News Article: GOP tax reform benefits top 1% and businesses

crimsonaudio · Sep 30, 2017

I didn't say all taxation was bad, my point is that unless / until we reduce the wasteful spending, I'll be 100% against any increase in taxation and will favor any reduction.

People fretting over other people's money instead of demanding a change in the wasteful nature of the federal government is as bad as the waste itself, imo.

bamachile · Sep 30, 2017

crimsonaudio said:
I didn't say all taxation was bad, my point is that unless / until we reduce the wasteful spending, I'll be 100% against any increase in taxation and will favor any reduction.

:iagree:

CharminTide · Sep 30, 2017

crimsonaudio said:
I didn't say all taxation was bad, my point is that unless / until we reduce the wasteful spending, I'll be 100% against any increase in taxation and will favor any reduction.

Fair enough. But realize that's a very idealistic stance that ensures you'll essentially never support increased taxation. To draw a simplistic analogy, I liken inefficiencies in tax handling to heat byproducts in chemical reactions: some energy (i.e. money) is almost always lost in the transfer. Of course, in chemistry and in government, I always favor increasing efficiency whenever possible, and you'll always have to decide on a case-by-case basis if the inherent inefficiency of a reaction is worth the end result. But if you simply refuse to attempt anything less than a 100% efficient transfer, you'll never create anything new or better than your starting products.

Again, not trying to convert you or anyone else. That's just how I view things.

Tide1986 · Sep 30, 2017

CharminTide said:
The graph I included shows change in percent tax relief. This is a plan aimed decidedly at benefiting the richest segment of Americans.

It is aimed at businesses in order to accelerate and increase growth. No surprise that those with means will see immediate benefits.

Tide1986 · Sep 30, 2017

Jon said:
I prefer a consumption tax personally

Likewise, but "progressives" find such taxes decidedly more regregressive.

crimsonaudio · Sep 30, 2017

CharminTide said:
Fair enough. But realize that's a very idealistic stance that ensures you'll essentially never support increased taxation. To draw a simplistic analogy, I liken inefficiencies in tax handling to heat byproducts in chemical reactions: some energy (i.e. money) is almost always lost in the transfer. Of course, in chemistry and in government, I always favor increasing efficiency whenever possible, and you'll always have to decide on a case-by-case basis if the inherent inefficiency of a reaction is worth the end result. But if you simply refuse to attempt anything less than a 100% efficient transfer, you'll never create anything new or better than your starting products.

Again, not trying to convert you or anyone else. That's just how I view things.

And if you accept increasing waste, you'll never stop searching for ways to take other people's money.

Case in point, how much more do you send the IRS via optional taxes? I think it's safe assume the answer is zero.

Bodhisattva · Sep 30, 2017

The idea that the federal government is only slightly inefficient is laughable. And much of these "have-to-haves" should be done at the state level. In previous threads I've listed waste in the high hundreds of billions of dollars. I put together these lists quickly without even getting into to waste at the DoD. No doubt the government squanders more than a trillion dollars each and every year. But, the problem is not enough taxation? When the Left won't even admit that government is inherently wasteful they can't be taken seriously.

Tide1986 · Sep 30, 2017

2003TIDE said:
Oh please. You and I both know they don't pay a higher percentage. They get to work all the loopholes.

That is quite a broad brush. Many businesses don't have access to the "loopholes" that you reference. The idea of the 1% and the "middle class" exists in businesses too. This tax plan is trying to help those "middle class" businesses.

CharminTide · Sep 30, 2017

crimsonaudio said:
And if you accept increasing waste, you'll never stop searching for ways to take other people's money.

Case in point, how much more do you send the IRS via optional taxes? I think it's safe assume the answer is zero.

As I said earlier, I was never expecting you to agree.

CharminTide · Sep 30, 2017

Bodhisattva said:
When the Left won't even admit that government is inherently wasteful they can't be taken seriously.

Impressive strawman.

Bodhisattva · Sep 30, 2017

Jon said:
I prefer a consumption tax personally

crimsonaudio said:
I'd be fine with flat or consumption based taxes, but detest progressive taxes.

I haven't decided whether a flat income tax or consumption tax is better. I know that I currently pay more than my share and I resent being told by the thieves that I don't.

Bodhisattva · Sep 30, 2017

CharminTide said:
Impressive strawman.

Your use of blue is confusing. Are you admitting the government is massively wasteful or not?

Tide1986 · Sep 30, 2017

CharminTide said:
Depends on how you define "rich," I suppose. Personally, I'd rather have well-maintained roads, ensure adequate access to health care for others, and live among an educated citizenry; if the cost of improving society (as well as, by extension, my own living conditions) is a slightly higher tax rate on my income, I'm fine with that tradeoff. But maybe I only feel that way because I don't come from money. Not long ago, I was keeping detailed spreadsheets just to ensure I made it to the next paycheck, and an unexpected expense of a few hundred would have been a crisis. I'm still very sensitive to that, which probably explains my animosity towards regressive taxation. Also, the empathy score.

I don't come from money (my parents were born in the back woods of Lamar County, Alabama, and grew up picking cotton, etc.), and I don't feel the same way as you do about "that tradeoff". My parents didn't feel that way and neither did my grandparents. All very self-sufficient people doing the best with what they had and not worried about what others have and don't have.

Bodhisattva · Sep 30, 2017

Tide1986 said:
I don't come from money (my parents were born in the back woods of Lamar County, Alabama, and grew up picking cotton, etc.), and I don't feel the same way as you do about "that tradeoff". My parents didn't feel that way and neither did my grandparents. All very self-sufficient people doing the best with what they had and not worried about what others have and don't have.

Yeah, it's funny so see the attempted diversion of "The rich were born into money; they don't deserve it." Three things: One, if someone is born into wealth, good for him. I'm not jealous of his good fortune. That money was made by that guy's family. It doesn't belong to anyone else. Is it better for the government to steal it and waste it? Hell no.

Two, a big reason my wife and I work as hard and invest as wisely as we do is to guarantee the prosperity of our daughter, her cousins, her future children, etc. Somehow, that concept is offensive to the Left.

Three, I know many wealthy people. None were born into money. Most are immigrants who made their fortunes via years of hard work.

bamachile · Sep 30, 2017

Bodhisattva said:
Yeah, it's funny so see the attempted diversion of "The rich were born into money; they don't deserve it." Three things: One, if someone is born into wealth, good for him. I'm not jealous of his good fortune. That money was made by that guy's family. It doesn't belong to anyone else. Is it better for the government to steal it and waste it? Hell no.

Two, a big reason my wife and I work as hard and invest as wisely as we do is to guarantee the prosperity of our daughter, her cousins, her future children, etc. Somehow, that concept is offensive to the Left.

Three, I know many wealthy people. None were born into money. Most are immigrants who made their fortunes via years of hard work.

So this whole thing is about giving immigrants a tax break?

CharminTide · Sep 30, 2017

Bodhisattva said:
Your use of blue is confusing. Are you admitting the government is massively wasteful or not?

If you read my posts, I discuss this.

CharminTide · Sep 30, 2017

Tide1986 said:
I don't come from money (my parents were born in the back woods of Lamar County, Alabama, and grew up picking cotton, etc.), and I don't feel the same way as you do about "that tradeoff". My parents didn't feel that way and neither did my grandparents. All very self-sufficient people doing the best with what they had and not worried about what others have and don't have.

I wasn't implying that everyone from a similar background felt the same.

crimsonaudio · Sep 30, 2017

CharminTide said:
As I said earlier, I was never expecting you to agree.

Fair enough, though I'm curious as to how much more you send the IRS via optional taxes, since you are arguing that funding the government helps your fellow citizens. Or is it only good to help them when other people do the excess funding?

CharminTide · Sep 30, 2017

crimsonaudio said:
Fair enough, though I'm curious as to how much more you send the IRS via optional taxes, since you are arguing that funding the government helps your fellow citizens. Or is it only good to help them when other people do the excess funding?

I don't think it follows that believing taxes serve some communal good means I must pay more than asked in order to validate that opinion.

Look, I think we've both expressed our views clearly and amicably. It's probably best to leave it at that.

uafanataum · Sep 30, 2017

crimsonaudio said:
Fair enough, though I'm curious as to how much more you send the IRS via optional taxes, since you are arguing that funding the government helps your fellow citizens. Or is it only good to help them when other people do the excess funding?

Maybe What the government does not tax you that you feel like you owe to society you can give in direct charity. Several on this board were advocating it a few weeks ago. It eliminates government waste and you control the outcome more. My only problem with it as I said a few years ago: do we honestly think the people with the means to do this ate charitable enough to pick up the government's slack if the government stopped redistributing rich people's money and left it up to the citizenry to fix it's own problems? I do not. I think the millionaires would hold onto their money more than donate it.

News Article: GOP tax reform benefits top 1% and businesses

Administrator

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Suspended

Suspended

Administrator

Hall of Fame

Suspended

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Suspended

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Administrator

Hall of Fame

All-American

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!