‘Threats’ prompt Target stores in US to withdraw some Pride Collection products

[roguenuke]

When you must immediately add “if” then there obviously is no entitlement for everyone to receive (some amount of) public ‘seed money’ at birth.

It is though. Based on apparent need rather than simply being born. The expectation is that it will be provided by someone/some group.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Society is why rich are "rich". And having resources that others don't have, especially in an advanced society, does give advantages to children.

The reality is that Peter didn't normally do anything special either, not compared honestly to Paul, in most cases, just had advantages that Paul didn't necessarily have.

OK, but did Peter (or his parents) do anything wrong to Paul or anyone else?

Very few feel only the rich should be taxed.

When it comes to federal income taxation, I feel (think?) that the poor should be effectively exempt.

But taxes based on ability to pay is not new nor something that most feel is unfair (fairness is subjective however).

Fairness, in terms of annual federal income taxation (FIT), would be a system with (only) a generous, yet truly standard, deduction amount (of say $40K) and a single (flat) tax rate (of say 25%) applied to any (and all) ‘excess’ income above that amount. That (my two number FIT) system also excludes having any other credits, exclusions, adjustments, deductions or special accounting methods based on how or upon who that income was later spent.

 

[roguenuke]

OK, but did Peter (or his parents) do anything wrong to Paul or anyone else?



When it comes to federal income taxation, I feel (think?) that the poor should be effectively exempt.



Fairness, in terms of annual federal income taxation (FIT), would be a system with (only) a generous, yet truly standard, deduction amount (of say $40K) and a single (flat) tax rate (of say 25%) applied to any (and all) ‘excess’ income above that amount. That (my two number FIT) system also excludes having any other credits, exclusions, adjustments, deductions or special accounting methods based on how or upon who that income was later spent.

It doesn't matter if Peter or parents did anything wrong to Paul. It isn't about restitution. It's about Peter/family giving back to society where their wealth causes an inherent imbalance.

Flat tax would not be fair unless everyone made approximately the same amount of money, within a certain range. Again, Wealth always provides some privilege.

 

[ttwtt78640]

It is though. Based on apparent need rather than simply being born. The expectation is that it will be provided by someone/some group.

OK, but your conditional (individual? entitlement idea differs from my universal (individual) entitlement idea and is closer to: from each according to their ability (to pay more taxes), to each according to their need (for more public assistance).

 

[roguenuke]

OK, but your conditional (individual? entitlement idea differs from my universal (individual) entitlement idea and is closer to: from each according to their ability (to pay more taxes), to each according to their need (for more public assistance).

Their ability in many cases is not actually what leads to their being richer though. In many cases it is due to other circumstances, like birth (family they were born into) or luck/chance, things they have little control over. Even things like our motivation levels are determined by outside things rather than ourselves, more by genetics and upbringing, things that can't be changed easily than things we do ourselves.

 

[ttwtt78640]

It doesn't matter if Peter or parents did anything wrong to Paul. It isn't about restitution. It's about Peter/family giving back to society where their wealth causes an inherent imbalance.

Flat tax would not be fair unless everyone made approximately the same amount of money, within a certain range. Again, Wealth always provides some privilege.

Wealth (or the ability to accumulate it) also provides incentive for folks to benefit society rather than simply enjoy society’s benefits without need to contribute to that society.

BTW, my two number FIT system is effectively quite progressive (especially for those with ‘middle class’ or lower incomes), despite having a single (flat) tax rate because it taxes only ‘excess’ income. Examples (based on annual income amounts) follow:

$40K (or less) would pay $0 FIT for an effective rate of 0%

$50K would pay $2.5K FIT for an effective rate of 5%

$75K would pay $8.75K FIT for an effective rate of 11.6%

$100K would pay $15K FIT for an effective rate of 15%

$200K would pay $40K FIT for an effective rate of 20%

$400K would pay $90K FIT for an effective rate of 22.5%

$800K would pay $190K FIT for an effective rate of 23.75%

 

[roguenuke]

Wealth (or the ability to accumulate it) also provides incentive for folks to benefit society rather than simply enjoy society’s benefits without need to contribute to that society.

BTW, my two number FIT system is effectively quite progressive (especially for those with ‘middle class’ or lower incomes), despite having a single (flat) tax rate because it taxes only ‘excess’ income. Examples (based on annual income amounts) follow:

$40K (or less) would pay $0 FIT for an effective rate of 0%

$50K would pay $2.5K FIT for an effective rate of 5%

$75K would pay $8.75K FIT for an effective rate of 11.6%

$100K would pay $15K FIT for an effective rate of 15%

$200K would pay $40K FIT for an effective rate of 20%

$400K would pay $90K FIT for an effective rate of 22.5%

$800K would pay $190K FIT for an effective rate of 23.75%

You are describing a progressive tax rate just of a slightly different type, but that would not provide nearly enough revenue.

 

[ttwtt78640]

You are describing a progressive tax rate just of a slightly different type, but that would not provide nearly enough revenue.

Nope, I’ve described a FIT system with a flat tax rate of 25%, but it’s applied only to ‘excess’ annual income. You have no idea how much revenue that would generate or you would have stated its amount.

 

[zincwarrior]

Well this thread changed. Target to tax rates - it has everything!

 

[roguenuke]

Nope, I’ve described a FIT system with a flat tax rate of 25%, but it’s applied only to ‘excess’ annual income. You have no idea how much revenue that would generate or you would have stated its amount.

We can figure out quite easily how much it would generate or mostly generate by looking at how much people make in the country.

What you described however is fairly close to what we have, just overly simplified and it would generate less revenue.

 

[ttwtt78640]

We can figure out quite easily how much it would generate or mostly generate by looking at how much people make in the country.

Really? Then do so. The current FIT system taxes adjusted gross income, while my ‘two number’ replacement taxes (all ‘excess’) gross income. Those can be vastly different amounts of income.

What you described however is fairly close to what we have, just overly simplified and it would generate less revenue.

It’s not “close to what we have” since it does away with adjusted (based on how and/or upon who one’s income was later spent) gross income. Some would pay less FIT, while others would pay more FIT.

 

[Michael Cole]

Free trade is a conservative value

Donald Trump may be able to redefine the Republican Party - indeed, he seems well on his way to doing so - but he can’t redefine words. His Tuesday speech

tylerpaper.com

The article discusses global markets, but the principle is the same.

I'm a free-trade pro-business kinda guy, myself.

Have yesterday's "conservatives" become something else? Or were yesterday's "conservatives" never conservative at all?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Free trade is a conservative value

Donald Trump may be able to redefine the Republican Party - indeed, he seems well on his way to doing so - but he can’t redefine words. His Tuesday speech

tylerpaper.com

The article discusses global markets, but the principle is the same.

I'm a free-trade pro-business kinda guy, myself.

Have yesterday's "conservatives" become something else? Or were yesterday's "conservatives" never conservative at all?

I suppose what it boils down to is whether government regulated trade is still free trade. Of course, even (so called) free trade agreements contain regulations/conditions.

 

[Michael Cole]

I suppose what it boils down to is whether government regulated trade is still free trade. Of course, even (so called) free trade agreements contain regulations/conditions.

That would depend on the definition. "Free" doesn't mean "Laizes-faire."

Products and jobs should be safe. Discrimination based on race, etc. is wrong. The environment needs protection. Guard rails are needed because of the human condition.

This is something else. This is so-called "conservatives" dictating what products a business is allowed to sell. There's nothing conservative about it.

What happened to "Let the market decide?"

 

[ttwtt78640]

That would depend on the definition. "Free" doesn't mean "Laizes-faire."

Products and jobs should be safe. Discrimination based on race, etc. is wrong. The environment needs protection. Guard rails are needed because of the human condition.

This is something else. This is so-called "conservatives" dictating what products a business is allowed to sell. There's nothing conservative about it.

What happened to "Let the market decide?"

A consumer boycott of Target isn’t a government action.

 

[Michael Cole]

A consumer boycott of Target isn’t a government action.

I didn't say it was. I'm talking about those engaged in the boycott.

They want to control what a business sells. That is anti-business and not at all conservative.

Is cancel-culture a purview of the left as I was told years ago? If so, what does that make these boycotts?

 

[j brown's body]

That would depend on the definition. "Free" doesn't mean "Laizes-faire."

Products and jobs should be safe. Discrimination based on race, etc. is wrong. The environment needs protection. Guard rails are needed because of the human condition.

This is something else. This is so-called "conservatives" dictating what products a business is allowed to sell. There's nothing conservative about it.

What happened to "Let the market decide?"

Yeah, if you don't like it, you can boycott it yourself. But these kinds of boycotts are really foolish. Why deprive other people of the goods they want just because you object to them? It hurts businesses, their employees, their customers and their stock holders. The business may pull back for awhile until the rabble find some other group to target. But its become like a game of whack-a-mole for boycotters.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I didn't say it was. I'm talking about those engaged in the boycott.

They want to control what a business sells. That is anti-business and not at all conservative.

Is cancel-culture a purview of the left as I was told years ago? If so, what does that make these boycotts?

Consumer choice (to shop elsewhere) isn’t “anti-business” and many who are bitching about the Target boycott were all for boycotting Chick-fil-A.

 

[Michael Cole]

Consumer choice (to shop elsewhere) isn’t “anti-business”

Except this isn't about people's individual choices. It's a mob of anti-woke wokesters who want to control what others can buy. That is 100% anti-business.

DeSantis is the worst offender, and that is indeed government.

and many who are bitching about the Target boycott were all for boycotting Chick-fil-A.

Yes, and they were leftists. Or so I've been told.

These people boycotting Target are not conservative. That's my one and only point here.

Do what you want. Good luck at destroying a fine American business. Revel in its failure (as I read here everyday.) Just don't pretend that you are in any way a conservative thinking person.

("you" in the general sense)

 

[ttwtt78640]

Except this isn't about people's individual choices. It's a mob of anti-woke wokesters who want to control what others can buy. That is 100% anti-business.

DeSantis is the worst offender, and that is indeed government.

Whether the boycott is based on objection is to (specific?) goods/services offered or the political lean of management doesn’t make any difference - it’s still consumer choice.

Yes, and they were leftists. Or so I've been told.

These people boycotting Target are not conservative. That's my one and only point here.

That’s your opinion, but what difference does their political lean make? You seem to be asserting that it’s somehow wrong for conservative consumers to choose to boycott, yet just peachy for liberal consumers to choose to boycott.

Do what you want. Good luck at destroying a fine American business. Revel in its failure (as I read here everyday.) Just don't pretend that you are in any way a conservative thinking person.

("you" in the general sense)

Neither Target nor Chick-fil-A are likely to be “destroyed” - they simply have a segment of the consumer base upset with them. Target’s management has a (business) decision to make: is continuing to sell some ‘pride items’ going to generate (significantly) less total sales/profit than not selling them? If so, they will likely decide to stop doing so.

 

[Michael Cole]

Whether the boycott is based on objection is to (specific?) goods/services offered or the political lean of management doesn’t make any difference - it’s still consumer choice.

???

That’s your opinion, but what difference does their political lean make?

It's not only my opinion. Everyone who understands the conservative position on business and trade has this opinion as well. It's been established for quite some time. Goes back to the Founders, actually.

Neither Target nor Chick-fil-A are likely to be “destroyed” - they simply have a segment of the consumer base upset with them. Target’s management has a (business) decision to make: is continuing to sell some ‘pride items’ going to generate (significantly) less total sales/profit than not selling them”? If so then they will likely decide to stop doing so.

Yes, and such actions have been labeled as leftwing. Are you now telling me cancel-culture is conservative?

 

[ttwtt78640]

???

It's not only my opinion. Everyone who understands the conservative position on business and trade has this opinion as well. It's been established for quite some time. Goes back to the Founders, actually.


Yes, and such actions have been labeled as leftwing. Are you now telling me cancel-culture is conservative?

That (bolded above) is nonsense - see the reaction to Bud Light deciding to celebrate the one year anniversary of a very vocal trans loon trying to act like a stereotypical teen or preteen.

 

[j brown's body]

Whether the boycott is based on objection is to (specific?) goods/services offered or the political lean of management doesn’t make any difference - it’s still consumer choice.



That’s your opinion, but what difference does their political lean make? You seem to be asserting that it’s somehow wrong for conservative consumers to choose to boycott, yet just peachy for liberal consumers to choose to boycott.



Neither Target nor Chick-fil-A are likely to be “destroyed” - they simply have a segment of the consumer base upset with them. Target’s management has a (business) decision to make: is continuing to sell some ‘pride items’ going to generate (significantly) less total sales/profit than not selling them? If so, they will likely decide to stop doing so.

They'll be more quiet about it for a while. at least until the rabid right finds another demon to skewer, which surely won't take long.

 

[j brown's body]

Consumer choice (to shop elsewhere) isn’t “anti-business” and many who are bitching about the Target boycott were all for boycotting Chick-fil-A.

Chic-fil-A uses profits to pass laws oppressing people. Target doesn't.

Chick-fil-A’s profits are being used to push anti-trans state laws & kill the Equality Act

Christian billionaires like Chick-fil-A's Dan Cathy and Betsy DeVos are funding one of "the most sophisticated dark money operations" to roll back LGBTQ rights...

www.lgbtqnation.com

 

[Michael Cole]

That (bolded above) is nonsense - see the reaction to Bud Light deciding to celebrate the one year anniversary of a very vocal trans loon trying to act like a stereotypical teen or preteen.

Now you've come full circle.

Free trade is a conservative value

Donald Trump may be able to redefine the Republican Party - indeed, he seems well on his way to doing so - but he can’t redefine words. His Tuesday speech

tylerpaper.com

And, no, I'm not going round and round again.