Page 68 of 80 FirstFirst ... 5464666768697072 ... LastLast
Results 671 to 680 of 795

Thread: The Biden Presidency

  1. Quote Originally Posted by Frogacuda View Post
    This isn't because these people have figured out how to beat the system, it's because the system is designed to serve them. You make it sound like they're slippery and not that we have just decided as a society let oligarchy reign.

    The shit's on purpose. They don't pay because we let them not pay. That could change the second we decide to change it.
    Right, but my reply was to your simplified answer that they should just "pay 10% more" - which is just taxing them at a higher rate and not addressing the loopholes above. If you meant something different then you should say so.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frogacuda View Post
    No they're not, that's literally the point. Where middle and lower class people spend nearly all of their income, putting it back into the economy, the richest people accumulate wealth, which takes money out of the economy. That's the whole problem
    Blanket statement that's not necessarily true. I mean, I haven't sat down and made an economic manifesto or anything, but figure out what the poverty line is, add % to that number and make everyone that makes x$ exempt from the flat tax.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frogacuda View Post
    Literally no one advocates for a flat tax as a better means of getting money out of the rich. It's actually designed to do the exact opposite of that, to force the middle class to shoulder a disproportionate tax burden, the exact opposite.of.what you seem to be claiming.
    Literally not true unless you're just addressing a flat tax where nobody is exempt which wouldn't be what I would advocate for. You're over simplifying a very complex problem that would require a lot work from Congress.

    Let's agree on this - the tax structure is completely fucked. Small businesses are encouraged (by their tax professionals) to show as little profit as possible and having a couple hundred thousand dollars in sales doesn't necessarily mean you actually made any money. Our tax code is antiquated, complex, rewards deceit, etc...

    Quote Originally Posted by Frogacuda View Post
    What they're doing IS the compromise. Compromising is where you meet in the middle and pass something narrowly, not where you just give the opposition everything they want.

    Progressives are only going to get a fraction of what they want. But even that fractional victory is only won through hard fought battles like this.
    If you're trying to pass a bill, or reconciliation, without a single vote from the other party it is NOT compromise. The bi-partisan bill that passed the Senate is compromise. The 3.5T that's been in limbo for months is exactly the opposite.

  2. Quote Originally Posted by BonusKun View Post
    Because it's all about power and control which is in itself politics. I'm sorry that you don't agree with it but this is the world we live in.
    It has nothing to do with the president or national politics, it's private citizens whining about each other. It's a distraction from politics.

    I think Chappelle's an amazing joke writer, and I think no subject should be off limits. But I also think he was coming at the subject from a kind of shitty place and that comes across bad in some of his material. He could probably pull those jokes off better if he didn't sound so angry about it. That's my critique as an audience member. But we shouldn't accept this kind of social media bickering as a substitute for political discourse.



    Sent from my LE2127 using Tapatalk

  3. Quote Originally Posted by haohmaru View Post
    Right, but my reply was to your simplified answer that they should just "pay 10% more" - which is just taxing them at a higher rate and not addressing the loopholes above. If you meant something different then you should say so.
    I wasn't advocating for a particular policy, I was just saying if we could collect 10% of what those people make in a year by whatever mechanism you choose.

    Personally I like the idea of a wealth tax, because I think tax policy should be designed to reward people for doing things that benefit the economy (investing, spending) and punish behavior that is bad for the economy (hoarding money/manipulating markets).


    Blanket statement that's not necessarily true. I mean, I haven't sat down and made an economic manifesto or anything, but figure out what the poverty line is, add % to that number and make everyone that makes x$ exempt from the flat tax.


    Literally not true unless you're just addressing a flat tax where nobody is exempt which wouldn't be what I would advocate for. You're over simplifying a very complex problem that would require a lot work from Congress.
    But rich people only spend a small fraction of their wealth on taxable goods and services. So again this doesn't really make sense and isn't reflective of what that demographic does with their money.

    And, to revisit my point above, it is taxing people for doing the thing that benefits the economy (spending) and allows them to do the bad thing (hoarding money) tax free. It's just a fundamentally bad idea, it doesn't matter if you exempt poor people, it gets the whole problem backwards.


    Let's agree on this - the tax structure is completely fucked. Small businesses are encouraged (by their tax professionals) to show as little profit as possible and having a couple hundred thousand dollars in sales doesn't necessarily mean you actually made any money. Our tax code is antiquated, complex, rewards deceit, etc...
    Our tax code is designed to give large businesses advantages over small. It's supposed to be the exact opposite.

    But I think we're getting a little off course with that because I do believe business and personal taxes operate on different principles.

    If you're trying to pass a bill, or reconciliation, without a single vote from the other party it is NOT compromise. The bi-partisan bill that passed the Senate is compromise. The 3.5T that's been in limbo for months is exactly the opposite.
    The Democratic party represents a range of political positions from social democrat to center right conservative. It's still fundamentally a compromise.

  4. Quote Originally Posted by Frogacuda View Post
    It has nothing to do with the president or national politics, it's private citizens whining about each other. It's a distraction from politics.

    I think Chappelle's an amazing joke writer, and I think no subject should be off limits. But I also think he was coming at the subject from a kind of shitty place and that comes across bad in some of his material. He could probably pull those jokes off better if he didn't sound so angry about it. That's my critique as an audience member. But we shouldn't accept this kind of social media bickering as a substitute for political discourse.



    Sent from my LE2127 using Tapatalk
    Sorry you're wrong I'm right!

    All jokes aside, Dave has brought some people out the woodwork protesting him over honestly what is simply jokes. When he did Sticks & Stones, He got some backlash but the Closer just literally had people screaming at him like he murdered their children. This kind of crap he's been getting is political. It's all about what you can and cannot say that really rubbed me the wrong way. People are asking for laws where you can't make fun of the alphabet people which to me seriously is a rabbit hole some countries are already starting to go down. I respect Dave for standing his ground & I hope he keeps to it because we as a country need to stand up to this cancel culture mentality.

    It's seeped into all forms of American issues from politics, companies, and all sorts of things where something you said 20 years ago can literally ruin your life and put you out of a job or career just because you said something either stupid or careless years ago. Thankfully some push back is finally happening more & more but guys like Dave need to stand their ground because nobody needs this kinda shit in their lives where words can ruin you.
    Last edited by BonusKun; 26 Oct 2021 at 05:00 PM.
    6-6-98 - 6-6-18 Happy 20th Anniversary TNL

  5. Quote Originally Posted by Frogacuda View Post

    But rich people only spend a small fraction of their wealth on taxable goods and services. So again this doesn't really make sense and isn't reflective of what that demographic does with their money.

    And, to revisit my point above, it is taxing people for doing the thing that benefits the economy (spending) and allows them to do the bad thing (hoarding money) tax free. It's just a fundamentally bad idea, it doesn't matter if you exempt poor people, it gets the whole problem backwards.
    I don't know about that and, I guess I look at it from the standpoint that anyone can "save" money on their taxes by buying less shit that they probably don't really need. I mean, a lot of people (rich included) won't care - they'll want the PS5, the iPhone, the Tesla, the home on the beach, the expensive dinners at fancy restaurants, etc... How much they pay in taxes is based entirely on consumption of goods and services and Americans are so consumer-driven-have-to-have-that-now that a lot of people wouldn't even care about a VAT or whatever you want to call it. 16% on a ten million dollar house, $250,000 car, 4 million dollar beach house, etc... is probably more than they're currently paying with our shit system so who knows? Add to that all of the little things - groceries, nights out, expensive beer and wine, golf, tennis, etc... Those people aren't going to sit home and not do anything because they're saving tax money.

    Simply raising their taxes also encourages them to put their money elsewhere, live elsewhere, etc... in places that are more tax friendly than the U.S. That certainly doesn't help anyone either.


    Quote Originally Posted by Frogacuda View Post
    The Democratic party represents a range of political positions from social democrat to center right conservative. It's still fundamentally a compromise.
    It's not. If one party passes it without any support from the other party it's not a compromise. The Democratic Party might be compromising within itself but it's not compromising with the other political party which is what we're talking about.

  6. Quote Originally Posted by BonusKun View Post
    Sorry you're wrong I'm right!

    All jokes aside, Dave has brought some people out the woodwork protesting him over honestly what is simply jokes. When he did Sticks & Stones, He got some backlash but the Closer just literally had people screaming at him like he murdered their children. This kind of crap he's been getting is political. It's all about what you can and cannot say that really rubbed me the wrong way. People are asking for laws where you can't make fun of the alphabet people which to me seriously is a rabbit hole some countries are already starting to go down. I respect Dave for standing his ground & I hope he keeps to it because we as a country need to stand up to this cancel culture mentality.

    It's seeped into all forms of American issues from politics, companies, and all sorts of things where something you said 20 years ago can literally ruin your life and put you out of a job or career just because you said something either stupid or careless years ago. Thankfully some push back is finally happening more & more but guys like Dave need to stand their ground because nobody needs this kinda shit in their lives where words can ruin you.
    I agree that it's a problem, but it's a problem obscuring politics, not of politics.

    If you're really a free speech advocate, you support Dave being able to say what he wants and people being able to get mad about it. And there might be a sickness in the discourse of how we talk about things and how we depersonalize those we disagree with (I think that's my real issue on both sides of this one), but I'm not sure how you think this should intersect with public policy?

    Are you suggesting we ban protest? Like what's the real issue here, framed as an matter of policy?

    Sent from my LE2127 using Tapatalk

  7. Quote Originally Posted by haohmaru View Post
    I don't know about that and, I guess I look at it from the standpoint that anyone can "save" money on their taxes by buying less shit that they probably don't really need. I mean, a lot of people (rich included) won't care - they'll want the PS5, the iPhone, the Tesla, the home on the beach, the expensive dinners at fancy restaurants, etc... How much they pay in taxes is based entirely on consumption of goods and services and Americans are so consumer-driven-have-to-have-that-now that a lot of people wouldn't even care about a VAT or whatever you want to call it. 16% on a ten million dollar house, $250,000 car, 4 million dollar beach house, etc... is probably more than they're currently paying with our shit system so who knows? Add to that all of the little things - groceries, nights out, expensive beer and wine, golf, tennis, etc... Those people aren't going to sit home and not do anything because they're saving tax money.
    Ok, but what percent of Elon Musk's income do you think he spends on taxable goods and services? Let's assume he bought like 50 yachts and 10 mansions and a private jet because fuck it. That's like what? 3% of what he made last year?

    And what percent of a normal person's income is spent on taxable goods and services? Pretty much all of it, right?

    You see why this might not be the best strategy for addressing the issue of wealthy people paying far too little?


    Simply raising their taxes also encourages them to put their money elsewhere, live elsewhere, etc... in places that are more tax friendly than the U.S. That certainly doesn't help anyone either.
    Recently, there was a huge dump of documents called the Pandora Papers showing how the super wealthy hid their money in tax shelters all over the world.

    You know who wasn't in it? Americans. Because the US is essentially a tax shelter already. This country is basically already acting like the Cayman Islands. We want to be a third world country, that's how you do it.
    Last edited by Frogacuda; 26 Oct 2021 at 05:51 PM.

  8. Quote Originally Posted by Frogacuda View Post
    Ok, but what percent of Elon Musk's income do you think he spends on taxable goods and services? Let's assume he bought like 50 yachts and 10 mansions and a private jet because fuck it. That's like what? 3% of what he made last year?

    And what percent of a normal person's income is spent on taxable goods and services? Pretty much all of it, right?

    You see why this might not be the best strategy for addressing the issue of wealthy people paying far too little?
    "Musk, known to some as a progressive innovator, reportedly paid less than $70,000 in federal income taxes between 2015 and 2017 and paid nothing in 2018 — despite having a net worth of $152 billion."

    I think those 10 mansions etc... would amount to more than that, don't you?



    Quote Originally Posted by Frogacuda View Post
    Recently, there was a huge dump of documents called the Pandora Papers showing how the super wealthy hid their money in tax shelters all over the world.

    You know who wasn't in it? Americans. Because the US is essentially a tax shelter already. This country is basically already acting like the Cayman Islands. We want to be a third world country, that's how you do it.
    Which actually supports my point - they'll just hide their money elsewhere if tax laws are changed. At least a VAT on consumption would amount to SOMETHING.

  9. Quote Originally Posted by haohmaru View Post
    "Musk, known to some as a progressive innovator, reportedly paid less than $70,000 in federal income taxes between 2015 and 2017 and paid nothing in 2018 — despite having a net worth of $152 billion."

    I think those 10 mansions etc... would amount to more than that, don't you?
    Are you suggesting a luxury tax on top of the kind of tax structure we have now? If so, then okay, I might disagree with the scope of it, but you're not crazy.

    But if you're suggesting this is enough to do away with the kind of progressive income tax structure we have now, I don't know what you're on about.
    Which actually supports my point - they'll just hide their money elsewhere if tax laws are changed. At least a VAT on consumption would amount to SOMETHING.
    There's clearly a balance that every other developed nation has figured out that we haven't.

    Sent from my LE2127 using Tapatalk

  10. Id just like to say that Rich people to spend money and pay luxury taxes for it. Jerry Jones bought a $250 million yacht several years ago, along with a private jet and a helicopter.

    https://www.sportscasting.com/jerry-...atercraft/?amp
    Last edited by gamevet; 26 Oct 2021 at 07:59 PM.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Games.com logo