|
If this thread turns into a USPMT 2.0, we will not hesitate to shut it down. Do not even bother posting if all you're going to do is shit on the Democratic candidates while adding nothing of value.
Rules:
- Don't post meaningless one-liners.
- Don't turn this into a X doesn't stand a chance against Trump debate.
- Sources MUST have a supporting comment that summarizes the source beforehand.
- Do NOT turn this thread into a Republicans vs. Democrats shit-storm.
This thread will be heavily moderated. Expect the same kind of strictness as the USPMT. |
On May 08 2019 22:05 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2019 13:37 Nebuchad wrote:On May 08 2019 13:28 FiWiFaKi wrote:On May 08 2019 13:22 Nebuchad wrote:On May 08 2019 08:53 Bourgeois wrote:On May 07 2019 04:29 Plansix wrote:
Why not? If that is the amount of money we need to rebuild the country after 50 years of doing nothing, then that is the amount they need to be taxed. It isn’t like that sort of tax rate is anything new. Taxes were that high in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s.
I don’t really care about morality, because I know how wealth inequality solves itself on a long enough time line. And that resolution will be less than moral. Either the government can do it or it will get solved through extra governmental means, like an economic collapse or some sort of civil unrest. We are facing some real problems this country that are simply not getting attention because everyone is convinced that a bombing economy will somehow fix the housing shortage, student loan crisis and rising healthcare costs.
My state is facing a real problem with massive numbers of homeless children that they simply do not have services to deal with it. We are also facing housing shortage and so signs of affordable housing being on the legislature’s to do list. And these problems won’t stay in the costal cities, people are getting priced out all over the country. This isn’t some abstract debate about the morality of taxes. These are real problems that must be solved and I’m not interested in the debate about how much is to much. 90% was what we taxed the rich in the 1940s and 1950s. Lets not get to that crisis level and just do 50%.
It's so easy to say this when you're not rich yourself. How about this, consider the computer you're currently using to play Starcraft, or your cellphone, because these are things you can relate to. Can you imagine that each time you brought one, you had to contribute to someone half the cost of their computer or cellphone? We live in a society that massively overattends to the needs of the wealthy and powerful and yet we still manage to get these "Won't somebody think of the poor rich people?", it's amazing. The primary driver to a healthy economy is technological innovation, good luck getting that when you're taxing people at 65%... I mean I guess for a country like Switzerland it's easy, because they can just piggyback off of the innovation from other countries. You guys are trying to marginalize "rich" people too much. They're no different than the average person here, I don't see people making arguments for why black people aren't deserving of certain things, so why is it so easy to marginalize the wealthy? You can have a typical person on TL, they end up buying a few bitcoins, sell, and boom, they can be millionaires. They took risks, we're smart, maybe a bit lucky, but how do you now go about rationalizing trying to take half their stuff. It's hard to put into words how much I don't empathize. Sorry. The aristocracy will always have its defenders, arguing that the wealth do so much for us and its unfair to expect them to do more.
Which a priori wouldn't be such a bad stance, in particular if it could have been shown that the society as a whole is better off when the rich are left alone. But the problem is that here the presented position doesn't stand on rational grounds, but on ignorance. "Countries like Switzerland" simply do not piggyback on US innovation. It's completely the contrary, the wealth of a nation in Europe directly correlates with innovation in the country. Switzerland is for example, for its size, an absolute behemoth in pharma research. Ever wondered why for example Denmark, a country that has shit for natural resources, not the best climate for agriculture and one hell of taxes, is one of the places with the highest living standards? Just look up their exports, it's technology after technology, it's amazing.
|
On May 08 2019 22:14 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2019 22:05 Plansix wrote:On May 08 2019 13:37 Nebuchad wrote:On May 08 2019 13:28 FiWiFaKi wrote:On May 08 2019 13:22 Nebuchad wrote:On May 08 2019 08:53 Bourgeois wrote:On May 07 2019 04:29 Plansix wrote:
Why not? If that is the amount of money we need to rebuild the country after 50 years of doing nothing, then that is the amount they need to be taxed. It isn’t like that sort of tax rate is anything new. Taxes were that high in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s.
I don’t really care about morality, because I know how wealth inequality solves itself on a long enough time line. And that resolution will be less than moral. Either the government can do it or it will get solved through extra governmental means, like an economic collapse or some sort of civil unrest. We are facing some real problems this country that are simply not getting attention because everyone is convinced that a bombing economy will somehow fix the housing shortage, student loan crisis and rising healthcare costs.
My state is facing a real problem with massive numbers of homeless children that they simply do not have services to deal with it. We are also facing housing shortage and so signs of affordable housing being on the legislature’s to do list. And these problems won’t stay in the costal cities, people are getting priced out all over the country. This isn’t some abstract debate about the morality of taxes. These are real problems that must be solved and I’m not interested in the debate about how much is to much. 90% was what we taxed the rich in the 1940s and 1950s. Lets not get to that crisis level and just do 50%.
It's so easy to say this when you're not rich yourself. How about this, consider the computer you're currently using to play Starcraft, or your cellphone, because these are things you can relate to. Can you imagine that each time you brought one, you had to contribute to someone half the cost of their computer or cellphone? We live in a society that massively overattends to the needs of the wealthy and powerful and yet we still manage to get these "Won't somebody think of the poor rich people?", it's amazing. The primary driver to a healthy economy is technological innovation, good luck getting that when you're taxing people at 65%... I mean I guess for a country like Switzerland it's easy, because they can just piggyback off of the innovation from other countries. You guys are trying to marginalize "rich" people too much. They're no different than the average person here, I don't see people making arguments for why black people aren't deserving of certain things, so why is it so easy to marginalize the wealthy? You can have a typical person on TL, they end up buying a few bitcoins, sell, and boom, they can be millionaires. They took risks, we're smart, maybe a bit lucky, but how do you now go about rationalizing trying to take half their stuff. It's hard to put into words how much I don't empathize. Sorry. The aristocracy will always have its defenders, arguing that the wealth do so much for us and its unfair to expect them to do more. Which a priori wouldn't be such a bad stance, in particular if it could have been shown that the society as a whole is better off when the rich are left alone. But the problem is that here the presented position doesn't stand on rational grounds, but on ignorance. "Countries like Switzerland" simply do not piggyback on US innovation. It's completely the contrary, the wealth of a nation in Europe directly correlates with innovation in the country. Switzerland is for example, for its size, an absolute behemoth in pharma research. Ever wondered why for example Denmark, a country that has shit for natural resources, not the best climate for agriculture and one hell of taxes, is one of the places with the highest living standards? Just look up their exports, it's technology after technology, it's amazing.
“Job Creators” and “Drivers of Innovation” is just the modern day version of “Captains of Industry”. Today’s tech industry is just the robber barons of our era. But they wear hoodies and shitty cloths to prop up a myth that they are just to busy to dress themselves like an adult, because they are innovating so hard.
|
|
|
On May 08 2019 13:21 FiWiFaKi wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2019 09:50 Plansix wrote:
Also, why the hell do I care about what rich people lose out on? They don’t care about me and my problems. Nobody cares about you or your problems. I want the law to be just to me, so I want it to be just for everybody who's important to me, anyone I might become, and in general, everyone. I think taking a lot of money away from someone who works hard is not right. Currently, I'm not in a relationship, and don't have kids, it's a conscious decision I made to focus all my energy on my career... I didn't have some special head start, I did my analysis, and thought I'd be better off working hard, saving up a lot of money, and living off my investments a decade down the road... Then I can think about a family and whatnot. Simply because choosing this life and making good money I need to pay a significantly higher portion of my income to taxes. In my situation, it doesn't really equalize anything, both of my theoretical selves had the same option. Anyway, I think the highest tax bracket when considering every form of taxing for any product should never be more than 50%, and right now the US exceeds that when you add up income, state, sales, and sin taxes on certain products. It's like modern day slavery, someone gets the majority of your benefit of your hard work. Just a few weeks ago we hired a few temps through an employment agency, and they got paid $15/h while we paid the agency $38/h, it made me so angry, injustices like that should never be allowed to happen. It's way worse than brothels to me, because they take way more of your money, and not only are you giving them your body to use, but you're required to use much more of your body in performing fatiguing work. At the end of the day, I view the problem of taxation as all forms of government combined should receive 20-25% of the GDP, taxes should never be raised above those levels, any higher and the country is trying to tax outside of its means. People get too caught up on whether the net tax rate should be 25% or 35%, then this is what we squabble about in politics... Versus just increasing the GDP of the economy by 40% and having the same tax base, and a lot more happier people. Always when discussing tax rates, the differences are so minor it's not worth the energy to discuss, just focus all your effort on technological innovation, and more money will come in.
If you think you're making enough or going to make enough for a tax on the super rich to effect you then you've got some real delusions of grander. Tax brackets exist for a reason, and if you think taxation is slavery and your money is unjustly taken, you best stop using all public roads, freeways, don't deal with anyone who went to any public school, and don't call the cops or fire department or ambulance when something goes wrong.
|
Bisutopia19298 Posts
On May 09 2019 05:25 hunts wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2019 13:21 FiWiFaKi wrote:On May 08 2019 09:50 Plansix wrote:
Also, why the hell do I care about what rich people lose out on? They don’t care about me and my problems. Nobody cares about you or your problems. I want the law to be just to me, so I want it to be just for everybody who's important to me, anyone I might become, and in general, everyone. I think taking a lot of money away from someone who works hard is not right. Currently, I'm not in a relationship, and don't have kids, it's a conscious decision I made to focus all my energy on my career... I didn't have some special head start, I did my analysis, and thought I'd be better off working hard, saving up a lot of money, and living off my investments a decade down the road... Then I can think about a family and whatnot. Simply because choosing this life and making good money I need to pay a significantly higher portion of my income to taxes. In my situation, it doesn't really equalize anything, both of my theoretical selves had the same option. Anyway, I think the highest tax bracket when considering every form of taxing for any product should never be more than 50%, and right now the US exceeds that when you add up income, state, sales, and sin taxes on certain products. It's like modern day slavery, someone gets the majority of your benefit of your hard work. Just a few weeks ago we hired a few temps through an employment agency, and they got paid $15/h while we paid the agency $38/h, it made me so angry, injustices like that should never be allowed to happen. It's way worse than brothels to me, because they take way more of your money, and not only are you giving them your body to use, but you're required to use much more of your body in performing fatiguing work. At the end of the day, I view the problem of taxation as all forms of government combined should receive 20-25% of the GDP, taxes should never be raised above those levels, any higher and the country is trying to tax outside of its means. People get too caught up on whether the net tax rate should be 25% or 35%, then this is what we squabble about in politics... Versus just increasing the GDP of the economy by 40% and having the same tax base, and a lot more happier people. Always when discussing tax rates, the differences are so minor it's not worth the energy to discuss, just focus all your effort on technological innovation, and more money will come in. If you think you're making enough or going to make enough for a tax on the super rich to effect you then you've got some real delusions of grander. Tax brackets exist for a reason, and if you think taxation is slavery and your money is unjustly taken, you best stop using all public roads, freeways, don't deal with anyone who went to any public school, and don't call the cops or fire department or ambulance when something goes wrong.
There is a big difference between a sales tax to pay for those things as opposed to an income tax which takes my earned money without choice. Sales, gas, soda tax etc at least leave me the choice. Even toll roads give you the option to use or not. It's high income tax that we are fighting.
|
Hopefully you lose the fight then.
|
On May 09 2019 05:25 hunts wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2019 13:21 FiWiFaKi wrote:On May 08 2019 09:50 Plansix wrote:
Also, why the hell do I care about what rich people lose out on? They don’t care about me and my problems. Nobody cares about you or your problems. I want the law to be just to me, so I want it to be just for everybody who's important to me, anyone I might become, and in general, everyone. I think taking a lot of money away from someone who works hard is not right. Currently, I'm not in a relationship, and don't have kids, it's a conscious decision I made to focus all my energy on my career... I didn't have some special head start, I did my analysis, and thought I'd be better off working hard, saving up a lot of money, and living off my investments a decade down the road... Then I can think about a family and whatnot. Simply because choosing this life and making good money I need to pay a significantly higher portion of my income to taxes. In my situation, it doesn't really equalize anything, both of my theoretical selves had the same option. Anyway, I think the highest tax bracket when considering every form of taxing for any product should never be more than 50%, and right now the US exceeds that when you add up income, state, sales, and sin taxes on certain products. It's like modern day slavery, someone gets the majority of your benefit of your hard work. Just a few weeks ago we hired a few temps through an employment agency, and they got paid $15/h while we paid the agency $38/h, it made me so angry, injustices like that should never be allowed to happen. It's way worse than brothels to me, because they take way more of your money, and not only are you giving them your body to use, but you're required to use much more of your body in performing fatiguing work. At the end of the day, I view the problem of taxation as all forms of government combined should receive 20-25% of the GDP, taxes should never be raised above those levels, any higher and the country is trying to tax outside of its means. People get too caught up on whether the net tax rate should be 25% or 35%, then this is what we squabble about in politics... Versus just increasing the GDP of the economy by 40% and having the same tax base, and a lot more happier people. Always when discussing tax rates, the differences are so minor it's not worth the energy to discuss, just focus all your effort on technological innovation, and more money will come in. If you think you're making enough or going to make enough for a tax on the super rich to effect you then you've got some real delusions of grander. Tax brackets exist for a reason, and if you think taxation is slavery and your money is unjustly taken, you best stop using all public roads, freeways, don't deal with anyone who went to any public school, and don't call the cops or fire department or ambulance when something goes wrong.
What do you mean, the wealthy pay much much more than the average person, it's not like they aren't paying money. We're talking about the rich paying 40% tax versus 60%... It's not worth making these people unhappy to a fairly marginal increase in tax revenue, when that emphasis could be placed on growing the economy and leading to the same increase in tax revenue.
And no, I don't consider myself the upper class. I'm in the top 20% income in Canada, so Im well off, but not much different from the typical university graduate. Short term your logic makes sense, long term, not really.
|
On May 09 2019 05:25 hunts wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2019 13:21 FiWiFaKi wrote:On May 08 2019 09:50 Plansix wrote:
Also, why the hell do I care about what rich people lose out on? They don’t care about me and my problems. Nobody cares about you or your problems. I want the law to be just to me, so I want it to be just for everybody who's important to me, anyone I might become, and in general, everyone. I think taking a lot of money away from someone who works hard is not right. Currently, I'm not in a relationship, and don't have kids, it's a conscious decision I made to focus all my energy on my career... I didn't have some special head start, I did my analysis, and thought I'd be better off working hard, saving up a lot of money, and living off my investments a decade down the road... Then I can think about a family and whatnot. Simply because choosing this life and making good money I need to pay a significantly higher portion of my income to taxes. In my situation, it doesn't really equalize anything, both of my theoretical selves had the same option. Anyway, I think the highest tax bracket when considering every form of taxing for any product should never be more than 50%, and right now the US exceeds that when you add up income, state, sales, and sin taxes on certain products. It's like modern day slavery, someone gets the majority of your benefit of your hard work. Just a few weeks ago we hired a few temps through an employment agency, and they got paid $15/h while we paid the agency $38/h, it made me so angry, injustices like that should never be allowed to happen. It's way worse than brothels to me, because they take way more of your money, and not only are you giving them your body to use, but you're required to use much more of your body in performing fatiguing work. At the end of the day, I view the problem of taxation as all forms of government combined should receive 20-25% of the GDP, taxes should never be raised above those levels, any higher and the country is trying to tax outside of its means. People get too caught up on whether the net tax rate should be 25% or 35%, then this is what we squabble about in politics... Versus just increasing the GDP of the economy by 40% and having the same tax base, and a lot more happier people. Always when discussing tax rates, the differences are so minor it's not worth the energy to discuss, just focus all your effort on technological innovation, and more money will come in. If you think you're making enough or going to make enough for a tax on the super rich to effect you then you've got some real delusions of grander. Tax brackets exist for a reason, and if you think taxation is slavery and your money is unjustly taken, you best stop using all public roads, freeways, don't deal with anyone who went to any public school, and don't call the cops or fire department or ambulance when something goes wrong.
I went on Bernie Sanders' website and typed my 2018 income and health insurance cost in his calculator. According to that, I'd have $8836 less per year thanks to his tax policy (probably more tbh), and I'm not "super rich"
am I missing something here, or is the bar for "super rich" set comically low?
|
On May 09 2019 12:27 BerserkSword wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2019 05:25 hunts wrote:On May 08 2019 13:21 FiWiFaKi wrote:On May 08 2019 09:50 Plansix wrote:
Also, why the hell do I care about what rich people lose out on? They don’t care about me and my problems. Nobody cares about you or your problems. I want the law to be just to me, so I want it to be just for everybody who's important to me, anyone I might become, and in general, everyone. I think taking a lot of money away from someone who works hard is not right. Currently, I'm not in a relationship, and don't have kids, it's a conscious decision I made to focus all my energy on my career... I didn't have some special head start, I did my analysis, and thought I'd be better off working hard, saving up a lot of money, and living off my investments a decade down the road... Then I can think about a family and whatnot. Simply because choosing this life and making good money I need to pay a significantly higher portion of my income to taxes. In my situation, it doesn't really equalize anything, both of my theoretical selves had the same option. Anyway, I think the highest tax bracket when considering every form of taxing for any product should never be more than 50%, and right now the US exceeds that when you add up income, state, sales, and sin taxes on certain products. It's like modern day slavery, someone gets the majority of your benefit of your hard work. Just a few weeks ago we hired a few temps through an employment agency, and they got paid $15/h while we paid the agency $38/h, it made me so angry, injustices like that should never be allowed to happen. It's way worse than brothels to me, because they take way more of your money, and not only are you giving them your body to use, but you're required to use much more of your body in performing fatiguing work. At the end of the day, I view the problem of taxation as all forms of government combined should receive 20-25% of the GDP, taxes should never be raised above those levels, any higher and the country is trying to tax outside of its means. People get too caught up on whether the net tax rate should be 25% or 35%, then this is what we squabble about in politics... Versus just increasing the GDP of the economy by 40% and having the same tax base, and a lot more happier people. Always when discussing tax rates, the differences are so minor it's not worth the energy to discuss, just focus all your effort on technological innovation, and more money will come in. If you think you're making enough or going to make enough for a tax on the super rich to effect you then you've got some real delusions of grander. Tax brackets exist for a reason, and if you think taxation is slavery and your money is unjustly taken, you best stop using all public roads, freeways, don't deal with anyone who went to any public school, and don't call the cops or fire department or ambulance when something goes wrong. I went on Bernie Sanders' website and typed my 2018 income and health insurance cost in his calculator. According to that, I'd have $8836 less per year thanks to his tax policy (probably more tbh), and I'm not "super rich" am I missing something here, or is the bar for "super rich" set comically low?
You're talking about different taxes.
How in the world did you manage to get $8836 less per year?
It's like modern day slavery, someone gets the majority of your benefit of your hard work. Just a few weeks ago we hired a few temps through an employment agency, and they got paid $15/h while we paid the agency $38/h
That's capitalism, not taxes. The temp agency is charging your company ~$20/h of work performed for the service of finding you a $15/hr worker to do that work.
|
On May 09 2019 12:40 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2019 12:27 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 05:25 hunts wrote:On May 08 2019 13:21 FiWiFaKi wrote:On May 08 2019 09:50 Plansix wrote:
Also, why the hell do I care about what rich people lose out on? They don’t care about me and my problems. Nobody cares about you or your problems. I want the law to be just to me, so I want it to be just for everybody who's important to me, anyone I might become, and in general, everyone. I think taking a lot of money away from someone who works hard is not right. Currently, I'm not in a relationship, and don't have kids, it's a conscious decision I made to focus all my energy on my career... I didn't have some special head start, I did my analysis, and thought I'd be better off working hard, saving up a lot of money, and living off my investments a decade down the road... Then I can think about a family and whatnot. Simply because choosing this life and making good money I need to pay a significantly higher portion of my income to taxes. In my situation, it doesn't really equalize anything, both of my theoretical selves had the same option. Anyway, I think the highest tax bracket when considering every form of taxing for any product should never be more than 50%, and right now the US exceeds that when you add up income, state, sales, and sin taxes on certain products. It's like modern day slavery, someone gets the majority of your benefit of your hard work. Just a few weeks ago we hired a few temps through an employment agency, and they got paid $15/h while we paid the agency $38/h, it made me so angry, injustices like that should never be allowed to happen. It's way worse than brothels to me, because they take way more of your money, and not only are you giving them your body to use, but you're required to use much more of your body in performing fatiguing work. At the end of the day, I view the problem of taxation as all forms of government combined should receive 20-25% of the GDP, taxes should never be raised above those levels, any higher and the country is trying to tax outside of its means. People get too caught up on whether the net tax rate should be 25% or 35%, then this is what we squabble about in politics... Versus just increasing the GDP of the economy by 40% and having the same tax base, and a lot more happier people. Always when discussing tax rates, the differences are so minor it's not worth the energy to discuss, just focus all your effort on technological innovation, and more money will come in. If you think you're making enough or going to make enough for a tax on the super rich to effect you then you've got some real delusions of grander. Tax brackets exist for a reason, and if you think taxation is slavery and your money is unjustly taken, you best stop using all public roads, freeways, don't deal with anyone who went to any public school, and don't call the cops or fire department or ambulance when something goes wrong. I went on Bernie Sanders' website and typed my 2018 income and health insurance cost in his calculator. According to that, I'd have $8836 less per year thanks to his tax policy (probably more tbh), and I'm not "super rich" am I missing something here, or is the bar for "super rich" set comically low? You're talking about different taxes. How in the world did you manage to get $8836 less per year?
I don't think I am talking about different taxes.
Hunts mentioned "make enough" and "tax brackets" which refers to income tax lol
Also, like i suspected, it is more than 8k for me
I went to Bernie's advanced calculator, and filled it out with more details. Turns out I'd lose $16k if I made the same amount of money as I did in 2018 lol. So the amount I lose out on doubles because my income is non-wage lol.
|
On May 09 2019 12:58 BerserkSword wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2019 12:40 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 12:27 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 05:25 hunts wrote:On May 08 2019 13:21 FiWiFaKi wrote:On May 08 2019 09:50 Plansix wrote:
Also, why the hell do I care about what rich people lose out on? They don’t care about me and my problems. Nobody cares about you or your problems. I want the law to be just to me, so I want it to be just for everybody who's important to me, anyone I might become, and in general, everyone. I think taking a lot of money away from someone who works hard is not right. Currently, I'm not in a relationship, and don't have kids, it's a conscious decision I made to focus all my energy on my career... I didn't have some special head start, I did my analysis, and thought I'd be better off working hard, saving up a lot of money, and living off my investments a decade down the road... Then I can think about a family and whatnot. Simply because choosing this life and making good money I need to pay a significantly higher portion of my income to taxes. In my situation, it doesn't really equalize anything, both of my theoretical selves had the same option. Anyway, I think the highest tax bracket when considering every form of taxing for any product should never be more than 50%, and right now the US exceeds that when you add up income, state, sales, and sin taxes on certain products. It's like modern day slavery, someone gets the majority of your benefit of your hard work. Just a few weeks ago we hired a few temps through an employment agency, and they got paid $15/h while we paid the agency $38/h, it made me so angry, injustices like that should never be allowed to happen. It's way worse than brothels to me, because they take way more of your money, and not only are you giving them your body to use, but you're required to use much more of your body in performing fatiguing work. At the end of the day, I view the problem of taxation as all forms of government combined should receive 20-25% of the GDP, taxes should never be raised above those levels, any higher and the country is trying to tax outside of its means. People get too caught up on whether the net tax rate should be 25% or 35%, then this is what we squabble about in politics... Versus just increasing the GDP of the economy by 40% and having the same tax base, and a lot more happier people. Always when discussing tax rates, the differences are so minor it's not worth the energy to discuss, just focus all your effort on technological innovation, and more money will come in. If you think you're making enough or going to make enough for a tax on the super rich to effect you then you've got some real delusions of grander. Tax brackets exist for a reason, and if you think taxation is slavery and your money is unjustly taken, you best stop using all public roads, freeways, don't deal with anyone who went to any public school, and don't call the cops or fire department or ambulance when something goes wrong. I went on Bernie Sanders' website and typed my 2018 income and health insurance cost in his calculator. According to that, I'd have $8836 less per year thanks to his tax policy (probably more tbh), and I'm not "super rich" am I missing something here, or is the bar for "super rich" set comically low? You're talking about different taxes. How in the world did you manage to get $8836 less per year? I don't think I am talking about different taxes. Hunts mentioned "make enough" and "tax brackets" which refers to income tax lol Also, like i suspected, it is more than 8k for me I went to Bernie's advanced calculator, and filled it out with more details. Turns out I'd lose $16k if I made the same amount of money as I did in 2018 lol. So the amount I lose out on doubles because my income is non-wage lol.
Hunts was responding to the 50% rate which would only be on money after the highest bracket, not money before. You're talking about a more general tax plan related to healthcare. They may overlap but are also distinct.
Is this supposed to be a humble brag? Because the only way I can figure out you'd get a number like that is with an income that was more than 99% of people in the country (most people consider this pretty rich, like the 99% that don't have it). In which case I don't care if you lose $16k you're confident you "earned"
To Faki's point that sure as hell isn't "modern day slavery", it's the prison industrial complex that comes closest to that in the US.
|
On May 09 2019 13:06 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2019 12:58 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 12:40 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 12:27 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 05:25 hunts wrote:On May 08 2019 13:21 FiWiFaKi wrote:On May 08 2019 09:50 Plansix wrote:
Also, why the hell do I care about what rich people lose out on? They don’t care about me and my problems. Nobody cares about you or your problems. I want the law to be just to me, so I want it to be just for everybody who's important to me, anyone I might become, and in general, everyone. I think taking a lot of money away from someone who works hard is not right. Currently, I'm not in a relationship, and don't have kids, it's a conscious decision I made to focus all my energy on my career... I didn't have some special head start, I did my analysis, and thought I'd be better off working hard, saving up a lot of money, and living off my investments a decade down the road... Then I can think about a family and whatnot. Simply because choosing this life and making good money I need to pay a significantly higher portion of my income to taxes. In my situation, it doesn't really equalize anything, both of my theoretical selves had the same option. Anyway, I think the highest tax bracket when considering every form of taxing for any product should never be more than 50%, and right now the US exceeds that when you add up income, state, sales, and sin taxes on certain products. It's like modern day slavery, someone gets the majority of your benefit of your hard work. Just a few weeks ago we hired a few temps through an employment agency, and they got paid $15/h while we paid the agency $38/h, it made me so angry, injustices like that should never be allowed to happen. It's way worse than brothels to me, because they take way more of your money, and not only are you giving them your body to use, but you're required to use much more of your body in performing fatiguing work. At the end of the day, I view the problem of taxation as all forms of government combined should receive 20-25% of the GDP, taxes should never be raised above those levels, any higher and the country is trying to tax outside of its means. People get too caught up on whether the net tax rate should be 25% or 35%, then this is what we squabble about in politics... Versus just increasing the GDP of the economy by 40% and having the same tax base, and a lot more happier people. Always when discussing tax rates, the differences are so minor it's not worth the energy to discuss, just focus all your effort on technological innovation, and more money will come in. If you think you're making enough or going to make enough for a tax on the super rich to effect you then you've got some real delusions of grander. Tax brackets exist for a reason, and if you think taxation is slavery and your money is unjustly taken, you best stop using all public roads, freeways, don't deal with anyone who went to any public school, and don't call the cops or fire department or ambulance when something goes wrong. I went on Bernie Sanders' website and typed my 2018 income and health insurance cost in his calculator. According to that, I'd have $8836 less per year thanks to his tax policy (probably more tbh), and I'm not "super rich" am I missing something here, or is the bar for "super rich" set comically low? You're talking about different taxes. How in the world did you manage to get $8836 less per year? I don't think I am talking about different taxes. Hunts mentioned "make enough" and "tax brackets" which refers to income tax lol Also, like i suspected, it is more than 8k for me I went to Bernie's advanced calculator, and filled it out with more details. Turns out I'd lose $16k if I made the same amount of money as I did in 2018 lol. So the amount I lose out on doubles because my income is non-wage lol. Hunts was talking responding to the 50% rate which would only be on money after the highest bracket, not money before. You're talking about a more general tax plan related to healthcare. They may overlap but are also distinct. Is this supposed to be a humble brag? Because the only way I can figure out you'd get a number like that is with an income that was more than 99% of people in the country (most people consider this pretty rich, like the 99% that don't have it). In which case I don't care if you lose $16k you're confident you "earned" To Faki's point that sure as hell isn't "modern day slavery", it's the prison industrial complex that comes closest to that in the US.
Faki said that when you include all forms of tax, including state, sales, property, etc, that it is over 50% for a lot of well off people. So I assumed that was what they were talking about.
I only brought it up because I was (perhaps mistakenly) under the impression that hunts was saying that some of these Democrat tax plans wouldnt affect anybody here - that they'd only affect the super rich.
And even though I'm a libertarian, I dont think paying taxes is slavery or even theft either
|
On May 09 2019 13:33 BerserkSword wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2019 13:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 12:58 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 12:40 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 12:27 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 05:25 hunts wrote:On May 08 2019 13:21 FiWiFaKi wrote:On May 08 2019 09:50 Plansix wrote:
Also, why the hell do I care about what rich people lose out on? They don’t care about me and my problems. Nobody cares about you or your problems. I want the law to be just to me, so I want it to be just for everybody who's important to me, anyone I might become, and in general, everyone. I think taking a lot of money away from someone who works hard is not right. Currently, I'm not in a relationship, and don't have kids, it's a conscious decision I made to focus all my energy on my career... I didn't have some special head start, I did my analysis, and thought I'd be better off working hard, saving up a lot of money, and living off my investments a decade down the road... Then I can think about a family and whatnot. Simply because choosing this life and making good money I need to pay a significantly higher portion of my income to taxes. In my situation, it doesn't really equalize anything, both of my theoretical selves had the same option. Anyway, I think the highest tax bracket when considering every form of taxing for any product should never be more than 50%, and right now the US exceeds that when you add up income, state, sales, and sin taxes on certain products. It's like modern day slavery, someone gets the majority of your benefit of your hard work. Just a few weeks ago we hired a few temps through an employment agency, and they got paid $15/h while we paid the agency $38/h, it made me so angry, injustices like that should never be allowed to happen. It's way worse than brothels to me, because they take way more of your money, and not only are you giving them your body to use, but you're required to use much more of your body in performing fatiguing work. At the end of the day, I view the problem of taxation as all forms of government combined should receive 20-25% of the GDP, taxes should never be raised above those levels, any higher and the country is trying to tax outside of its means. People get too caught up on whether the net tax rate should be 25% or 35%, then this is what we squabble about in politics... Versus just increasing the GDP of the economy by 40% and having the same tax base, and a lot more happier people. Always when discussing tax rates, the differences are so minor it's not worth the energy to discuss, just focus all your effort on technological innovation, and more money will come in. If you think you're making enough or going to make enough for a tax on the super rich to effect you then you've got some real delusions of grander. Tax brackets exist for a reason, and if you think taxation is slavery and your money is unjustly taken, you best stop using all public roads, freeways, don't deal with anyone who went to any public school, and don't call the cops or fire department or ambulance when something goes wrong. I went on Bernie Sanders' website and typed my 2018 income and health insurance cost in his calculator. According to that, I'd have $8836 less per year thanks to his tax policy (probably more tbh), and I'm not "super rich" am I missing something here, or is the bar for "super rich" set comically low? You're talking about different taxes. How in the world did you manage to get $8836 less per year? I don't think I am talking about different taxes. Hunts mentioned "make enough" and "tax brackets" which refers to income tax lol Also, like i suspected, it is more than 8k for me I went to Bernie's advanced calculator, and filled it out with more details. Turns out I'd lose $16k if I made the same amount of money as I did in 2018 lol. So the amount I lose out on doubles because my income is non-wage lol. Hunts was talking responding to the 50% rate which would only be on money after the highest bracket, not money before. You're talking about a more general tax plan related to healthcare. They may overlap but are also distinct. Is this supposed to be a humble brag? Because the only way I can figure out you'd get a number like that is with an income that was more than 99% of people in the country (most people consider this pretty rich, like the 99% that don't have it). In which case I don't care if you lose $16k you're confident you "earned" To Faki's point that sure as hell isn't "modern day slavery", it's the prison industrial complex that comes closest to that in the US. Faki said that when you include all forms of tax, including state, sales, property, etc, that it is over 50% for a lot of well off people. So I assumed that was what they were talking about. I only brought it up because I was (perhaps mistakenly) under the impression that hunts was saying that some of these Democrat tax plans wouldnt affect anybody here - that they'd only affect the super rich. And even though I'm a libertarian, I dont think paying taxes is slavery or even theft either
Fair enough, and I can't promise that's exactly what hunts meant, but it is how I read it.
Now that we've cleared that up can we clear up how in the world you got to a figure of $16,000+ the tax plan would cost you? Because, while certainly a shocking number, I think it needs more context to be of any value.
|
Norway28706 Posts
A number like that with no context is meaningless. For that to be remotely meaningful you need to also post how much you currently pay and what your income is.
|
On May 09 2019 13:38 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2019 13:33 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 13:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 12:58 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 12:40 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 12:27 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 05:25 hunts wrote:On May 08 2019 13:21 FiWiFaKi wrote:On May 08 2019 09:50 Plansix wrote:
Also, why the hell do I care about what rich people lose out on? They don’t care about me and my problems. Nobody cares about you or your problems. I want the law to be just to me, so I want it to be just for everybody who's important to me, anyone I might become, and in general, everyone. I think taking a lot of money away from someone who works hard is not right. Currently, I'm not in a relationship, and don't have kids, it's a conscious decision I made to focus all my energy on my career... I didn't have some special head start, I did my analysis, and thought I'd be better off working hard, saving up a lot of money, and living off my investments a decade down the road... Then I can think about a family and whatnot. Simply because choosing this life and making good money I need to pay a significantly higher portion of my income to taxes. In my situation, it doesn't really equalize anything, both of my theoretical selves had the same option. Anyway, I think the highest tax bracket when considering every form of taxing for any product should never be more than 50%, and right now the US exceeds that when you add up income, state, sales, and sin taxes on certain products. It's like modern day slavery, someone gets the majority of your benefit of your hard work. Just a few weeks ago we hired a few temps through an employment agency, and they got paid $15/h while we paid the agency $38/h, it made me so angry, injustices like that should never be allowed to happen. It's way worse than brothels to me, because they take way more of your money, and not only are you giving them your body to use, but you're required to use much more of your body in performing fatiguing work. At the end of the day, I view the problem of taxation as all forms of government combined should receive 20-25% of the GDP, taxes should never be raised above those levels, any higher and the country is trying to tax outside of its means. People get too caught up on whether the net tax rate should be 25% or 35%, then this is what we squabble about in politics... Versus just increasing the GDP of the economy by 40% and having the same tax base, and a lot more happier people. Always when discussing tax rates, the differences are so minor it's not worth the energy to discuss, just focus all your effort on technological innovation, and more money will come in. If you think you're making enough or going to make enough for a tax on the super rich to effect you then you've got some real delusions of grander. Tax brackets exist for a reason, and if you think taxation is slavery and your money is unjustly taken, you best stop using all public roads, freeways, don't deal with anyone who went to any public school, and don't call the cops or fire department or ambulance when something goes wrong. I went on Bernie Sanders' website and typed my 2018 income and health insurance cost in his calculator. According to that, I'd have $8836 less per year thanks to his tax policy (probably more tbh), and I'm not "super rich" am I missing something here, or is the bar for "super rich" set comically low? You're talking about different taxes. How in the world did you manage to get $8836 less per year? I don't think I am talking about different taxes. Hunts mentioned "make enough" and "tax brackets" which refers to income tax lol Also, like i suspected, it is more than 8k for me I went to Bernie's advanced calculator, and filled it out with more details. Turns out I'd lose $16k if I made the same amount of money as I did in 2018 lol. So the amount I lose out on doubles because my income is non-wage lol. Hunts was talking responding to the 50% rate which would only be on money after the highest bracket, not money before. You're talking about a more general tax plan related to healthcare. They may overlap but are also distinct. Is this supposed to be a humble brag? Because the only way I can figure out you'd get a number like that is with an income that was more than 99% of people in the country (most people consider this pretty rich, like the 99% that don't have it). In which case I don't care if you lose $16k you're confident you "earned" To Faki's point that sure as hell isn't "modern day slavery", it's the prison industrial complex that comes closest to that in the US. Faki said that when you include all forms of tax, including state, sales, property, etc, that it is over 50% for a lot of well off people. So I assumed that was what they were talking about. I only brought it up because I was (perhaps mistakenly) under the impression that hunts was saying that some of these Democrat tax plans wouldnt affect anybody here - that they'd only affect the super rich. And even though I'm a libertarian, I dont think paying taxes is slavery or even theft either Fair enough, and I can't promise that's exactly what hunts meant, but it is how I read it. Now that we've cleared that up can we clear up how in the world you got to a figure of $16,000+ the tax plan would cost you? Because, while certainly a shocking number, I think it needs more context to be of any value.
Well you nailed the context lol. Last year I made a lot of money, I'm single, and my income is capital gains. Bernie's tax plan, on paper, achieves its goal, making me pay my "fair share"
|
On May 09 2019 14:01 BerserkSword wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2019 13:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 13:33 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 13:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 12:58 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 12:40 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 12:27 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 05:25 hunts wrote:On May 08 2019 13:21 FiWiFaKi wrote:On May 08 2019 09:50 Plansix wrote:
Also, why the hell do I care about what rich people lose out on? They don’t care about me and my problems. Nobody cares about you or your problems. I want the law to be just to me, so I want it to be just for everybody who's important to me, anyone I might become, and in general, everyone. I think taking a lot of money away from someone who works hard is not right. Currently, I'm not in a relationship, and don't have kids, it's a conscious decision I made to focus all my energy on my career... I didn't have some special head start, I did my analysis, and thought I'd be better off working hard, saving up a lot of money, and living off my investments a decade down the road... Then I can think about a family and whatnot. Simply because choosing this life and making good money I need to pay a significantly higher portion of my income to taxes. In my situation, it doesn't really equalize anything, both of my theoretical selves had the same option. Anyway, I think the highest tax bracket when considering every form of taxing for any product should never be more than 50%, and right now the US exceeds that when you add up income, state, sales, and sin taxes on certain products. It's like modern day slavery, someone gets the majority of your benefit of your hard work. Just a few weeks ago we hired a few temps through an employment agency, and they got paid $15/h while we paid the agency $38/h, it made me so angry, injustices like that should never be allowed to happen. It's way worse than brothels to me, because they take way more of your money, and not only are you giving them your body to use, but you're required to use much more of your body in performing fatiguing work. At the end of the day, I view the problem of taxation as all forms of government combined should receive 20-25% of the GDP, taxes should never be raised above those levels, any higher and the country is trying to tax outside of its means. People get too caught up on whether the net tax rate should be 25% or 35%, then this is what we squabble about in politics... Versus just increasing the GDP of the economy by 40% and having the same tax base, and a lot more happier people. Always when discussing tax rates, the differences are so minor it's not worth the energy to discuss, just focus all your effort on technological innovation, and more money will come in. If you think you're making enough or going to make enough for a tax on the super rich to effect you then you've got some real delusions of grander. Tax brackets exist for a reason, and if you think taxation is slavery and your money is unjustly taken, you best stop using all public roads, freeways, don't deal with anyone who went to any public school, and don't call the cops or fire department or ambulance when something goes wrong. I went on Bernie Sanders' website and typed my 2018 income and health insurance cost in his calculator. According to that, I'd have $8836 less per year thanks to his tax policy (probably more tbh), and I'm not "super rich" am I missing something here, or is the bar for "super rich" set comically low? You're talking about different taxes. How in the world did you manage to get $8836 less per year? I don't think I am talking about different taxes. Hunts mentioned "make enough" and "tax brackets" which refers to income tax lol Also, like i suspected, it is more than 8k for me I went to Bernie's advanced calculator, and filled it out with more details. Turns out I'd lose $16k if I made the same amount of money as I did in 2018 lol. So the amount I lose out on doubles because my income is non-wage lol. Hunts was talking responding to the 50% rate which would only be on money after the highest bracket, not money before. You're talking about a more general tax plan related to healthcare. They may overlap but are also distinct. Is this supposed to be a humble brag? Because the only way I can figure out you'd get a number like that is with an income that was more than 99% of people in the country (most people consider this pretty rich, like the 99% that don't have it). In which case I don't care if you lose $16k you're confident you "earned" To Faki's point that sure as hell isn't "modern day slavery", it's the prison industrial complex that comes closest to that in the US. Faki said that when you include all forms of tax, including state, sales, property, etc, that it is over 50% for a lot of well off people. So I assumed that was what they were talking about. I only brought it up because I was (perhaps mistakenly) under the impression that hunts was saying that some of these Democrat tax plans wouldnt affect anybody here - that they'd only affect the super rich. And even though I'm a libertarian, I dont think paying taxes is slavery or even theft either Fair enough, and I can't promise that's exactly what hunts meant, but it is how I read it. Now that we've cleared that up can we clear up how in the world you got to a figure of $16,000+ the tax plan would cost you? Because, while certainly a shocking number, I think it needs more context to be of any value. Well you nailed the context lol. Last year I made a lot of money, I'm single, and my income is capital gains. Bernie's tax plan, on paper, achieves its goal, making me pay my "fair share"
So you're complaining about paying $16k out of hundreds of thousands of dollars (that's not even for work you did) so that people don't die and expecting sympathy?
I just feel there's gotta be more to this?
EDIT: I had to reread everything and I think you're point was that you don't consider yourself "super rich" despite making more money than 99% (maybe more) of people in the wealthiest country on the planet. For me personally, I'd own the tackiness of the humble brag, rather than cling to the argument that the "bar for the super rich is comically low". tbf/h though, I definitely want you to do the latter one.
I'd have some sympathy if you inherited a house that you sold or something like that and had 1 particular year with abnormal income, but not much, mostly for the lost loved one, not the lost cash.
|
On May 09 2019 14:06 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2019 14:01 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 13:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 13:33 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 13:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 12:58 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 12:40 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 12:27 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 05:25 hunts wrote:On May 08 2019 13:21 FiWiFaKi wrote:
[quote]
Nobody cares about you or your problems.
I want the law to be just to me, so I want it to be just for everybody who's important to me, anyone I might become, and in general, everyone.
I think taking a lot of money away from someone who works hard is not right. Currently, I'm not in a relationship, and don't have kids, it's a conscious decision I made to focus all my energy on my career... I didn't have some special head start, I did my analysis, and thought I'd be better off working hard, saving up a lot of money, and living off my investments a decade down the road... Then I can think about a family and whatnot.
Simply because choosing this life and making good money I need to pay a significantly higher portion of my income to taxes. In my situation, it doesn't really equalize anything, both of my theoretical selves had the same option. Anyway, I think the highest tax bracket when considering every form of taxing for any product should never be more than 50%, and right now the US exceeds that when you add up income, state, sales, and sin taxes on certain products.
It's like modern day slavery, someone gets the majority of your benefit of your hard work. Just a few weeks ago we hired a few temps through an employment agency, and they got paid $15/h while we paid the agency $38/h, it made me so angry, injustices like that should never be allowed to happen. It's way worse than brothels to me, because they take way more of your money, and not only are you giving them your body to use, but you're required to use much more of your body in performing fatiguing work.
At the end of the day, I view the problem of taxation as all forms of government combined should receive 20-25% of the GDP, taxes should never be raised above those levels, any higher and the country is trying to tax outside of its means. People get too caught up on whether the net tax rate should be 25% or 35%, then this is what we squabble about in politics... Versus just increasing the GDP of the economy by 40% and having the same tax base, and a lot more happier people. Always when discussing tax rates, the differences are so minor it's not worth the energy to discuss, just focus all your effort on technological innovation, and more money will come in. If you think you're making enough or going to make enough for a tax on the super rich to effect you then you've got some real delusions of grander. Tax brackets exist for a reason, and if you think taxation is slavery and your money is unjustly taken, you best stop using all public roads, freeways, don't deal with anyone who went to any public school, and don't call the cops or fire department or ambulance when something goes wrong. I went on Bernie Sanders' website and typed my 2018 income and health insurance cost in his calculator. According to that, I'd have $8836 less per year thanks to his tax policy (probably more tbh), and I'm not "super rich" am I missing something here, or is the bar for "super rich" set comically low? You're talking about different taxes. How in the world did you manage to get $8836 less per year? I don't think I am talking about different taxes. Hunts mentioned "make enough" and "tax brackets" which refers to income tax lol Also, like i suspected, it is more than 8k for me I went to Bernie's advanced calculator, and filled it out with more details. Turns out I'd lose $16k if I made the same amount of money as I did in 2018 lol. So the amount I lose out on doubles because my income is non-wage lol. Hunts was talking responding to the 50% rate which would only be on money after the highest bracket, not money before. You're talking about a more general tax plan related to healthcare. They may overlap but are also distinct. Is this supposed to be a humble brag? Because the only way I can figure out you'd get a number like that is with an income that was more than 99% of people in the country (most people consider this pretty rich, like the 99% that don't have it). In which case I don't care if you lose $16k you're confident you "earned" To Faki's point that sure as hell isn't "modern day slavery", it's the prison industrial complex that comes closest to that in the US. Faki said that when you include all forms of tax, including state, sales, property, etc, that it is over 50% for a lot of well off people. So I assumed that was what they were talking about. I only brought it up because I was (perhaps mistakenly) under the impression that hunts was saying that some of these Democrat tax plans wouldnt affect anybody here - that they'd only affect the super rich. And even though I'm a libertarian, I dont think paying taxes is slavery or even theft either Fair enough, and I can't promise that's exactly what hunts meant, but it is how I read it. Now that we've cleared that up can we clear up how in the world you got to a figure of $16,000+ the tax plan would cost you? Because, while certainly a shocking number, I think it needs more context to be of any value. Well you nailed the context lol. Last year I made a lot of money, I'm single, and my income is capital gains. Bernie's tax plan, on paper, achieves its goal, making me pay my "fair share" So you're complaining about paying $16k out of hundreds of thousands of dollars (that's not even for work you did) so that people don't die and expecting sympathy? I just feel there's gotta be more to this?
First of all, I dont recall complaining. I just stated that it would affect me (I thought hunts was saying it only affects the super rich)
Second of all, I did work for it. Not sure what you mean there.
Third of all, I don't believe the leftist healthcare model is a good thing and it will eventually just fuck the poor people over more than they already get fucked. But that is another topic.
Anyways, I honestly don't care that much.
My point was simply that Bernie's tax policy would affect people other than the super rich.
On May 09 2019 14:06 GreenHorizons wrote:
EDIT: I had to reread everything and I think you're point was that you don't consider yourself "super rich" despite making more money than 99% (maybe more) of people in the wealthiest country on the planet. For me personally, I'd own the tackiness of the humble brag, rather than cling to the argument that the "bar for the super rich is comically low". tbf/h though, I definitely want you to do the latter one.
wtf is a humble brag dude
I was just responding to some guy who I thought was saying that it's delusional to think that Bernie's tax policy wouldnt affect any of us...that it only affects the super rich
Bernie always talks about going after the super rich. Does the super rich include doctors, lawyers, small business owners and pharmacists?
|
On May 09 2019 14:23 BerserkSword wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2019 14:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 14:01 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 13:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 13:33 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 13:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 12:58 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 12:40 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 12:27 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 05:25 hunts wrote:
[quote]
If you think you're making enough or going to make enough for a tax on the super rich to effect you then you've got some real delusions of grander. Tax brackets exist for a reason, and if you think taxation is slavery and your money is unjustly taken, you best stop using all public roads, freeways, don't deal with anyone who went to any public school, and don't call the cops or fire department or ambulance when something goes wrong.
I went on Bernie Sanders' website and typed my 2018 income and health insurance cost in his calculator. According to that, I'd have $8836 less per year thanks to his tax policy (probably more tbh), and I'm not "super rich" am I missing something here, or is the bar for "super rich" set comically low? You're talking about different taxes. How in the world did you manage to get $8836 less per year? I don't think I am talking about different taxes. Hunts mentioned "make enough" and "tax brackets" which refers to income tax lol Also, like i suspected, it is more than 8k for me I went to Bernie's advanced calculator, and filled it out with more details. Turns out I'd lose $16k if I made the same amount of money as I did in 2018 lol. So the amount I lose out on doubles because my income is non-wage lol. Hunts was talking responding to the 50% rate which would only be on money after the highest bracket, not money before. You're talking about a more general tax plan related to healthcare. They may overlap but are also distinct. Is this supposed to be a humble brag? Because the only way I can figure out you'd get a number like that is with an income that was more than 99% of people in the country (most people consider this pretty rich, like the 99% that don't have it). In which case I don't care if you lose $16k you're confident you "earned" To Faki's point that sure as hell isn't "modern day slavery", it's the prison industrial complex that comes closest to that in the US. Faki said that when you include all forms of tax, including state, sales, property, etc, that it is over 50% for a lot of well off people. So I assumed that was what they were talking about. I only brought it up because I was (perhaps mistakenly) under the impression that hunts was saying that some of these Democrat tax plans wouldnt affect anybody here - that they'd only affect the super rich. And even though I'm a libertarian, I dont think paying taxes is slavery or even theft either Fair enough, and I can't promise that's exactly what hunts meant, but it is how I read it. Now that we've cleared that up can we clear up how in the world you got to a figure of $16,000+ the tax plan would cost you? Because, while certainly a shocking number, I think it needs more context to be of any value. Well you nailed the context lol. Last year I made a lot of money, I'm single, and my income is capital gains. Bernie's tax plan, on paper, achieves its goal, making me pay my "fair share" So you're complaining about paying $16k out of hundreds of thousands of dollars (that's not even for work you did) so that people don't die and expecting sympathy? I just feel there's gotta be more to this? First of all, I dont recall complaining. I just stated that it would affect me (I thought hunts was saying it only affects the super rich) Second of all, I did work for it. Not sure what you mean there. Third of all, I don't believe the leftist healthcare model is a good thing and it will eventually just fuck the poor people over more than they already get fucked. But that is another topic. Anyways, I honestly don't care that much. My point was simply that Bernie's tax policy would affect people other than the super rich.
Sorry it was fiwifaki that was complaining (likening taxation to slavery), and Bisu "fighting" the taxes, you (as I noted in my edit) we're making the argument that the bar for the "super-rich was comically low", I disagree that being in the top richest 1% income in the wealthiest country on the planet is "comically low", what's your argument that it is?
Capital gains taxes aren't on (payment for) work, they're on transfer of assets, is what I meant btw.
wtf is a humble brag dude
I was just responding to some guy who I thought was saying that it's delusional to think that Bernie's tax policy wouldnt affect any of us...that it only affects the super rich
Bernie always talks about going after the super rich. Does the super rich include doctors, lawyers, small business owners and pharmacists?
A humble brag: an ostensibly modest or self-deprecating statement whose actual purpose is to draw attention to something of which one is proud.
That you were talking about how much you'd pay in taxes (ostensibly modest, especially since you haven't shared the income that tax is derived from) when really you are proud that you "earned" that income. In quotes because I have no idea what you did other than it wasn't taxed as labor.
The situation you described yourself isn't one of those professions because they don't pay capital gains tax on the majority of their income. Except maybe lawyers? and "pharmacists" making that kinda money probably aren't paying any taxes, if you know what I mean?
The mistake seems not to be that it would only impact people that could reasonably be called "super rich", but that we didn't have someone (probably several) like that here.
|
On May 09 2019 14:28 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2019 14:23 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 14:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 14:01 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 13:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 13:33 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 13:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 12:58 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 12:40 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 12:27 BerserkSword wrote:
[quote]
I went on Bernie Sanders' website and typed my 2018 income and health insurance cost in his calculator. According to that, I'd have $8836 less per year thanks to his tax policy (probably more tbh), and I'm not "super rich"
am I missing something here, or is the bar for "super rich" set comically low? You're talking about different taxes. How in the world did you manage to get $8836 less per year? I don't think I am talking about different taxes. Hunts mentioned "make enough" and "tax brackets" which refers to income tax lol Also, like i suspected, it is more than 8k for me I went to Bernie's advanced calculator, and filled it out with more details. Turns out I'd lose $16k if I made the same amount of money as I did in 2018 lol. So the amount I lose out on doubles because my income is non-wage lol. Hunts was talking responding to the 50% rate which would only be on money after the highest bracket, not money before. You're talking about a more general tax plan related to healthcare. They may overlap but are also distinct. Is this supposed to be a humble brag? Because the only way I can figure out you'd get a number like that is with an income that was more than 99% of people in the country (most people consider this pretty rich, like the 99% that don't have it). In which case I don't care if you lose $16k you're confident you "earned" To Faki's point that sure as hell isn't "modern day slavery", it's the prison industrial complex that comes closest to that in the US. Faki said that when you include all forms of tax, including state, sales, property, etc, that it is over 50% for a lot of well off people. So I assumed that was what they were talking about. I only brought it up because I was (perhaps mistakenly) under the impression that hunts was saying that some of these Democrat tax plans wouldnt affect anybody here - that they'd only affect the super rich. And even though I'm a libertarian, I dont think paying taxes is slavery or even theft either Fair enough, and I can't promise that's exactly what hunts meant, but it is how I read it. Now that we've cleared that up can we clear up how in the world you got to a figure of $16,000+ the tax plan would cost you? Because, while certainly a shocking number, I think it needs more context to be of any value. Well you nailed the context lol. Last year I made a lot of money, I'm single, and my income is capital gains. Bernie's tax plan, on paper, achieves its goal, making me pay my "fair share" So you're complaining about paying $16k out of hundreds of thousands of dollars (that's not even for work you did) so that people don't die and expecting sympathy? I just feel there's gotta be more to this? First of all, I dont recall complaining. I just stated that it would affect me (I thought hunts was saying it only affects the super rich) Second of all, I did work for it. Not sure what you mean there. Third of all, I don't believe the leftist healthcare model is a good thing and it will eventually just fuck the poor people over more than they already get fucked. But that is another topic. Anyways, I honestly don't care that much. My point was simply that Bernie's tax policy would affect people other than the super rich. Sorry it was fiwifaki that was complaining, you (as I noted in my edit) we're making the argument that the bar for the "super-rich was comically low", I disagree that being in the top richest 1% income in the wealthiest country is "comically low", what's your argument that it is?
Well I agree with you that from a worldwide point of view, the top 1% of America is super rich. I thank Flash every day that I was born in the US instead of where my parents are from.
But I thought we were talking about the U.S. here. In the U.S., doctors and lawyers can often be 1% earners for example. Doctors are considered upper middle class to rich, not "super rich"
On May 09 2019 14:28 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2019 14:23 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 14:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 14:01 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 13:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 13:33 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 13:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 12:58 BerserkSword wrote:On May 09 2019 12:40 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 09 2019 12:27 BerserkSword wrote:
[quote]
I went on Bernie Sanders' website and typed my 2018 income and health insurance cost in his calculator. According to that, I'd have $8836 less per year thanks to his tax policy (probably more tbh), and I'm not "super rich"
am I missing something here, or is the bar for "super rich" set comically low? You're talking about different taxes. How in the world did you manage to get $8836 less per year? I don't think I am talking about different taxes. Hunts mentioned "make enough" and "tax brackets" which refers to income tax lol Also, like i suspected, it is more than 8k for me I went to Bernie's advanced calculator, and filled it out with more details. Turns out I'd lose $16k if I made the same amount of money as I did in 2018 lol. So the amount I lose out on doubles because my income is non-wage lol. Hunts was talking responding to the 50% rate which would only be on money after the highest bracket, not money before. You're talking about a more general tax plan related to healthcare. They may overlap but are also distinct. Is this supposed to be a humble brag? Because the only way I can figure out you'd get a number like that is with an income that was more than 99% of people in the country (most people consider this pretty rich, like the 99% that don't have it). In which case I don't care if you lose $16k you're confident you "earned" To Faki's point that sure as hell isn't "modern day slavery", it's the prison industrial complex that comes closest to that in the US. Faki said that when you include all forms of tax, including state, sales, property, etc, that it is over 50% for a lot of well off people. So I assumed that was what they were talking about. I only brought it up because I was (perhaps mistakenly) under the impression that hunts was saying that some of these Democrat tax plans wouldnt affect anybody here - that they'd only affect the super rich. And even though I'm a libertarian, I dont think paying taxes is slavery or even theft either Fair enough, and I can't promise that's exactly what hunts meant, but it is how I read it. Now that we've cleared that up can we clear up how in the world you got to a figure of $16,000+ the tax plan would cost you? Because, while certainly a shocking number, I think it needs more context to be of any value. Well you nailed the context lol. Last year I made a lot of money, I'm single, and my income is capital gains. Bernie's tax plan, on paper, achieves its goal, making me pay my "fair share" So you're complaining about paying $16k out of hundreds of thousands of dollars (that's not even for work you did) so that people don't die and expecting sympathy? I just feel there's gotta be more to this? First of all, I dont recall complaining. I just stated that it would affect me (I thought hunts was saying it only affects the super rich) Second of all, I did work for it. Not sure what you mean there. Third of all, I don't believe the leftist healthcare model is a good thing and it will eventually just fuck the poor people over more than they already get fucked. But that is another topic. Anyways, I honestly don't care that much. My point was simply that Bernie's tax policy would affect people other than the super rich. Sorry it was fiwifaki that was complaining (likening taxation to slavery), and Bisu "fighting" the taxes, you (as I noted in my edit) we're making the argument that the bar for the "super-rich was comically low", I disagree that being in the top richest 1% income in the wealthiest country on the planet is "comically low", what's your argument that it is? Capital gains taxes aren't on (payment for) work, they're on transfer of assets, is what I meant btw. Show nested quote +wtf is a humble brag dude
I was just responding to some guy who I thought was saying that it's delusional to think that Bernie's tax policy wouldnt affect any of us...that it only affects the super rich
Bernie always talks about going after the super rich. Does the super rich include doctors, lawyers, small business owners and pharmacists? A humble brag: Show nested quote +an ostensibly modest or self-deprecating statement whose actual purpose is to draw attention to something of which one is proud. That you were talking about how much you'd pay in taxes (ostensibly modest, especially since you haven't shared the income that tax is derived from) when really you are proud that you "earned" that income. In quotes because I have no idea what you did other than it wasn't taxed as labor. The situation you described yourself isn't one of those professions because they don't pay capital gains tax on the majority of their income. Except maybe lawyers? and "pharmacists" making that kinda money probably aren't paying any taxes, if you know what I mean? The mistake seems not to be that it would only impact people that could reasonably be called "super rich", but that we didn't have someone (probably several) like that here.
I trade for a living, meaning I pay short term capital gains tax on my profits. Short term capital gains tax is the same rate as income tax a doctor or lawyer would pay. Since effort was involved in making that money, I'd say I earned it.
I know a pharmacist couple who together make over 400k, and non-retail non-hospital pharmacists can make in that range as well.
Would this discussion make a difference to you if I made my money as a doctor?
|
deleted because duoble post
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
