Question about progressive view on taxation

I know 3 principles of progressive economic policy.
1. If's it working tax it.
2. If it still works, regulate it.
3. When it quits working, subsidize it.

tidegrandpa said:

I know 3 principles of progressive economic policy.
1. If's it working tax it.
2. If it still works, regulate it.
3. When it quits working, subsidize it.

Click to expand...

TidePapa,
I agree with you +

4. Progressively destroy our economy by making businesses want to relocate to another country where tax policies are more favorable. When NY advertises that businesses move to NY where that will have tax incentives, I just wonder what will happen after that 10 year period of Tax advantages? Will it then be tax Hell for those businesses?
5. Progressive Think Tanks work 24/7/365 on how they can GOUGE the American people, who have a job or business, out of their last ounce of crimson blood.
6. Progressives create disincentives for people who would love to have a legitimate job instead of being on the dole.

I think some commentator mentioned that someone's daughter was paying $50,000 each month on her $10 million dollar pad. Who was that?

So, take from Hillary, Billy, et al and give to the poor who are tooooooooooooooo disabled to work. It's SAD that the Progressive Elite live a lifestyle that is above that of the masses they represent. Socialism destroys people's desire to be the best they can be. Progressives teach them to settle for mediocrity.

How long does she have to rehearse her speech before setting foot in the South. That Southern drawl of her's is at least as fake as a $3 dollar bill. Being POWER Hungry will make you do a lot of evil things. So, "be for Real Hil".

Bodhisattva said:

With Hillary's release of her economic plan and its (shocking) call for higher taxes on the "wealthy," I have a basic question ....

The meme is that the "wealthy" pay next to nothing, while the "middle class" pay the lion's share. Aside from the fact that's false, what is the thought process here? For the sake of argument, I'll buy into the left wing populist lie. Why is it "better" to raise taxes on the wealthy so they pay the same as the middle class? Isn't it better to lower taxes on the middle class to the level of the wealthy? I mean, if you really care about the little guy, shouldn't you make his life better.

There are a lot of other piles of bovine scat in progressive economic philosophy, but I'll wait here for an answer to the first question. TIA.

Click to expand...

wish I could understand it myself. Feels like punishment of achievers more than anything

Here is the official progressive line:

For years, the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations have been getting a free ride in the formof excessive tax cuts, tax breaks and tax loopholes. It’s time for them to pay their fair share to keep thecountry strong.

First, we must end tax cuts for the richest Americans and treat all sources of income, includingsources such as capital gains and stock dividends, more equitably. Those who make more generallyuse more of the nation’s common equity and should pay more.

Second, we must maintain a significant estate tax and reinstate the 2009 policy with a top tax levelof 45 percent and an exemption of $3.5 million per person, a policy position with significant bipartisansupport.

Third, we must close the “carried interest” and overseas and offshore tax loopholes that allowsome of the wealthiest Americans and multinational corporations to escape paying their fair shareof taxes. We need to end subsidies for big oil and gas companies. And we need to hold the financialsector accountable for its risky behavior, implying the need for a small “financial speculation tax.”

Fourth, we must eliminate government waste, increase efficiency and rationalize our expenditureson the basis of need and impact.The size of our military budget should correlate with the threats to oursafety, and health care costs can be reduced by focusing on quality care at reasonable prices.

Click to expand...

No one wants to pay more taxes, but we all should do our fair share. Conservatives want topreserve tax cuts and low rates for the rich, at any cost—ignoring the considerable body of solidevidence that such policies contribute to inequality and mounting budget deficits. Government actionis vital to promoting individual opportunity and securing national priorities, but it doesn’t come for free.Tax breaks for wealthy Americans will not solve our national problems and spending cuts alone will notrein in the deficits.

Tax reform and tax increases must be on the table if we are going to deal with budget deficits andtake our responsibilities as a nation seriously.

Click to expand...

I've seen no indication that progressives want to control the spending of the welfare/entitlement state.

Bodhisattva said:

With Hillary's release of her economic plan and its (shocking) call for higher taxes on the "wealthy," I have a basic question ....

The meme is that the "wealthy" pay next to nothing, while the "middle class" pay the lion's share. Aside from the fact that's false, what is the thought process here? For the sake of argument, I'll buy into the left wing populist lie. Why is it "better" to raise taxes on the wealthy so they pay the same as the middle class? Isn't it better to lower taxes on the middle class to the level of the wealthy? I mean, if you really care about the little guy, shouldn't you make his life better.

There are a lot of other piles of bovine scat in progressive economic philosophy, but I'll wait here for an answer to the first question. TIA.

Click to expand...

If you're a left-wing populist, you've got to be able to fund a growing and ever-more-intrusive government. So you've got to tax somebody, and the rich have plenty to spare, right?