They need to tax the poor/middle class more!

I have a great idea-save up, work hard and buy some land. I see "for sale" signs all over the place.

 

"I have a great idea: save up, work hard and buy some slaves of your own. Problem solved!" -- slave owners to abolitionists

Can you find a willingness to know the fact that me being a greedy, privileged, parasitic landowner legally entitled to steal from everyone else does not address, let alone solve, the problem of greedy, privileged, parasitic landowners being legally entitled to steal from everyone else? Can you understand why slave owners encouraging abolitionists to just buy some slaves of their own was not responsive to the abolitionists' objections to slavery?

 

I have identified the relevant facts of objective physical reality. You just refuse to know them because you have already realized that they prove your beliefs are false and evil.

Facts and logic do win arguments, whether the loser chooses to know them or not.

I want them to be better, and have explained why the way I propose is better.

Facts and logic are proof.

 

what facts, you whine about the rich, and claim anyone who doesnt buy into your Georgian faith is evil. What facts have you brought.? You claim the rich use more than they pay in taxes. That is patent bullshit. The top one percent in no way use 40% of what the income tax pays for and 100% of what the death tax pays. And your idiotic comment about Jimmy Page pretty much demanded that I relegate your entire argument to the loony bin

 

Among others, the fact that the great incomes and wealth of the wealthy are mainly based on government-issued and -enforced privileges like land titles and IP monopolies, not any sort of commensurate contributions to production on their part, and they therefore benefit from government far more than the less wealthy.

Identifying the relevant facts of objective physical reality and their logical implications is not "whining"; you are just makin' $#!+ up.

The superior justice and efficiency of taxing the unimproved value of land is fact, not faith, and anyone who prefers injustice to justice is evil.

Read my posts, and then reflect that you have not been able to refute a single statement I have made.

No. It is an indisputable fact that the market value of government-issued and -enforced privileges like land titles and IP monopolies is nothing but the expected future after-tax subsidy to their owners. It is also an indisputable fact that it is only those who own such privileges who benefit from them, not voters, and that landowners, specifically, are privileged to pocket the full market value of all government spending on desirable services and infrastructure, so that none of that value actually goes to the users of such services and infrastructure.

They get most of the benefit of government spending on desirable public services and infrastructure because everyone else has to pay landowners full market value just for permission to access the benefits.

There is no "death tax," and the estate tax raises a derisory amount of revenue.

All privilege holders benefit from privilege, and the market value of their privileges measures how much they can expect to benefit from government spending. The top 1% just own most of the privileges, so they benefit enormously more from government spending than the less affluent whom you false claim are its main beneficiaries. Have you priced a building lot recently? That's how much government is giving to its owner.

There is nothing idiotic about identifying the fact that Page's wealth is almost entirely due to government-issued and -enforced monopoly copyright privileges and the resulting artificial scarcity, not consensual exchange in a free market.

 

You obviously do not understand what facts are. Your assertions are not facts. The Death tax is well known description of the federal estate tax-indeed the federal literature refers to state estate taxes as state death taxes. Prove the top one percent own most of the "privileges" WTF that might mean since I never heard of the term despite having an honors degree in political science and one in law-both from top universities in the USA

 

False. When they identify objective reality, as they do, they are facts. Calling facts "assertions" does not change the objective reality they identify.

If it does -- which you have asserted but not demonstrated -- then it is lying. A tax on transfer of a deceased person's assets via their estate is not a tax on their death. I'm not sure there is any clearer or simpler way to explain that to you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_by_wealth_inequality

Analyzing wealth by composition is extremely difficult, as categories are often quite arbitrary and subject to change. But Rognlie of MIT found that when Piketty's data were broken down, the increase in wealth inequality he had found was due entirely to appreciation of residential real estate: i.e., increased land value.

Privilege (from the Latin for "private law") means legal entitlements to benefit from the abrogation of others' rights without making just compensation. It is the foundation of all substantial accumulations of wealth because unlike products of labor, the value of privilege cannot be competed away by production to relieve scarcity. It is legal imposition of scarcity.

 

You have yet to post any facts. Envy sucks as a political foundation

 

Death tax is a well known term for the abomination that the parasites in politics call "estate" taxes

https://smartasset.com/estate-planning/death-tax

 

It's well known, all right: for being deceitful and disingenuous garbage.

The "parasites in politics" are the privileged, not their victims, and I will thank you to remember it. The greedy, privileged, parasitic rich take an order of magnitude more from the economy than the parasitic unemployed poor (~40% of GDP vs ~4%), while numbering an order of magnitude fewer (~1% of the population vs ~10%).

 

All readers are aware that that is objectively false.

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

 

I tire of being told I need to pay more taxes to encourage and increase those suckling on the public teat. you confuse facts with an opinion I reject your opinion and deny your opinions about the wealthy. I would end both income and death taxes and other schemes the federal government dreams up to pander to the unproductive

 

Your definition of injustice is a facade serving as a pretext for envy

 

No, that is nothing but another despicable, vicious, evil ad hominem attack from you. You have realized that your beliefs are false and evil because your only "arguments" are the same vicious, evil, anti-justice filth that slave owners used to attack the abolitionists, such as the filth you posted above. You are, like all readers of this thread, aware of the fact that you have not been able to refute a single sentence I have written with facts or logic. So to distract yourself from the fact that you have fully embraced evil, and made a deliberate decision to prefer lies to truth, injustice to justice, evil to good, you are throwing $#!+ -- because that is all you have -- and hoping some sticks. But it is only sticking to you.

 

I already demonstrated to you that it is the greedy, privileged rich who suck more from the public teat than everyone else combined, because their wealth consists almost entirely of government-issued and -enforced privilege.

No, I have identified the relevant facts. Calling them opinions cannot alter them no matter how many times you do so.

There is a difference between denying facts and refuting them. You are aware that you cannot refute any of the facts I have identified, so you have to just deny them.

So would I. But if that's all that's on the table, they should be steeply progressive so that they are as fair and economically benign as possible.

The federal -- and all junior -- government panders to the unproductive privileged rich, who take an order of magnitude more from government and the community than the poor. And I will thank you to remember it.

 

your values are not ones that are welcomed by most. You miss that point as you insult anyone who doesn't buy into your values. You haven't been able figure out that I rejected your values and your insulting claims that you have a monopoly on what is "just" . I don't know what is more amusing, your posts hysterical self righteousness or your their frantic virtue signaling

 

More bullshit intertwined with stage IV envy. What is an unproductive rich person? as opposed to the many unproductive poor ones. What facts support your values? envy?

 

Accusations of envy are nothing but evil ad hominem filth, as already explained.

One whose wealth is based on privilege rather than productive contribution.

The poor ones don't own privileges, so they can't legally steal the way the privileged rich can. They are dependent on government and private charities to rescue them from being murdered by the privileged, and must still pay the privileged just for permission to access public services and infrastructure, private charitable programs, etc.

Start with the fact that the landowner qua landowner by definition does not contribute the land to production -- it was already there, ready to use, with no help from him or any previous owner -- but is just legally entitled to charge others full market value for what government, the community and nature contribute, while contributing nothing himself. If you can find a willingness to know that fact, we have a basis for communication. If not, then you have simply decided that the preservation of your false and evil beliefs is more important to you than liberty, justice, or the truth.

 

I think most people welcome liberty, justice and truth -- when it is on offer.

I do not insult. I simply identify the facts and their logical implications.

I have made no such claim.

Still no facts or logic from you, just puerile ad hominem filth.

 

gobbledygook nonsense. I like the system. I would like it even more if we got rid of progressive income taxes. that is my opinion. All your ranting and raving is opinion to. You use definitions that are designed to bolster your arguments-not ones that are objectively accurate. Your concept of privilege is stilted and peculiar

 

Facts of objective physical reality that you cannot refute, and that prove your beliefs are false and evil.

Because -- surprise! -- you like being legally entitled to steal, and you like your victims being legally prohibited to defend themselves against you.

So that you would not have to repay the community as much of what you legally steal from it. Duh.

Right. Because in your opinion, privilege is better than production, injustice is better than justice, and evil is better than good.

I have not been doing that and you know it. You simply made it up and falsely accused me of it -- like your accusations of envy -- because you have no facts or logic to offer in support of your false and evil beliefs.

No, that is false. I have identified specific facts of objective physical reality that support my views and prove your views are false and evil.

False. While there is always a danger of question begging when dealing with definitions, accurate, valid, agreed definitions are crucial to scientific understanding.

It is a technical term that identifies the relevant facts of objective physical reality, enabling understanding of economic relationships that cannot be understood without the use of such concepts.

 

you just don't get it. It is what you want that I attack. I oppose your desire to punish the wealthy with your envy laden tax schemes. I am not attacking your facts that your system would screw over the rich. I am also attacking your claim that the wealthy are unproductive when it is those who are sucking off the public tit and not paying taxes who are unproductive. I dispute your UNSUPPORTED bullshit that the rich use more of the government services than they pay in federal taxes.
what you are trying to do is pretend that your class warfare envy laden opinion is superior because you cite irrelevant facts (often which turn upon your rather esoteric and dishonest definitions of say "privilege") that in no way makes your DESIRES for soaking the rich more valid. You might as well claim that your facts show blue is a better color than red

 

I get it just fine: you do not care about justice, and prefer injustice if it is in your own narrow financial interest.

Right: justice.

It is not "punishment" to require people to pay for what they are taking. It is a beneficiary-pay, value-for-value transaction. You are merely accustomed to taking without paying, and wish to go on doing so.

Wanting people to pay for what they are taking instead legally stealing it is not envy. It is righteousness.

You have not offered anything but ad hominem filth, nor will you ever be doing so.

When has justice ever not "screwed over" those who had become accustomed to profiting from injustice? Were slave owners not "screwed over" by emancipation? You merely believe that maintaining slavery is preferable to screwing over slave owners. I, by contrast, am willing to know the fact that it is the privileged who are screwing over the rest of us, just as it was the slave owners who were screwing over the slaves.

I did not make that claim. Some wealthy people are productive. Most are not -- though they may work very hard at their rent-seeking. Most of the rich who are productive nevertheless take far more from the community than they produce.

Garbage. It is those who are not making a contribution to production and relief of scarcity who are unproductive. And you are merely repeating your false and disingenuous claim that those who do not pay federal income tax pay no taxes.

Your claim is objectively false. I cited the Henry George Theorem, which explains how landowners, specifically, get all the benefit of public spending on desirable services and infrastructure, as everyone else must pay them full market value for permission to access such advantages. And you are again trying to pretend that only federal income taxes and estate taxes count as taxes.

You again prove that you have nothing to offer but despicable and evil ad hominem filth.

The fact that, as one indisputable example, the unimproved rental value of land is publicly created by government and the community but in the main privately pocketed by the rich is extremely relevant.

The definition merely identifies what I am talking about. Using the technical term, "privilege" saves me from having to say, "legal entitlements to benefit from the abrogation of others' rights without making just compensation" over and over again.

My desire for justice is indisputably more valid than your desire to profit from injustice.

No, that is just some more silly, irrelevant tripe from you.

 

Your definition of justice is subjective. stop pretending that anyone who rejects it is evil as you constantly do. stop demanding others fund your existence or give up what they have to salve some sort of envy you seem to harbor towards them

 

No it isn't. Objectively, justice is rewards commensurate with contributions and costs commensurate with deprivations.

I have said no such thing. You simply made it up.

Evil would describe those who deliberately abrogate others' rights with intent to inflict injustice -- and those who lie to rationalize and justify it. Evil must always be justified, and the only way to justify it is with lies.

You made that up, too. I have proposed no such thing. It is in fact the privileged who demand that others fund their existence -- and their luxuries -- and I will thank you to remember it.

I don't ask them to give up anything they have -- except their legal entitlements to steal even more.

One of the most profoundly evil acts a human being can commit is to accuse those who oppose injustice of envy for those who profit from it.