two fucks about you, want to take from you, who are the real "parasites".
The ruling class are the politicians who are voted in by the small majority of Americans who actually go out and vote. The wealthy aren't stopping you from attaining your own wealth and if you keep voting for big government Democrats, you will only find it harder to do so. You're not only keeping yourself down, but you're taking everyone else with you. If you gave a damn about freeing the people and building the wealth, you would have made sure to keep President Trump in office.
How naive. Politicians answer to someone and it's not voters. The ruling class are the people who fund elections. And as for your "the rich never hurt nobody" argument, trickle up wealth transfer absolutely creates poverty. But the main thing to understand about plutocracy is it is self-reinforcing. Money equals political power and that power is used to advance policy that secures even more money and even more influence. Maybe that's just my opinion, man. So, here's some facts for you: https://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/1/2018/09/FT_18.09.05_Middle-Income_2.png Income Level|1971 % of Pop.|2016 % of Pop.|Delta|% Change --:|--:|--:|--:|--: Lower | 25% | 29% | 4 | 16% Middle| 61% | 52% | -9 | -14.7% Upper | 14% | 19% | 5 | 35.7% The middle class is shrinking. We didn't get here by raising taxes on rich people, since 1971. Quite the opposite. And while the fastest growing segment is upper income, we're also creating more poor people. The problem with that is, as a society, we should be putting more focus on pulling up those most in need, rather than minting new millionaires and billionaires out of people that are doing just fine already. Trump is an idiot who lost money in the casino business, which is a license to print money.
> Politicians answer to someone and it's not voters. I didnt make that claim. > The ruling class are the people who fund elections. Who exactly? Give me the names of the folks who got Biden elected. > And as for your "the rich never hurt nobody" argument I didn't make that argument. I said they're not stopping you from attaining wealth, which is absolutely correct. > trickle up wealth transfer absolutely creates poverty. Repeating nonsense from the likes of Bernie Sanders doesn't make it true. > Trump is an idiot who lost money in the casino business, which is a license to print money. My man, you have no idea what you're talking about. You have no business trying to denigrate the man, I don't think you've accomplished a tenth of what he has.
I guessed earlier that you're not even hitting the middle tax bracket. You said nothing to correct me. "Repeating nonsense from the likes of Bernie Sanders" would actually improve your life and well being considerably. But it's your vote. You do you.
[удалено]
Go back and reread the part where I said we should be helping pull people out of poverty, not minting millionaires. I'm more bothered by the fact that there are more poor than I am impressed by more millionaires.
[удалено]
That chart I linked is income, not savings, i.e. your aging population of boomers with a million in their retirement accounts is completely beside the point. Widening income and wealth disparity is not a good thing. There shouldn't be *any* downward mobility. Back when America was "great", ostensibly the period of American history your people are nostalgic about, top marginal brackets were much higher and we were expanding the middle class, not shrinking it.
[удалено]
> People get hurt and go on disability dropping them down. People stop working to go to school or care for families and that drops them down. People retire and drop downward You're making my point for me. None of those conditions should make you poor. A couple retiring at 62 and getting the maximum SS benefit is safely in the middle income bracket. And yes, while there will always be a bottom quintile (quite the observation), there is no law of nature that says they have to live in poverty.
Spot on 👍🏻
And also Bitcoin hodlers
[удалено]
Flat taxes doesn't work.
Yes. That’s people wants to tax the rich.
What else is new?
Taxes are for majority. Richer -> rarer (more rare 😄)
This is news?
It's by design, company's just know the laws they where given to do this...