Can anybody explain 'fair share'?

[ataraxia]

So you consider the hundreds of millions of people who have be murdered and tortured and worked to death by the state to be a "side effect"?

Not sure what you’re talking about. What modern contemporary democracy do you have in mind?

 

[ataraxia]

I suppose the same thing that keeps me from robbing you.

You don’t know me.

Are you saying that there are not people who knew they were more powerful than you and had far more resources, they would not readily rob you?

 

[ataraxia]

I'm not going to pay you protection money.

If I am already stronger than you and have more resources, it’s not your choice. I’ll take it from you. Who’s gonna stop me? Now that’s what I call freedom.

 

[ataraxia]

No. That's a common misconception. Consider the fact that the US could easily take over Canada, but it doesn't.

Not that easily. It’s not worth the trouble.

But why isn’t there that kind of deterrence between rival mob bosses or street gangs?

 

[aociswundumho]

A system of rival armed gangs is not a legal system.

That's true, but why do you assume no legal system?

You do agree that there is a demand for dispute resolution, correct?

 

[ataraxia]

That's true, but why do you assume no legal system?

You do agree that there is a demand for dispute resolution, correct?

Because who are you going to steal from to create that system that is so corrupt anyway? And how are they going to enforce the dispute resolution?

 

[aociswundumho]

Not sure what you’re talking about. What modern contemporary democracy do you have in mind?

lol, I'm talking about the track record of government. The Weimar Republic was once a "modern contemporary democracy", and look how that turned out.

 

[ataraxia]

lol, I'm talking about the track record of government. The Weimar Republic was once a "modern contemporary democracy", and look how that turned out.

Yeah- it stopped being one.

That’s like saying someone’s car broke down once, and that’s why everyone must walk to work.

 

[aociswundumho]

Yeah- it stopped being one.

That’s like saying someone’s car broke down once, and that’s why everyone must walk to work.

No, because when a car breaks down, millions of people aren't starved to death, worked to death, or summarily executed.

 

[Gator]

Of course we all know the rich and corporations don't pay their ' fair share'.
But what is the exact percentage they should be paying and why is that 'fair'
?
Please ,no anecdotes about people or corp's that didn't pay this or that. What #should# they be paying and why?

One definition is that we pay the same percentage of taxes as our percentage of income. By that measure the wealthy is the only group paying their fair share of federal income taxes. The top 50% of wage earners pay 97% of individual federal income taxes.

 

[Bullseye]

Of course we all know the rich and corporations don't pay their ' fair share'.
But what is the exact percentage they should be paying and why is that 'fair'
?
Please ,no anecdotes about people or corp's that didn't pay this or that. What #should# they be paying and why?

The rich and corporations pay far more than their "fair share".

 

[multivita-man]

Of course we all know the rich and corporations don't pay their ' fair share'.
But what is the exact percentage they should be paying and why is that 'fair'
?
Please ,no anecdotes about people or corp's that didn't pay this or that. What #should# they be paying and why?

More than they are now, how about that?

 

[Bullseye]

?? If I'm paying 28% of my income to income taxes, then the rich should be paying no less than 28% of their income in federal taxes as well. Likewise, those who are gifted unearned money through their inheritance should be paying 28% tax on that windfall.
Those would both be obvious examples of "fair share".

If you're paying 28% on your income, find a new tax person.

 

[Peter]

If you're paying 28% on your income, find a new tax person.

That's the whole problem.
Rich people can afform to hire armies of tax advisors to minimise their tax burden.
Poor people don't have that luxury.
The rich don't need tax cuts but Republicans keep giving it to them anyway.

 

[HK.227]

That's the whole problem.
Rich people can afform to hire armies of tax advisors to minimise their tax burden.
Poor people don't have that luxury.
The rich don't need tax cuts but Republicans keep giving it to them anyway.

The rich have been making laws complicated since the start of recorded history, so that there could be one set of rules for them and another for everyone else.

The laws of Hammurabi weren't seen as just because they abolished the death penalty and freed the slaves (they didn't). They were considered just because ordinary people were now allowed to read what the laws said and argue them in court. Other revolutionary lawmakers said that no laws could be passed that were more complicated than that the average person could understand them. Yet others didn't even write down their laws, because if you had so many laws you needed to write them down, you had too many.

Sadly we have regressed to the present state of affairs, where our only chance at not being screwed over is if we pay protection money to a specific group of people, because they are the only ones who understand the rules, spending all their productive time studying their arcane formulas. Much like the priests of old studied the stars and entrails of animals while the peasants paid them lavishly and felt privileged to do so (adding the odd human sacrifice now and then when anyone made too much of a fuss and "offended the gods").

It's been said that law is the basis of all civilization. I sometimes wonder if this was what they really meant.

 

[vegas giants]

Having a flat tax means having a flat tax. Nothing more, nothing less.

It's a horribly regressive system that almost no democracy on earth will support

 

[HonestJoe]

Of course we all know the rich and corporations don't pay their ' fair share'.
But what is the exact percentage they should be paying and why is that 'fair'
?
Please ,no anecdotes about people or corp's that didn't pay this or that. What #should# they be paying and why?

How about they pay the actual percentages set out in the relevant laws and regulations, and not the massively reduced amounts they commonly achieve by hiring accountants whose sole role is to operate in the massive grey area between avoidance and evasion?

 

[Groogrux]

Do you have a problem with our government helping out we the people or would you rather see more given to farmers, oil companies and the military?

The government doesn’t help people, it keeps them in poverty.

 

[vegas giants]

The government doesn’t help people, it keeps them in poverty.

Uh.......no

 

[Groogrux]

Uh.......no

Giving people just what they need to barely survive is not helping. Helping would be providing education, job training and affordable child care. Our government does none of that.

 

[vegas giants]

Giving people just what they need to barely survive is not helping. Helping would be providing education, job training and affordable child care. Our government does none of that.

So people on disability just need job training? Lol


By the way those are government programs

 

[KLATTU]

How about they pay the actual percentages set out in the relevant laws and regulations, and not the massively reduced amounts they commonly achieve by hiring accountants whose sole role is to operate in the massive grey area between avoidance and evasion?

you just contradicted yourself. They hire accountants to pay the percentages set out in the tax code and no more..
People generally don't pay more. That includes lower and middle class.
We would probably agree that the tax code is too complicated.
It really needs streamlining.
Doubling the standard deduction was a step in that direction.

 

[KLATTU]

That's the whole problem.
Rich people can afform to hire armies of tax advisors to minimise their tax burden.
Poor people don't have that luxury.
The rich don't need tax cuts but Republicans keep giving it to them anyway.

They don't need lawyers as Bush and Trump reduced their tax liability without having to hire lawyers!

 

[KLATTU]

More than they are now, how about that?

More. That's the go to Dem position. So every election they can play the class warrior card and whine that the rich aren't paying their fair shar.

 

[vegas giants]

More. That's the go to Dem position. So every election they can play the class warrior card and whine that the rich aren't paying their fair shar.

As they should