• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Tax cuts: close-mindedness from the left

maxparrish said:
Although I could have picked out any one of a hundred posts expousing your like-minded views, I think yours is fairly representative of the sentimental 'I'm envious and what's in it for me' bilge that has infected public policy disputes. The entire tax policy debate has been reduced to class warfare and accusations of "greed", a bitter argument over peter robbing paul and which peters are going to walk away with the gang's loot.

This attitude reminds me of the Seinfeld episode, when George Costanza is trying to secure a posh rent-controlled apartment (the loot) by selling his "virtue" as a pathetic and helpless victim. George whines to the controlling board how he was handcuffed to a bed in his underwear by a Nazi, drivel about his sexual embarrassment, and how all of this "are simply, horrifyingly, the story of my life as a short, stocky, slow witted bald man.".

However, he does not really secure it until he adds, upon leaving, that "Oh, also... my fiancé died from licking toxic envelopes that I picked out.", after which sobs and loud crying erupts from the board members.

That is the moral corruption of contemporary America - everyone seeking deserving goodies by the "virtue" of showing themselves a part of the most pathetic and helpless group - someone deserving of some special treatment that, if they don't get, makes the other guy "greedy".
Click to expand...

I don't think you understood the content of my post. I want to give more back to society, i'm paying too little in taxes. That's wholly incompatible with your silly accusation that i'm envious. There's no envy in this for me. It's about what's best for my fellow humans, who i care about.

It's trivially obvious that a bill which will raise taxes on half of Americans while handing out $500 billion to wealthy foreigners is bad for this country and its people. There's literally no economic argument that can justify this bill, even trickle down.
 
TurtleDude said:
only someone who thinks either that the government actually owns all the money or labors under the delusion that the group that pays 40% of the income tax and all the death tax isn't paying their share of their citizenship benefits would spew such idiocy.

taking less from the rich is hardly a handout. that claim is based on the silliness that higher tax rates are written in stone by the Lord Himself and anything less is giving the rich something they didn't deserve.

sorry but taking less from people who already pay more than their share of the income tax burden is not a handout, Now if it gets to the point where that one percent is paying less than one percent of the income tax then maybe its a handout, but since they are paying 40 TIMES that, lets stash the idiocy that the rich get a handout with a tax cut because they still will be paying more of the FIT burden than at any other time in history
Click to expand...

Explain why 40% is a magical tipping point where suddenly the government "owns" all the money.

Giving the rich more money is a handout. That's exactly what this bill does. No amount of willful stupidity on your part can change that fact. An electron is a negative charge carrier. A hole, which is the absence of an electron, is a positive charge carrier. You are neglecting to consider that charging someone less money, in effect, gives them more money.

Actually, the rich are far greater thieves than all the "real" criminals combined:

1c8173c930bc12fde14f2c1d61ab2235.jpg


You are simply unable or unwilling to understand that those in power are changing the rules to give themselves more power without legitimate justification, which is bad for society on the whole. You can't just be honest and say that you'd happily watch the poor suffer and die because you think they aren't worth the meager resources to keep alive, rather, your ability to afford another toy or two is far more important.
 
Absentglare said:
Explain why 40% is a magical tipping point where suddenly the government "owns" all the money.

Giving the rich more money is a handout. That's exactly what this bill does. No amount of willful stupidity on your part can change that fact. An electron is a negative charge carrier. A hole, which is the absence of an electron, is a positive charge carrier. You are neglecting to consider that charging someone less money, in effect, gives them more money.

Actually, the rich are far greater thieves than all the "real" criminals combined:

1c8173c930bc12fde14f2c1d61ab2235.jpg


You are simply unable or unwilling to understand that those in power are changing the rules to give themselves more power without legitimate justification, which is bad for society on the whole. You can't just be honest and say that you'd happily watch the poor suffer and die because you think they aren't worth the meager resources to keep alive, rather, your ability to afford another toy or two is far more important.
Click to expand...

that proves my point. in the welfare socialist/socialist/marxist etc mindset, taking LESS from someone is the same as giving them other peoples' money
 
TurtleDude said:
that proves my point. in the welfare socialist/socialist/marxist etc mindset, taking LESS from someone is the same as giving them other peoples' money
Click to expand...

No, not at all, it has nothing to do with socialist/socialist(sic)/marxist anything, in fact it is clear that you do not understand those words in this context. In a pure socialism, the concept of private ownership does not exist. So your post is incoherent rambling about totally rhetorical and meaningless buzzwords.

We can look at how Pfizer, Coca Cola, etc. are looking to spend their tax break. Note that i said "spend", that's because they're treating this as additional post-tax income, which it most certainly is. What these businesses are doing is assuring investors that these increases in post-tax income will go directly to them, rather than being spent on "wasteful" thinks like labor wages or new factories (they're already satisfying the needs of the rich, and the poor won't have money to buy what they need, so no reason to build more stuff). What they're planning to do is spend more money on stock buybacks and dividends, meaning that they're giving the shareholders a raise that they didn't have to do any work to achieve.
 
TurtleDude said:
that proves my point. in the welfare socialist/socialist/marxist etc mindset, taking LESS from someone is the same as giving them other peoples' money
Click to expand...

Because it is.

When less money from one group is going into the things that support the entire society, the tab has to be picked up from the rest of society to compensate. It's called math.
 
Nickyjo said:
Depends on how you look at labor’s contributions: who builds the marketplaces where markets dwell?, who built the schools where they learned or assembled the garage where HP started and the devices they used to launch their revolution? Henry Ford’s idea of an assembly line would have been worthless without workers to put it in place, his thoughts built on knowledge gained in school’s or by observing other industries built on the labor of others. Don’t know what “legacy investment” is, but presume that the legacy might have been built through labor.

Marx got a few things right, even as he got the big things wrong.
Click to expand...

I am not a denier of labor's contributions to both society and the economy.... But let's be real for a second. The difference in wealth between North Korea and South Korea is a matter of capital and it's formation.
 
Absentglare said:
Technological discovery is an output of labor.

Markets are useless in and of themselves. They all require labor to be useful in any meaningful way.

There would be no products for us to attribute value to services without labor.
Click to expand...

I understand your point, and i am in no way denying labors contributions.
 
TurtleDude said:
its time for more than half the country to start paying for what they get. If you think the government is to be credited, you should be giving more of what you earn to the government
Click to expand...
If Trump's tax reform package passes, and it looks like it will, he just may be paying more to the government and getting less in return.
 
Kushinator said:
I am not a denier of labor's contributions to both society and the economy.... But let's be real for a second. The difference in wealth between North Korea and South Korea is a matter of capital and it's formation.
Click to expand...

How was that capital produced and formed? It is certainly managed (management being “labor” of a sort) far better in the South, but in both countries wealth is (or was) created by labor.
 
Nickyjo said:
How was that capital produced and formed?
Click to expand...

This is a fallacy of composition. Yes, i understand that labor contributes to production and therefore wealth. Yes, i understand that labor is a necessary component for the formation of capital. I've never denied this.

I will state for the record: the more capital intensive the production process(es) of society, the wealthier the society. The fact that labor is a component for capital is entirely irrelevant.
 
MrPeanut said:
I think we would need a plan that is good for the middle class and poor first. There is a lot of truth to the fact that most Democrats would oppose tax cuts generally, because of the price of programs, but if there was a truly beneficial tax plan being pushed by Republicans it would be interesting to see how things fell. The ideas Republicans are pushing now are just atrocious, and the response by Democrats is proportional in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I agree with you on this. The notion that this tax-cut is a good thing for this country is pure delusion. It was written for the wealthiest. I am solidly a middle class earner ($130K). This tax cut doesn't benefit me. If anything I think I will end up with a 1% increase in taxation, this is based on a few of the many articles I've read analyzing it. I can live with that. Of course the poor see no benefit whatsoever, and the Republicans are going to hit social security and medicare to help offset the huge breaks they are giving corporations and the very wealthy.

This will not trickle down. They will still find a way to protect their increased earnings and hoard their wealth. There is no incentive for them to re-invest in a way that actually helps working Americans. There is nothing close minded about being critical at this pile of **** they call tax reform. I seriously hope it costs the Republicans control of Congress. They are turning their backs on the two demographics that actually put them in power - poor whites and old whites. There is nothing redeeming about this legislation at all.

Apparently all you have to do is yell "TAX CUTS!" and today's Republican voters are in, regardless of what exactly is in the bill.
 
Lerxst said:
I agree with you on this. The notion that this tax-cut is a good thing for this country is pure delusion. It was written for the wealthiest. I am solidly a middle class earner ($130K). This tax cut doesn't benefit me. If anything I think I will end up with a 1% increase in taxation, this is based on a few of the many articles I've read analyzing it. I can live with that. Of course the poor see no benefit whatsoever, and the Republicans are going to hit social security and medicare to help offset the huge breaks they are giving corporations and the very wealthy.

This will not trickle down. They will still find a way to protect their increased earnings and hoard their wealth. There is no incentive for them to re-invest in a way that actually helps working Americans. There is nothing close minded about being critical at this pile of **** they call tax reform. I seriously hope it costs the Republicans control of Congress. They are turning their backs on the two demographics that actually put them in power - poor whites and old whites. There is nothing redeeming about this legislation at all.

Apparently all you have to do is yell "TAX CUTS!" and today's Republican voters are in, regardless of what exactly is in the bill.
Click to expand...

I agree with this except for the idea that you are actually "solidly middle class", unless what you really meant was "knocking on the door of the top 10%, sitting in the 88th percentile" :D

What Percent Are You? - Interactive Feature - NYTimes.com
 
Kushinator said:
This is a fallacy of composition. Yes, i understand that labor contributes to production and therefore wealth. Yes, i understand that labor is a necessary component for the formation of capital. I've never denied this.

I will state for the record: the more capital intensive the production process(es) of society, the wealthier the society. The fact that labor is a component for capital is entirely irrelevant.
Click to expand...

This is a frontier example of how I understand my (or Marxists’) point. The government clears land west of where I live of Indians using the labor of the cavalry. So we start with nothing but land. Their work allows me to explore some of that land with my labor, go to the land office where a clerk uses his/her labor to give me a deed in an office built with someone’s labor. I buy a drill made with the labor of someone else, and with my drilling labor strike oil. With the prospect of selling my oil, I buy pumps or whatever through a loan at a bank, money availabie through farmers who deposited the fruits of their labor after the cavalry cleared out the Indians in their way. ...You can guess where I’m going here...

I assume one could say that the ball starts rolling due to an accumulation of capital... but tho I’m not a Marxist scholar (one course years ago), presumably true believers would insist the capital formation would be impossible unless workers produced that capital to begin with. Or maybe I am seeing labor where there was none.
 
radcen said:
Tax cuts: close-mindedness from the left

Just perception, based on observation, but... I suspect that the right could come up with the most awesome tax cut and reform that would be of great benefit to the middle class and the poor, give them virtually everything they want and need, and yet the left would still complain if by chance the wealthy someone got some small benefit, too.

Lower/middle class get what it needs, left's response is: " :2mad: ZOMG! More tax cuts for the wealthy! This is so unfair!"
Click to expand...
Except, it literally is that, this time.

They're even going to let the "tax cuts" for the middle and lower class expire in 8 years, while keeping those for corporations and the wealthy permanent.

And what tax cuts they have put in for middle and lower economic classes are largely offset by removing deductions.
Student loan interest deduction removed.
State and local tax deduction removed.
Graduate student deduction for waived tuition removed.
 
radcen said:
Tax cuts: close-mindedness from the left

Just perception, based on observation, but... I suspect that the right could come up with the most awesome tax cut and reform that would be of great benefit to the middle class and the poor, give them virtually everything they want and need, and yet the left would still complain if by chance the wealthy someone got some small benefit, too.

Lower/middle class get what it needs, left's response is: " :2mad: ZOMG! More tax cuts for the wealthy! This is so unfair!"
Click to expand...

Unfortunately you have zero evidence to support this hypothesis because the current tax plan is blatant class-and-partisan warfare.
 
TurtleDude said:
someone appears to be triggered. If that is going to upset you, perhaps this isn't the place for you. Trump supporters are called far worse
Click to expand...

oh, that explains why Trump supporters are always so pissed off, they are triggered all the time, gotcha! now I'm going to have to be extra gentle around them, lest they melt like a ... SNOWFLAKE!
 
LostArtist said:
oh, that explains why Trump supporters are always so pissed off, they are triggered all the time, gotcha! now I'm going to have to be extra gentle around them, lest they melt like a ... SNOWFLAKE!
Click to expand...

I don't think you've been around long enough to make such silly generalization
 
Hey, here's a wild one:

The final version of the tax plan, which was released Friday and is set for votes next week, eliminates the tax deduction for alimony payments. Right now, alimony payments are tax free for the payer, and they're taxed like regular income for the recipient. Since the recipient usually makes less money -- and is thus in a lower tax bracket -- it keeps more money in the family unit and away from Uncle Sam.

Alimony will now be taxed under GOP bill - Dec. 15, 2017
Click to expand...

Not expected at all. Betcha some good ol' boys aint gonna be too happy with this one.
 
I definitely don't agree with the idea that scholarships and grants are treated as income and can be taxed, especially if used solely for education and education expenses.

It makes it incredibly difficult for those that have to earn every penny of their education through hard work and scholarship to follow through and better themselves. I truly hope this does not remain in the final bill.
 
Dittohead not! said:
It's a bit like those "You may have just won a zillion dollars" ads that come in the junk mail. After a while, you just don't believe them any more.
Click to expand...

I can't wait for the celebrating to begin. Then what will they say. What CAN they say.

Nothing!
 
chuckiechan said:
The democrats were completely happy with Obama's moribund economy and the shrinking of the middle class, and millions of illegals waltzing in to the job market offering to work for less, and the nations debt climbing to record levels. For business, he stuck a thumb in their eye by wrapping them in regulations until they gave up and hid.

True, Obama inherited a tough hand. But he had a choice to make: Social change or economic rescue. He chose social change through demographic change and the destruction of the American identity as a diverse group of people, to tribes within a jungle.

Why?

And why are they against a republican tax plan that promises to be a job creator, and a benefit to all workers.

Class warfare of the Obama years brought pain and suffering to the middle class, make the rich richer, and didn't help the poor one bit.


Democrats don't want economic success except "their way", which has been proven not to work.
Click to expand...

Illegal immigrant populations were flat during Obama years. In many periods, they were negative. He did not substantially change deportation rates from the last few decades.

https://www.snopes.com/obama-deported-more-people/

Obama's presidency was 7 and a half years of job gains and economic growth. Could have been better if he hadn't pursued healthcare reform first, but it also could have been better if he hadn't been stonewalled by the tea party.

Your claims of "social change" and "Class warfare" are a conservative blog fueled fantasy. Please provide some evidence of that. He argued against reinstating Bush tax cuts for the wealthy because they didn't work. He didn't overturn DOMA. The supreme court did. The Dream act is just simple common sense and compassion. WTF are you talking about?

Also, by the way, it is the supply side economic theory that the Repubs base their tax plan and economic ideas on that have been 100% without a doubt proven to not work.
 
Deuce said:
Unfortunately you have zero evidence to support this hypothesis because the current tax plan is blatant class-and-partisan warfare.
Click to expand...

Absolutely! Only 23% of Americans want this Billionaire-favoring tax plan. Write your Congressman and Senators, and tell them that if they vote for this, they will lose your vote.
 
Media_Truth said:
Absolutely! Only 23% of Americans want this Billionaire-favoring tax plan. Write your Congressman and Senators, and tell them that if they vote for this, they will lose your vote.
Click to expand...

and yet, it looks like it will pass. Who do our representatives and senators actually represent?
 
Dittohead not! said:
and yet, it looks like it will pass. Who do our representatives and senators actually represent?
Click to expand...

the money that keeps them getting elected. Just like it has always been. The problem is that there were enough competing interests in business.. to end up keeping the politician doing things that generally helped everyone. Now.. the polarization of the electorate is complete, and business/corporations have become more concentrated, and more powerful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom