The Progressive Tax System is unethical... We need a Flat Tax

I choose not watching people eat other human being in the street, if the global economy collapses.

That is what I think is moral.

I bet you don't have these same moral objections when it comes to, let's say, US foreign policy though huh?
I am not against Immigration. I am against illogical, unchecked, irrational immigration purely for "humanitarian" reasons.
 
Fair?

Fuck your feelz.(Not trying to be a dick, just making the point)

Mine is an economic argument about functioning systems.

How is the collapse of the global economy fair to anyone?
Why not just pillage Europe a redistribute the wealth to to third world? no one would die, Europe would just roll over. especially Germany
 
There is this weird myth going around that when rich become become richer, they spread that wealth and enhance the lives of all those beneath them.

In reality, they just keep paying everyone shit wages and keep as much money as possible, with rare exceptions.
I do find it funny that people are against MW increases because they understand rich people are greedy and will increase the costs of goods and services but are for tax cuts because rich people are also simultaneously generous.

I know someone whose family runs a business and they always paid their employees shit. Under Reagan, both Bush's, Clinton, and Obama, probably even Carter but I don't know if they opened the business then. We could completely stop taxing them and their employees will still eat shit.

This guy was a Trump fan before this election and frequently says shit like he doesn't understand how rich people can vote for Dems but I guess he wasn't a big enough fan to realize Trump was a Dem and for taxing the rich. And also not understanding that plenty of rich people vote Dem even the richest like Gates, Buffet, and Zuckerberg.

Interesting character that guy.
 
Punishes people for being wealthy. Ironically the demographic hurt most by this is the middle class. They're in the no-man's land between not paying much income tax, and being able to utilize the tax code to it's fullest.

Why punish people? Institute a flax tax rate.
Isn't a flat percentage still by definition progressive, since the rich will still be paying way more than the poor?
 
Isn't a flat percentage still by definition progressive, since the rich will still be paying way more than the poor?
In that context, yes. In absolute measures, yes. It's important to note it's called "flat tax" in regards to the relative.
 
Because they're humans just like the rest of us? 15% of 1 billion is a lot more than 15% of 20k. They pay a lot more in absolute terms, but the important one is relative. Relative equality of taxes is essential.
Paying 15% of 20k hurts you a lot more than 15% of 1 billion because there is a minimum people need in order to live. If you make 1 billion you could pay 90% tax and you would still be living the same standards of life, as the extra money goes mostly for investments. If you make 20k and pay 90% of tax you die from hunger.
 
you don't need an explanation for this because it's fair. the rich person will still be paying more.

we shouldn't be able to tax certain earners at a higher rate because it's immoral as fuck

What do you think about Eisenhower?
 
Punishes people for being wealthy. Ironically the demographic hurt most by this is the middle class. They're in the no-man's land between not paying much income tax, and being able to utilize the tax code to it's fullest.

Why punish people? Institute a flax tax rate.

No, because one it is unsustainable. Two because of the way numbers work a flat tax is not fair, it puts more burden on the poor and the middle class and less burden on the wealthy.

Quick example....

Lets say you have a 10% flat tax rate.

The Rich Man makes $1,000,000 a year. The Middle Class Man makes $100,000 a year. The Poor Man makes $10,000 per year.

after taxes

Rich Man - $900,000, Middle Class Man $90,000 and Poor Man $9,000.

Now the Rich Man that $100K loss looks like a lot of money, but it is not going to really effect his life style. The Middle Class Man, well he is taking home around a grand less per month, so he is going to have to make changes. The Poor Man, he taking home $750 a month after the tax, without it would be $830. For him that extra $80 is huge.
 
I dont mind a flat tax. But get rid of loopholes that allow the rich to avoid paying their fair share.

What do you consider fair share for a rich person? Fair share would be a flat tax. That way the poor would actually contribute instead of getting all benefits without putting anything in.
 
What do you consider fair share for a rich person? Fair share would be a flat tax. That way the poor would actually contribute instead of getting all benefits without putting anything in.

Pretty sure the poor dont get all the benifits. You have them confused with the rich.
 
What do you consider fair share for a rich person? Fair share would be a flat tax. That way the poor would actually contribute instead of getting all benefits without putting anything in.

tumblr_nqj8wxph2u1s2wio8o1_500.gif
 
Our tax system does a reasonably good job of correcting for capitalist greed. Keep the capitalism up front, and correct the greed after the fact. Good system, avoids the pitfalls of socialist state power, creates others though- like the reluctance to tax the people who are bribing you.
 
I say go for it.

These idiots don't understand they're asking to pay more taxes.


It's well documented that a flat tax hurts the poor and gives the rich an even bigger tax break. Also all economic indicators show it would be disastrous for the economy As a whole.
 
Because they're humans just like the rest of us? 15% of 1 billion is a lot more than 15% of 20k. They pay a lot more in absolute terms, but the important one is relative. Relative equality of taxes is essential.

It's not quite the same though. Suppose someone makes $20k and gets taxed at 15%. His net is $17k. Now, what are his living expenses? Probably something on the order of $17k and the dude is living on the edge.

Suppose someone makes $100 million and gets taxed at 15%. He has $85 million in net. What's his living expenses? Probably no where near $85 million. Probably like $10 million or something. That guy has PLENTY of money to spare and can be taxed higher without affecting his quality of life much at all.
 
The rich get more benefit from the government than the poor or middle class. If you have $100,000 in the bank, federal deposit insurance is 20 times as valuable to you as it is for someone with $5,000 in the bank and infinitely more valuable to you than it is for someone with nothing in the bank. The same for a legal system which protects private property rights, a military which protects from invasion by some assholes who might confiscate your property, etc. etc. The fire department is more valuable to the dude with a $5 million home than to the renter, etc.
 
What do you consider fair share for a rich person? Fair share would be a flat tax. That way the poor would actually contribute instead of getting all benefits without putting anything in.
Right. But the loopholes in the system allow them to pay less than what they would. Get rid of them and I am fine.
 
<18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18>
<18>
 
Back
Top