I'm poor myself and I could not care less if someone else is rich.

[gdgyva]

Go back to the 1950s. When the rich paid 90% tax rate.
The USA was a white man's haven.

why are you deflecting from the question?

what is so hard to answer?

why run from the truth?

 

[Moderate Right]

I don't care really.
I just wonder why it concerns you so much that children, college students, and senior citizens are not paying more in taxes.

I stated that everyone over the poverty line should pay some amount of taxes, even if only a pittance. What's wrong with that? Most of the people you describe wouldn't be paying taxes under my thoughts. But, let me ask you this, why do children, college students, and senior citizens need a living wage?

 

[RetiredUSN]

Good for you. But let's not pretend the wealthy don't have an effect on your life.

You're right.


I have made a lot of money off of the wealthy.

 

[ttwtt78640]

You're right.


I have made a lot of money off of the wealthy.

Yep, the poor are not nearly as likely to become my customers.

 

[RetiredUSN]

Yep, the poor are not nearly as likely to become my customers.

I never made any money off of a poor person, but I have dedicated a lot of my time and materials doing stuff for poor people in my area.

I can't count how many times the wife pointed at my QuickBooks numbers on the computer monitor and started screaming at me.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I never made any money off of a poor person, but I have dedicated a lot of my time and materials doing stuff for poor people in my area.

I can't count how many times the wife pointed at my QuickBooks numbers on the computer monitor and started screaming at me.

I charge my lower income customers a lower hourly labor rate, but I can't afford to work for free.

 

[dairyair]

why are you deflecting from the question?

what is so hard to answer?

why run from the truth?

Have you not been paying attention.
They own the politicians. They set policy with the bribes(donations) they make.

 

[dairyair]

I stated that everyone over the poverty line should pay some amount of taxes, even if only a pittance. What's wrong with that? Most of the people you describe wouldn't be paying taxes under my thoughts. But, let me ask you this, why do children, college students, and senior citizens need a living wage?

Yet you use 50%. That is a BS number. Because that 50% included those not even eligible to pay taxes.
They don't need a living wage. Well Seniors perhaps. Afterall they are paying their own way.

 

[Moderate Right]

Yet you use 50%. That is a BS number. Because that 50% included those not even eligible to pay taxes.
They don't need a living wage. Well Seniors perhaps. Afterall they are paying their own way.

I thought lefties like to deal in facts. The fact is, about 50% of Americans pay no federal income tax. If seniors are getting social security they don't need a living wage on top of that. If they are earning a living wage then they don't need social security at all, if they are working full time and earning a living wage.

 

[gdgyva]

Have you not been paying attention.
They own the politicians. They set policy with the bribes(donations) they make.

again...bribes for WHAT....what law affects you in your daily life?

tell me how your life differs....can you?

 

[Mr Person]

Sorry, I still don't agree.

So if the wealthy vote themselves a tax cut and decide that services you or any of your family uses have to be cut to support that, it affects you.

Now you can claim you don't care and it don't affect you, but it does. You can put your head in the sand all you want but it still affects you.

+

This doesn't mesh with the title. If you didn't care about the rich, you wouldn't support tax policy like a flat tax, which heavily favors the wealthy.

So, your tax policy would mesh with your political lean, but it clearly shows that you favor the rich paying less in tax. Kinda hard to claim you "don't care" and be taken seriously.

To me, it looks like just another variant of the "I used to be a Democrat, but I left the Democrats because [insert list of hyperpartisan lies told uniformly by Trumpists]." The lies' predicate is supposed to bootstrap them into credibility, but it's obvious the person is only claiming to have been a Democrat because they want the appearance of credibility without earning it.

It's always extremely suspicious when someone trots out personal anecdotes that look tailor-made for the occasion.



"I'm poor and disabled, and I support GOP policies that shaft me in favor of the upper crust because I don't think they shaft me!"

Yeah ok. Sure. You know what would be believable?

"I'm poor but a Republican whispered 'guns, gays, and abortion' into my ears, so I voted for him even though he wants to slash the safety net programs I need to survive and give tax cuts to the richest."

 

[dairyair]

I thought lefties like to deal in facts. The fact is, about 50% of Americans pay no federal income tax. If seniors are getting social security they don't need a living wage on top of that. If they are earning a living wage then they don't need social security at all, if they are working full time and earning a living wage.

Yes, and I've pointed out several times now.
Many in your 50% are under 18 and still in school living with mom and dad.
Another in your group are college students. Also, not full time wage earners.
And the other in your group are senior citizens. Who mostly only have SS payments as income.

All 3 of those groups aren't wage earners. So your 50% is very misleading stat.

 

[Moderate Right]

Yes, and I've pointed out several times now.
Many in your 50% are under 18 and still in school living with mom and dad.
Another in your group are college students. Also, not full time wage earners.
And the other in your group are senior citizens. Who mostly only have SS payments as income.

All 3 of those groups aren't wage earners. So your 50% is very misleading stat.

LOL. I am always humbled by the cherry picked facts the left pull out of their asses. They are masters at it. I try to tell them their facts are cherry picked but they always say there is no such thing as cherry picked facts, facts are facts. Well, I presented facts.

 

[dairyair]

LOL. I am always humbled by the cherry picked facts the left pull out of their asses. They are masters at it. I try to tell them their facts are cherry picked but they always say there is no such thing as cherry picked facts, facts are facts. Well, I presented facts.

What is cherry picked?
Do you not understand facts?

 

[Moderate Right]

What is cherry picked?
Do you not understand facts?

Seriously? YOU just denied facts. 50% of Americans pay no federal income tax. Do you deny that fact?

 

[danielpalos]

First off, I don't envy the rich. Yes, someday I'd aspire to get a career that would get me there, but I focus on the now. I don't blame any of the rich for my problems, and I don't think they should have to give up any of their income to support me. I still support either a flat tax, a fair tax, but the best option I think would be a basic consumption tax (not a fair tax). I think any of those would be the best options. I do have a disability, and I get some aid. But I'm striving to work my way out of it, unlike some. I think privatization of my aid would still be better. I plan to go to a different state to go to school someday, but for privacy reasons (I already told you enough) I won't share what those are. I will tell you it's a liberal dominated field though.

Raise the minimum wage until the Poor pay their fair capital share of taxes.

 

[dairyair]

Seriously? YOU just denied facts. 50% of Americans pay no federal income tax. Do you deny that fact?

Where did I deny it?
Post the quotes.

 

[OscarLevant]

Equality of burden is not equality before the law.

That's beside the point being made.

 

[OscarLevant]

A flat tax implies equal percentage rate of tax. That is an equal burden. Any tax levied on a poor person is a burden, but poor are not exempt from civic responsibility.

The poor pay more taxes, indirectly and directly, expressed as a percentage of net worth, than the rich. How so?

If a rich man's holdings on 100 million in assets accrues to a value of 120 million, his net worth and increased $20 million but was taxed on 15% of income, not wealth, which could be a very low figure, given loopholes which, by comparison, that 15% represents a small fraction of that compared to his wealth accrual. The system is vastly in his favor.

Poor people pay direct taxes in other ways, they pay a payroll tax, they pay sales taxes, etc.

But, a poor man who has $500 in the bank, whose income does not keep up with inflation, pays an indirect tax due a decrease in purchasing power.

Where does the value lost by the poor via inflation go to? It goes to inflation's beneficiaries, the government ( because they are the creators of inflation via fiat currency created faster than GDP can keep up ) and the rich who can hedge against inflation and profit from it. Inflation is a transfer of wealth from the poor to the government and to the rich. When you print money, value is not created out of thin air. What it does is shift resources from one sector and passes it to another. I understand the complexity of money creation, and all that, just keeping it simple.

Poor are more likely to be given welfare in other matters.

The rich receive welfare via inflation benefits, tax breaks on corporations, low capital gains tax, and any tax they do not pay and should, that burden shifts to poor and anyone who are unable to shield themselves for lack of investments. Also, Churches and non profits do not pay taxes, and I believe they should ( maybe at a discounted rate, but they should pay taxes, in my view, because they benefit from government services, too, just like everyone else ).

I know you are going to argue that inflation is technically not a 'tax', but money is money, value is value when it goes out of your pocket and into another's or a poor man loses purchasing power because of inflation while the rich get ahead of it, it feels the same. It's not a tax in the de jure sense, but it is a tax in the de facto sense.

There should be a motivation to exceed not become complacent.

There should be motivation to prevent the rich from exploiting the poor.

'exceed'? You mean 'excel'. That motivation already exists, it's call misery of being poor.

FYI, 15% to a poor man is far more painful than 15% to a rich man. No way in hell is that an equal burden.

What I find is that the vast majority of people on the right are unable to grasp the principle given in this post.

Some libertarian economists, do, however.

 

[danielpalos]

Raise the minimum wage so the Poor can pay their share of taxes!

 

[noonereal]

First off, I don't envy the rich. Yes, someday I'd aspire to get a career that would get me there, but I focus on the now. I don't blame any of the rich for my problems, and I don't think they should have to give up any of their income to support me. I still support either a flat tax, a fair tax, but the best option I think would be a basic consumption tax (not a fair tax). I think any of those would be the best options. I do have a disability, and I get some aid. But I'm striving to work my way out of it, unlike some. I think privatization of my aid would still be better. I plan to go to a different state to go to school someday, but for privacy reasons (I already told you enough) I won't share what those are. I will tell you it's a liberal dominated field though.

You have much to learn.

 

[Aurora]

The poor pay more taxes, indirectly and directly, expressed as a percentage of net worth, than the rich. How so?

If a rich man's holdings on 100 million in assets accrues to a value of 120 million, his net worth and increased $20 million but was taxed on 15% of income, not wealth, which could be a very low figure, given loopholes which, by comparison, that 15% represents a small fraction of that compared to his wealth accrual. The system is vastly in his favor.

Poor people pay direct taxes in other ways, they pay a payroll tax, they pay sales taxes, etc.

But, a poor man who has $500 in the bank, whose income does not keep up with inflation, pays an indirect tax due a decrease in purchasing power.

Where does the value lost by the poor via inflation go to? It goes to inflation's beneficiaries, the government ( because they are the creators of inflation via fiat currency created faster than GDP can keep up ) and the rich who can hedge against inflation and profit from it. Inflation is a transfer of wealth from the poor to the government and to the rich. When you print money, value is not created out of thin air. What it does is shift resources from one sector and passes it to another. I understand the complexity of money creation, and all that, just keeping it simple.

The rich receive welfare via inflation benefits, tax breaks on corporations, low capital gains tax, and any tax they do not pay and should, that burden shifts to poor and anyone who are unable to shield themselves for lack of investments. Also, Churches and non profits do not pay taxes, and I believe they should ( maybe at a discounted rate, but they should pay taxes, in my view, because they benefit from government services, too, just like everyone else ).

I know you are going to argue that inflation is technically not a 'tax', but money is money, value is value when it goes out of your pocket and into another's or a poor man loses purchasing power because of inflation while the rich get ahead of it, it feels the same. It's not a tax in the de jure sense, but it is a tax in the de facto sense.



There should be motivation to prevent the rich from exploiting the poor.

'exceed'? You mean 'excel'. That motivation already exists, it's call misery of being poor.

FYI, 15% to a poor man is far more painful than 15% to a rich man. No way in hell is that an equal burden.

What I find is that the vast majority of people on the right are unable to grasp the principle given in this post.

Some libertarian economists, do, however.

Increase economic activity so the poor have a shot at better paying jobs. Flood the country with unskilled and low skilled so our poor workers have less of a shot at the available jobs. That's what's happening. More workers seeking available jobs lowers the value of each worker. Poor people don't establish large manufacturing companies which need lots of people.
They do suck resources out of the community. The democrat party is on record for mass third world entry into the USA.


Immigration World Poverty and Gumballs 2010 - Immigration Doesn't Work - YouTube

 

[danielpalos]

Increase economic activity so the poor have a shot at better paying jobs. Flood the country with unskilled and low skilled so our poor workers have less of a shot at the available jobs. That's what's happening. More workers seeking available jobs lowers the value of each worker. Poor people don't establish large manufacturing companies which need lots of people.
They do suck resources out of the community. The democrat party is on record for mass third world entry into the USA.


Immigration World Poverty and Gumballs 2010 - Immigration Doesn't Work - YouTube

Raise the minimum wage so Labor can afford to work in our first world economy.

 

[Aurora]

Raise the minimum wage so Labor can afford to work in our first world economy.

Allow wages to rise naturally out of need. Make eating at a restaurant unaffordable and all will be out of work at that restaurant.

 

[danielpalos]

Allow wages to rise naturally out of need. Make eating at a restaurant unaffordable and all will be out of work at that restaurant.

I have no idea how you reached your conclusion.

Raising the minimum wage now means more stimulus to the economy now; Labor as the least wealthy in our Republic tend to spend most of their income on more immediate needs. Business can always have a good excuse for a tax break.