They need to tax the poor/middle class more!

No. Calling facts opinions does not change them; however, if you want to see some examples of fact-free opinion, you should check out your own "contributions" to this thread. You have offered nothing but your unsupported -- and hateful, putrid and evil -- personal opinion that those who oppose injustice can only be motivated by envy for those who profit from it.

Wrong again. It is supported by dictionaries.

Derogating and dismissing opposition to injustice as being motivated by envy for those who profit from it is most certainly evil. Also despicable, disgusting, atrocious, disgraceful, vicious, loathsome and grotesque.

As with everything else, I understand it far better than you. Government steals with taxes -- very much including the tax on earned income, which you prefer over justice -- to fund its immense subsidies to the privileged, especially landowners, as I already proved. If the privileged were simply required to repay the subsidies government and the community give them, that would not be stealing, but rather a voluntary, market-based, beneficiary-pay, value-for-value transaction. That is why you are against it: you do not want to pay the community for what you are taking from the community. You like being legally entitled to steal; you intend to go on stealing; you want your victims legally prohibited from defending themselves against you; and you do not care how many people suffer how much unjust harm as a result. Every word you have written in this thread reeks of towering, sociopathic greed.

 

I am sure those rich people will appreciate being able to buy a $40 mil house and upgrade from their $25-30 mil house with all those tax saving if the government wanted to tax the lower and middle classes more and the rich less.

 

wrong again-i want the income tax abolished. your concept of subsidies is idiotic. you pretend all land belongs to the government when many owned land before the modern government was created. Try again and lay off the envy

 

those demanding more taxes from others need to feel that bite on them. right now, they don't get enough feedback because the lower and middle cohorts of tax payers pay less of the federal tax burden than at any other time since before WWII

 

For people to even think that taxing lower and middle classes more in this day and age is absolutely crazy. Nobody making under $40k a year can really afford a decent apartment and most are stuck having to share places. Then, you add in how much gas and food has risen with inflation to cut into their living expenses. After all the poor and middle class do to survive (and I mean the vast majority do not get handouts), you want to tax them more just because your rich friends want more money to spend? That is freaking complete and utter idiocy.

If you truly want this country to revolt and have widespread riots in every major city, then try taxing the rich less and the poor more. Only a moron would attempt this in modern times.

In no way or form do rich people need more money.

 

It is the privileged who are demanding -- and getting -- more taxes from others, because they are the ones who actually pocket the benefits of government spending as a welfare subsidy giveaway. That is why the working poor toil their lives away and end up with nothing, while the privileged rich do not lift a productive finger, and are made vastly richer without effort or contribution of any kind on their part.

 

You want all taxes that you might have to pay abolished. You want government to consist of a subsidy engine that steals money from other people and gives it to you in return for nothing.

No, it is accurate, correct, and honest. When government takes money from some people and spends it in ways that benefit other people who do not have to repay that benefit, that is a subsidy to those people.

No, I identify the fact that government always administers possession and use of land in any case because that is what government IS: the sovereign authority over a specific area of land. The only question is whether government will discharge that function as I advocate, to secure and reconcile the equal individual rights of all to life, liberty, and property in the fruits of their labor, or as it currently does and you advocate, to steal from producers and consumers and give the loot to rich, greedy, privileged, parasitic landowners.

Because their land titles were issued to them by a pre-modern government.

<yawn> There is nothing you could do to refute yourself more conclusively than to repeat that unsupported personal accusation. Accusing those who oppose injustice of envy for those who profit from it is one of the most profoundly evil acts a human being can commit. It is also despicable, vicious, filthy, disgusting, disgraceful, loathsome and grotesque. Why have you chosen to advocate oppression over liberty, injustice over justice, lies over truth, and evil over good? For money?

 

No, I am correct: whether you want income tax abolished or not, you prefer income tax to justice.

 

justice would be me not having to fund the existence of parasites

 

much land back then had no governmental control. try again. why does envy permeate your arguments.

 

Like landowners and other privilege holders. Everything government gives to the poor people you call "parasites" is taken by their landlords.

 

Right: before the emergence of settled agriculture, states, and government, no one ever thought they owned land or claimed to own it. The first task of governments, the reason people created government in the first place, was to administer possession and use of the land people had begun farming without owning. Only when governments started issuing titles of private ownership to land were people's rights to liberty forcibly stripped from them and made into the private property of landowners.

Why would I need to? I've proved you wrong on every substantive claim you have made.

It doesn't. You simply made up that accusation out of whole cloth. It is a total fabrication. You cannot quote a single statement I have made that supports your accusation that my views are motivated by envy, any more than slave owners could quote any statement by the abolitionists that supported the slave owners' accusations that opposition to slavery was motivated by envy.

 

And FYI, justice would also be you making just compensation to those whose rights to liberty you abrogate -- and whom you forcibly deprive of their liberty to access opportunity unless they pay you for permission -- by the exercise of your privileges.

 

just stop your bullshit that somehow any one who owns land or has dividends is oppressing anyone.

 

I didn't mention dividends. You simply made that up and falsely attributed it to me, like your constant accusations of envy, because you have no other choice. And the fact that private ownership of land forcibly abrogates the liberty rights of all who would otherwise be at liberty to use that land is not bull$#!+. It is simply a self-evident and indisputable fact of objective physical reality. You just don't want anyone mentioning that fact, because you have already realized that it proves that the real parasites and the real recipients of tax-funded government subsidies are the privileged, especially landowners, not the poor, and that your beliefs are therefore false and evil.

 

what's wrong-you want more land than you have? where did you get any rights to property merely because you happen to exist near it?

 

I want justice in public revenue and land tenure institutions. You prefer injustice in those institutions as long as it redounds to your unearned profit. Simple.

Same place slaves got their rights to their owners' "property" by happening to exist in it. Land can only ever be legal property, like slaves were, not rightful property, and can only be legal property by government's say-so. Property in land is always inherently a government-created and -enforced privilege whose unimproved value is entirely created by government and the community, not the owner, as a welfare subsidy giveaway to the owner. You just don't want to repay the community for the subsidy it is giving you, and you don't want anyone pointing out the fact that landowners -- like you -- are indeed getting that subsidy, and it is therefore landowners, not the poor, who are the real parasites sucking on the public teat.

 

that's complete bullshit. people owned property long before there were governments.

 

back on topic: the US federal income tax scheme is far more progressive than most nations because the lower brackets' share of the income tax burden is so much smaller

https://www.heritage.org/taxes/commentary/1-chart-how-much-the-rich-pay-
Over time, high-income Americans have shouldered a larger and larger share of the cost of government. Even the 2017 tax cuts—reviled by the political left—reduced tax bills for the lowest-income Americans by 10% while only cutting taxes for the top 1% by 0.04%. After the tax cuts, the rich pay a larger—not smaller—share of income taxes.

In fact, by almost every measure, the U.S. has one of the most progressive systems of taxation in the world, in which high-income people pay the highest tax rates.

 

It is indisputable fact.

You are now trying to change the subject from land to "property" because you know that you have been proved wrong. Property in the fruits of one's labor antedates government, but not property in land. Owning the fruits of one's labor does not abrogate anyone else's rights because it does not deprive anyone of anything they would otherwise have, and is therefore not wrongful. Owning land does abrogate others' rights because it does deprive them of what they would otherwise have, so it is wrongful.

 

Because most nations are poor, undemocratic, and governed by plutocratic oligarchies -- i.e., the kind of nation you would apparently prefer to live in.

Evidence?

Page not found.

Evidence?

Why do you want a tax system that is characteristic of poor, ignorant, undemocratic Third World plutocracies?

 

what's the most successful country in the world?

does it use the georgian nonsense?
did it have a steep progressive income tax when it became the top country

 

Successful at what? A number of different countries have been notably successful at providing liberty, justice and prosperity to their citizens at various times in history.

All of history's examples of successful countries -- including the USA -- got more of their public revenue from land during their most successful periods than they did when they were less successful, and than did other contemporaneous countries that were less successful.

I don't advocate income tax; but if you are going to have an income tax, it is best if it is steeply progressive. Japan had a steeply progressive income tax during its period of greatest prosperity in the 1970s-80s, and so did the USA in its period of greatest success in the third quarter of the 20th century.

 

NST is what I support. it gives the government the least amount of extra-constitutional power.

 

So, the second most regressive possible tax, after a poll tax...

You mean it forces the government to steal the most from those who can least afford it, and give the loot to the richest, greediest, most privileged parasites, like... whom, exactly? Such a mystery....

To you, that is.