Punk rockers/anarchists and Libertarians, what is the difference?

[Machismo]

Only when you don’t classify parts of their income as income.

One again, the tax numbers have already been provided.

[Mayhem]

And through all that, the wealthy still pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes, as has been shown.

That's a lie. You could've just clicked the link and saved yourself from the embarrassment.

You whined that the wealthy had better health care, because they fucking paid for it in the private sector.

I did not whine about anything, I explain shit to you because you couldn't be arsed to research what you're talking about even if your life depended on it. Everyone would save money, yes that includes the wealthy, if you'd have universal healthcare. How does this fit in with your narrative that I just want to punish wealthy people for being wealthy?

This isn't a matter of semantics, this is you getting caught pushing a bullshit narrative, one where you damn well know you don't have the data to back it up. Instead, you are pushing talking points, because you got called out on your bullshit. It has already been shown that to cover the deficit, and have only the top 1% pay for it, their tax burden would need to be tripled.

The data to back up that a fixed fine impacts poor people more than wealthy people? Sorry, I didn't know I needed data for that. I mean, that's math, what data are you asking for? That poor people have less money?

And it has been shown that the US wastes a good amount of taxpayer money on shit that you're defending, namely public school and healthcare. We could probably throw the legal system in too.

I get that this is what you want, but that's because you're being selfish.

I am not from the US. So how in your imagination would I profit from changes in your system?

Of the two of us, you are the only one that can profit from this and as you yourself claim to be better off, are.

You have not refuted even one of my points. You choose to ignore them whenever you feel like doing so (case in point you suddenly ignored the part about public school funding and equality before the law right in this post) or build a straw man to attack, if you run out of arguments.

[Machismo]

Let me know when capital gains are taxed at the same rate as other income. Let me know when Amazon pays even 10% in taxes. Let me know when you figure out that taxing the wealthy isn’t harming them.

Amazon largely dodges taxes by buying companies, R&D, and other things that limit their actual profits.

That's the thing, people don't think it's harm, because it's not them.

- - - Updated - - -

I should know better than to get into this, but why exactly is it an "issue" that government spending is apparently mostly going to those that actually need it?

He simply stated a fact that the government benefits the wealthy more than the other income levels. I simply questioned how he could state it was a fact.

[Mayhem]

I should know better than to get into this, but why exactly is it an "issue" that government spending is apparently mostly going to those that actually need it?

I'd argue it's subsidizing companies that don't pay high enough wages which in turn would mean they profit off of it more than the people the government spends it on.

[Machismo]

That's a lie. You could've just clicked the link and saved yourself from the embarrassment.



I did not whine about anything, I explain shit to you because you couldn't be arsed to research what you're talking about even if your life depended on it. Everyone would save money, yes that includes the wealthy, if you'd have universal healthcare. How does this fit in with your narrative that I just want to punish wealthy people for being wealthy?



The data to back up that a fixed fine impacts poor people more than wealthy people? Sorry, I didn't know I needed data for that. I mean, that's math, what data are you asking for? That poor people have less money?

And it has been shown that the US wastes a good amount of taxpayer money on shit that you're defending, namely public school and healthcare. We could probably throw the legal system in too.



I am not from the US. So how in your imagination would I profit from changes in your system?

Of the two of us, you are the only one that can profit from this and as you yourself claim to be better off, are.

You have not refuted even one of my points. You choose to ignore them whenever you feel like doing so (case in point you suddenly ignored the part about public school funding and equality before the law right in this post) or build a straw man to attack, if you run out of arguments.

It's not a lie, I've provided the tax numbers from the United States Government. If you have an issue, take it up with the IRS.

That's the point, you're not from the US, most of you guys talking about this are not... which makes your desire to tax the wealthy even more absurd. It's someone else's money you support spending, and you want them to spend even more on the shit you want.

So, I will ask you... how much more are YOU PERSONALLY willing to spend. Of, if that's too tough for you, pretend you're an American, and dealing with out current deficit, how much more would you be willing to spend to balance our budget?

[Machismo]

People like you who would do away with big government and their “insane” regulations.

If you want a giant government, then you should be willing to pay for it. How much more are you willing to pay to balance the budget?

[Machismo]

I dunno what qan5 is, but I’m willing to pay my fair share. How about you? See, I think we currently misspend quite a bit and don’t do enough to ensure that the wealthy pay their share. You previously attacked me for wanting the wealthy to be prosecuted when they dodge taxes, is that still your position?

What exactly is your fair share? Are you willing to pay another $3k, just to cover the deficit? How about a total of $10k to cover the deficit including the covid bailout. So let me know how much more you are willing to spend, and we can see if it is anywhere close to the average that it would take.

Oh, that's per person, so multiply it by the number of people in your household.

As for me, I'd prefer to lower government spending.

Where did I stake such a position?

[Machismo]

Damn, I didn’t realize your grasp of economics was so elementary. Sorry about that.

The numbers were already presented. The average... just to cover the deficit... is $3k per person... or $10k per person due to the Covid bailouts. So, are you and your household even willing to cover the average?

Or, would you like to chat about spending cuts?

[downnola]

Or, would you like to chat about spending cuts?

*lips directly on microphone* tax the rich

[Machismo]

*lips directly on microphone* tax the rich

They are already being taxed at a higher rate than the othe income levels. In order to balance the budget just off the top 1%, you'd need to triple their tax burden.

And that's not including the Covid bailouts.

So, how much more would you be willing to pay?

[downnola]

They are already being taxed at a higher rate than the othe income levels.

You can keep insisting this is the case but it's simply not true. It's not even true going by the numbers you linked earlier in the thread. Furthermore, there is an entire list of corporations that pay no taxes each year and are even in the negative as far as their tax burden goes.

Soak the rich.

[Theodarzna]

You can keep insisting this is the case but it's simply not true. It's not even true going by the numbers you linked earlier in the thread. Furthermore, there is an entire list of corporations that pay no taxes each year and are even in the negative as far as their tax burden goes.

Soak the rich.

It should also note that Corporations as entities are immortal and thus have infinite time to make money, they aren't living things, so taxing the fuck out of them shouldn't even be a moral problem. Wal-Mart and Amazon are not even alive and have infinite time to make money. Normal living flesh and blood people do not have infinite time.

[Machismo]

You can keep insisting this is the case but it's simply not true. It's not even true going by the numbers you linked earlier in the thread. Furthermore, there is an entire list of corporations that pay no taxes each year and are even in the negative as far as their tax burden goes.

Soak the rich.

The numbers for this have already been provided. I don't care whether you want to believe it, or not. Stomping your feet, and sticking your fingers in your ears isn't the argument you think it is.

- - - Updated - - -

It should also note that Corporations as entities are immortal and thus have infinite time to make money, they aren't living things, so taxing the fuck out of them shouldn't even be a moral problem. Wal-Mart and Amazon are not even alive and have infinite time to make money. Normal living flesh and blood people do not have infinite time.

This makes no sense at all...

[downnola]

The numbers for this have already been provided. I don't care whether you want to believe it, or not. Stomping your feet, and sticking your fingers in your ears isn't the argument you think it is.

Yeah, this isn't how I operate. When I'm presented with data that falsifies my argument, I take note and reevaluate my views. I don't want to be wrong longer than I have to be, so it doesn't bruise my ego to say "Hey, I was wrong in this situation, I should stop arguing for things that aren't true."

When multiple people tell you that you're reading a graph wrong, you should probably take a step back and re-evaluate.

This makes no sense at all...

Sure it does. Corporations aren't people, they're legal entities. Corporations don't get sick and die from cancer, human beings do. Under no circumstance should a corporation pay no taxes. There's no rational logic for it.

[Machismo]

Yeah, this isn't how I operate. When I'm presented with data that falsifies my argument, I take note and reevaluate my views. I don't want to be wrong longer than I have to be, so it doesn't bruise my ego to say "Hey, I was wrong in this situation, I should stop arguing for things that aren't true."

When multiple people tell you that you're reading a graph wrong, you should probably take a step back and re-evaluate.





Sure it does. Corporations aren't people, they're legal entities. Corporations don't get sick and die from cancer, human beings do. Under no circumstance should a corporation pay no taxes. There's no rational logic for it.

It wasn't a graph, it was the actual numbers of taxes paid based on income groups. My guess is that you don't have any idea what data I'm talking about.

So...

You should probably take a step back, and evaluate.

[Edge-]

The numbers for this have already been provided. I don't care whether you want to believe it, or not. Stomping your feet, and sticking your fingers in your ears isn't the argument you think it is.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/02/b...orate-tax.html

Except they still fuckin don't, yo. This is a list of companies generating billions, or hundreds of millions, a year in revenue are either paying 0 taxes or have a negative tax rate.

How does Duke have a -15.5% tax rate on nearly $8B in revenue over the past 3 years? How does FedEx have a -12.8% on nearly $7B? Seems like they're not paying their fair share at all and that they're instead benefitting from taxpayer dollars providing huge funding for their businesses.

Tax. Corporations. Hard. It's almost like the entire tax system as it exists now largely exists to benefit the rich who still aren't paying even what they're supposed to, and not like, actual everyday people and small businesses that could use a break every now and then. Nike, Duke Energy, and Salesforce? Yeah, they don't need a break, much less massive taxpayer subsidies.

[Machismo]

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/02/b...orate-tax.html

Except they still fuckin don't, yo. This is a list of companies generating billions, or hundreds of millions, a year in revenue are either paying 0 taxes or have a negative tax rate.

How does Duke have a -15.5% tax rate on nearly $8B in revenue over the past 3 years? How does FedEx have a -12.8% on nearly $7B? Seems like they're not paying their fair share at all and that they're instead benefitting from taxpayer dollars providing huge funding for their businesses.

Tax. Corporations. Hard. It's almost like the entire tax system as it exists now largely exists to benefit the rich who still aren't paying even what they're supposed to, and not like, actual everyday people and small businesses that could use a break every now and then. Nike, Duke Energy, and Salesforce? Yeah, they don't need a break, much less massive taxpayer subsidies.

How hard? You do realize that the harder you tax them, the more they will push to have their own politicians in power, right? The same goes for the wealthy. Your desire to tax them into oblivion is no different than their desire to buy off politicians, and screw over everyone else.

People also get those subsidies and tax breaks. Believe me, I'd love a simplified tax structure. Get rid of all deductions and tax credits. Yes, that means the child tax credit, deductions for mortgage interest, and deductions for daycare costs. If you want to make sure people and companies aren't "dodging," then let's be consistent. The sooner everyone is truly equal under the law... the better.

[Edge-]

How hard? You do realize that the harder you tax them, the more they will push to have their own politicians in power, right? The same goes for the wealthy. Your desire to tax them into oblivion is no different than their desire to buy off politicians, and screw over everyone else.

Is asking that they like...actually pay taxes on billions in revenue asking to "tax them into oblivion"? I mean, I'd just like to see them pay like...taxes at all, let's start small and work our way from there.

And like, I'm for campaign finance reform so that corporations can't stack the deck for their favored politicians too. That's beyond fucked up considering they don't even fuckin pay taxes, and not just don't pay taxes, but get massive taxpayer subsidies in the process.

People also get those subsidies and tax breaks. Believe me, I'd love a simplified tax structure. Get rid of all deductions and tax credits. Yes, that means the child tax credit, deductions for mortgage interest, and deductions for daycare costs. If you want to make sure people and companies aren't "dodging," then let's be consistent. The sooner everyone is truly equal under the law... the better.

I have no problems with tax breaks/credits for people, especially people in poverty. Just as I don't for small businesses to encourage startups and growth and help ensure that there's access to the market for newer businesses, and not just those with connections to existing big businesses. The government needs to get involved in the market to ensure fairness and a level playing field, an absent government by default creates a decidedly stacked playing field.

What I'm considerably less for are tax breaks for people who legitimately don't need them because they're already wealthy as fuck, same goes for corporations. Poor people shouldn't be subsidizing a millionaires 5th yacht, nor should they be subsidizing massive bonuses for executives at wildly profitable companies. Ever.

[Machismo]

Is asking that they like...actually pay taxes on billions in revenue asking to "tax them into oblivion"? I mean, I'd just like to see them pay like...taxes at all, let's start small and work our way from there.

And like, I'm for campaign finance reform so that corporations can't stack the deck for their favored politicians too. That's beyond fucked up considering they don't even fuckin pay taxes, and not just don't pay taxes, but get massive taxpayer subsidies in the process.



I have no problems with tax breaks/credits for people, especially people in poverty. Just as I don't for small businesses to encourage startups and growth and help ensure that there's access to the market for newer businesses, and not just those with connections to existing big businesses.

What I'm considerably less for are tax breaks for people who legitimately don't need them because they're already wealthy as fuck, same goes for corporations. Poor people shouldn't be subsidizing a millionaires 5th yacht, nor should they be subsidizing massive bonuses for executives at wildly profitable companies. Ever.

Tax. Coroporations. Hard.

Did I get it right?

There's the problem, you want everyone else to be able to get tax breaks, deductions, and credits... just not the wealthy or corporations.

It is beyond fucked up when those who barely pay any in taxes want to makenothers pay more....

Yeah, I'm enjoying the shit out of the irony right now.

Oh, and has been pointed out, those wealthy assholes you hate so much already pay a higher percentage of their income than everyone else.

[Edge-]

There's the problem, you want everyone else to be able to get tax breaks, deductions, and credits... just not the wealthy or corporations.

I mean, yeah.

It is beyond fucked up when those who barely pay any in taxes want to makenothers pay more....

Sorry I want to live in some sort of moral society where people take care of each other, and those that have benefitted from this society the most pay a bit more while still enjoying fabulous wealth and excess that the vast majority of us will never know?

Yeah, I'm enjoying the shit out of the irony right now.

There is none, this is a logically consistent and rationale position. There's like, endless economic theory (and actual practice!) backing this up as an effective system in achieving collective economic success while limiting suffering and harm to the greater population.

Oh, and has been pointed out, those wealthy assholes you hate so much already pay a higher percentage of their income than everyone else.

Ok, and? This isn't a, "Do they pay more" issue. They could pay .00001% more and they'd pay a higher percentage, but now we're getting into discussions on the relative value of money to people. This is basic economic theory shit.

$10 is worth far more to someone making $100 a week than $100 is to someone making $10,000 a week. Paying 10% of their income in taxes is likely going to be crippling for someone only making say, $12,000 a year, while paying 40% of your income in taxes won't have anywhere near the same impact on someone making $2M a year.