Tim Allen tweet about taxation

Originally posted by normbenign
The difference is that expanding the money supply, the real definition of inflation, is a regressive tax on the poor and middle class. Of course it effects every dollar, but the reduction of what money will buy more has more effect on lower income groups.

Inflation certainly does not hurt the poor directly, since they generally don't hold much cash assets. However, indirectly it can hurt them if wage increases are lower than inflation.

Originally posted by normbenign
You can look at the actual numbers at each percentile, and it doesn't fit Buffett's claim in the least. The higher you go on the income scale, the greater the percentage of revenue that group is paying.

I already gave a source showing that you are wrong.

Originally posted by finnegan
I already gave a source showing that you are wrong.

A better source might be the IRS or dept. of Treasury.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Inflation certainly does not hurt the poor directly, since they generally don't hold much cash assets. However, indirectly it can hurt them if wage increases are lower than inflation.

Poor people don't have lots of cash, but they usually have weekly or monthly income. If that persistently declined in purchasing power, inflation harms them. And of course published inflation rates often leave out important categories which effect people at the bottom.

Sure it is easier to count what a wealthy estate loses, even a middle class retiree, but inflation robs every dollar of purchasing power, and the people with the fewest dollars have to adjust not wants but needs.

Originally posted by normbenign
Poor people don't have lots of cash, but they usually have weekly or monthly income. If that persistently declined in purchasing power, inflation harms them. And of course published inflation rates often leave out important categories which effect people at the bottom.

Sure it is easier to count what a wealthy estate loses, even a middle class retir ...[text shortened]... of purchasing power, and the people with the fewest dollars have to adjust not wants but needs.

It seems we don't disagree.

Whodey's obsession with inflation seems peculiar, especially since I have pointed out repeatedly that inflation has not really been an issue in the US for the past two decades or so, and is not expected to become one any time soon. Perhaps with whodey's misplaced nostalgia for ye olde times comes also a desire for dramaqueening about problems that are no longer relevant.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
It seems we don't disagree.

Whodey's obsession with inflation seems peculiar, especially since I have pointed out repeatedly that inflation has not really been an issue in the US for the past two decades or so, and is not expected to become one any time soon. Perhaps with whodey's misplaced nostalgia for ye olde times comes also a desire for dramaqueening about problems that are no longer relevant.

Measuring inflation is tricky, even if done with total honesty, and that isn't a characteristic of government. Different parts of an economy may show the signs of inflation more quickly than others, for example food prices may rise, while government may make an effort to quash rising fuel and energy costs.

Then when calculating inflation, they exclude the parts that have escalating prices due to inflation. Inflation still is a major factor, for anyone who is not able to personally inflate his own income. This often includes low skill workers, retirees, even those with substantial savings. I disagree that inflation is no longer relevant. Governments want you to believe that, so that their borrow and spend plans aren't interrupted. History is loaded with examples that prove debasing currency has consequences.