They need to tax the poor/middle class more!

Facts that you cannot refute.

Slave owner to abolitionist: "Sounds like someone is upset that they cannot buy as many slaves as they want."

That about it? There are few acts a human being can commit that are more deeply evil than accusing those who oppose injustice of envy for those who profit from it.

But you want to make it even more regressive than it is naturally because you prefer injustice to justice. You literally think evil is better than good.

 

Why do you falsely claim federal income tax is the only tax anyone pays? Why do you think people should be taxed according to how much income they receive rather than by how much benefit they receive from government spending?

 

one of the scams the left engages in involves claiming the income tax is not progressive enough because it should balance out "regressive taxes" like drivers licenses, hunting licenses, sales tax etc. while ignoring the fact that our federal income tax-including the surcharge on the highest net tax payers-the "estate tax" is extremely progressive. I have never claimed that the income tax is the only tax people pay, and in the case of almost half the country, the income tax is something they DO NOT PAY. you appear to operate from the opinion that all wealth belongs to the government first and that the rich have SOMEHOW been GIVEN more of the public wealth than others and you want to remedy that. claiming "regressive" taxes are UNFAIR is as stupid as claiming it is UNFAIR for some high school dropout who is constantly stoned having to pay the same for a meal at Wendys that I do.

 

how could you possibly make that silly claim based on this post

 

The rich have always done well by definition; but the "peasants" did just fine before government forcibly removed their rights to liberty without compensation and gave them to the rich. Google "enclosure of the commons" and start reading.

...who own government-issued and -enforced privileges like land titles, IP monopolies, etc. Read and learn:

“The most comfortable, but also the most unproductive way for a capitalist to increase his fortune, is to put all monies in sites and await that point in time when a society, hungering for land, has to pay his price.”
-- Andrew Carnegie

It is fact; I have proved it; and you have offered no factual or logical argument to the contrary, just denials and despicable personal insults.

Few acts that a human being can commit are more deeply evil than accusing those who oppose injustice of envy for those who profit from it. That is what slave owners did when the abolitionists opposed slavery: "You are just envious of slave owners because they are more successful than you. Go out and get a job, save up some money, and buy some slaves of your own. Problem solved!"

That about it?

 

Maybe because the thread title just says, "tax," but in that post you said, "we are talking about the federal income tax here"?

 

your take on history is woefully inadequate-want to cite some actual sources about how well the untalented and the unproductive did in say anytime after the start of recorded history? It is amusing that you cite Carnegie-remind me, how did he become wealthy.

Pretending that those who hate capitalism are more just is a fiction that had lead to millions upon millions murdered by collectivist governments

 

DUH-I was talking about the federal income tax, not tax on say medicinal marijuana dispensaries or the tax on NFA firearms or the excise tax on spirits.

 

Right: you were pretending that only the federal income tax counts as a tax that people pay because the distribution of its burden is progressive.

 

No, it is factually accurate. I have cited the facts of history, you have merely made false claims about it.

You said peasants, not the untalented and unproductive. Now you are trying to change the subject because I proved you wrong.

By being an efficient producer. Unlike most of the rich, who just own privileges that legally entitle them to steal from everyone else. As Carnegie told you.

You made that up. I didn't say anything about hating capitalism, I specifically said those who oppose injustice. Socialists hate capitalism, but they do not oppose injustice. They just want a different kind of injustice.

Capitalist governments, both fascist and otherwise, have also murdered millions. In fact, they have murdered far more people than socialist ones because socialism has been very much the exception over the last few hundred years, capitalism the rule. It is only the average rate of murder that is about twice as high for socialist governments.

 

I oppose income tax; but if you are going to have an income tax, then it should be highly progressive, like Japan's, because the more income a person has, the higher the probability that most of it consists of unearned economic rent -- i.e., legalized stealing.

No it isn't. It is one of the least progressive personal income tax systems found in any advanced country.

Then why are you pretending that people's total tax burdens are measured by their federal income taxes?

Because it is a tax on income, and they don't have enough income to qualify to pay it. Similarly, people who don't have vehicles do not pay the federal excise tax on gas. They pay other taxes. You just want to pretend they don't.

See how that works?

No; but unlike you, I am willing to know the fact that the publicly created value of government-issued and -enforced privileges, like the unimproved value of land, IP monopolies, etc., belongs to the community first, and government represents that community. You simply want the privileged, especially private landowners, to be legally entitled to steal that wealth from the community that creates it.

Correct. That is simply a fact. It is indisputable that the value of privileges like land titles and IP monopolies has been created exclusively by government and the community, not their owners, and has been given almost exclusively to their mostly rich owners.

Correct: I want to replace injustice with justice. You prefer injustice, and oppose justice. You literally think evil is better than good.

No, there is no similarity between the two cases. The meal at Wendy's costs the same for everyone because what they are taking from Wendy's is the same. The owner of a land parcel is the one taking its value from the community, while someone who doesn't own it is not.

See how that works?

 

The rich get far more from government than the poor or middle class, as I have proved.

Garbage. Many taxes are less fair, including taxation of earned income, and your practice of attributing any attempt to get the rich to pay their fair share of the taxes to envy is despicable, evil filth.

That is just more of the same despicable, evil filth you have been spewing all along. You have no basis for such claims. It is simply a fact that absent government privilege, a talented musician earns a good living, but does not become a billionaire.

 

you haven't proven anything. You make unsupported assertions that fly in the face of obvious reality. Without government handouts, the incapable, the untalented and the intellectually deficient would starve. we get it-you hate those who are better off than you are. Taxes should be based on what you get in return from government.

should a top one percenter pay more for a meal at Arby's than a guy on public assistance? Should I pay more for a gallon of gasoline than a guy driving a third hand chevy? of course not

 

so you assume all the land belongs to the community. right there is the epic fail in your argument

 

oh I see what we are dealing with now. parents that didn't do well. collectivist governments kill people in droves. constitutional republics not so much=especially not their OWN CITIZENS

 

Total nonsense. The top 20% of earners pay over 40% of total income tax, while the bottom 50% pay essentially ZERO and SOME even get rebates.

 

your post PROVES nothing; it simply regurgitates fare left looniness.

 

Poverty line "swallows up about 10-15% not 50%

We already do.

 

No I don't. As you have no facts or logic to offer, you continue to just make $#!+ up. I merely identify the fact that there is no way land could ever validly have become private property, as all titles of ownership to land are based on nothing but forcible dispossession of all who would otherwise be at liberty to use it. The community doesn't rightly own the land either; but as government is responsible for securing and reconciling the equal individual rights of all, it is government's job -- perhaps its most fundamental job -- to administer possession and use of land so as to discharge that duty.

No, you are just makin' $#!+ up again. There is no fail whatever in my argument, as proved above. You merely tried another absurd and disingenuous strawman fallacy, and I comprehensively and conclusively demolished you for it. It's always the same.

 

But she was certainly correct in her observation, and many billionaires, especially in the real estate racket, continue to honor her memory by paying little or no tax.

 

I find this argument to be silly. a free society is based upon the ownership of property. You can rant and rave about that till the cows come home but that is not going to change

 

<yawn> I knew what I was dealing with from the start, and you have not disappointed. This sort of personal filth:

See? Despicable. My parents did fine, thanks.

So do capitalist ones, whenever they are not constrained by democratic accountability.

They kill their own citizens in the service of privilege all the time. You just don't notice it because it is statistical murder, and thus doesn't make the news.

 

its amazing how the left complains about a few billionaires when their goal is soaking everyone in the top one percent. the people making between 400K to 10M a year are the most taxed individuals in the USA and they make up the vast majority of the top one percent.

 

what constitutional republic has killed as many of its own citizens as stalinist russia, Nazi Germany, Maoist china or Pol Pot's Cambodia