17 Jun 21
@liljo saidHa. And the Libs say that we are the ones that want power!!!!
I TOTALLY support a flat tax.
It is not, however, a "liberal" idea. Liberals have long argued that a flat tax favors "the rich" (as defined by them, of course) and actually hurts the lower income folks.
I'm pretty radical in that I believe they should stop taxing my INCOME, and tax SPENDING. Give me the pay I earn, and I'll spend a lot more on goods and services. Tax me the ...[text shortened]... blue state that thinks the government should be able to control what size drink I buy at McDonalds.
17 Jun 21
@averagejoe1 saidIndeed, you do not need to destroy the rich to help the poor. The poor can have a better social security through taxes from the rich, and middle class can be provided with small business assistance. Also there is a certain mindset that one must have to be a successful businessman..
Thankyou for this, no one ever listens to me. What is curious to me is that the liberals, for want of burying the rich people, will lose the war. If they could only see what you are saying, they would realize to let the Rich be what they want to be and make all the money they make as long as they create the tremendous prosperity in this country. The liberals hate Rich just like they hate Donald Trump,, pulling out all stops. They don’t think it through.
The sad thing is that sometimes a country needs to go through that phase of hating the rich, and destroying them, then descending into poverty, for then to learn how these things work.
@rajk999 saidIndeed, A shame that liberals do not delve into these matters instead of writing post after post about gender race and other insignificant issues.
Indeed, you do not need to destroy the rich to help the poor. The poor can have a better social security through taxes from the rich, and middle class can be provided with small business assistance. Also there is a certain mindset that one must have to be a successful businessman..
The sad thing is that sometimes a country needs to go through that phase of hating the rich, and destroying them, then descending into poverty, for then to learn how these things work.
17 Jun 21
@very-musty saidPeople won't accept that and find ways to overstep the barriers with means already existing today:
So we live in a world where the rich get richer and the poor stay poor.
So... would you agree that each individual could only make a certain amount of money?
If so...how much?
Once they reach the limit where would you put that extra money?
A billionaire is someone who has a million dollars 1000 times.
What can they buy that a regular millionaire can't?
I think ...[text shortened]... ne time.
Not 30 million a year that you build up.
30 million total wealth cannot be surpassed.
companies owning companies, that own companies, that in turn own companies, that in turn own the original company.
Plus you would have the problem if a person wons something say: stock of a company for 29 million $ (the y also need a place to live that is were the other million is located). Now that stock makes a rise by 5%. they have to give away the money, but then the stock falls again, will the administration have to reimburse them? At what datwes is the value assesed? Same for all?
There is something in your suggestion, but I can't see any way that it can work.
17 Jun 21
@ponderable saidThis your moment, Musty!
People won't accept that and find ways to overstep the barriers with means already existing today:
companies owning companies, that own companies, that in turn own companies, that in turn own the original company.
Plus you would have the problem if a person wons something say: stock of a company for 29 million $ (the y also need a place to live that is were the oth ...[text shortened]... d? Same for all?
There is something in your suggestion, but I can't see any way that it can work.
🤔🤔🤔
17 Jun 21
1 edit
@liljo saidOf COURSE it's not a liberal idea.
I TOTALLY support a flat tax.
It is not, however, a "liberal" idea. Liberals have long argued that a flat tax favors "the rich" (as defined by them, of course) and actually hurts the lower income folks.
I'm pretty radical in that I believe they should stop taxing my INCOME, and tax SPENDING. Give me the pay I earn, and I'll spend a lot more on goods and services. Tax me the ...[text shortened]... blue state that thinks the government should be able to control what size drink I buy at McDonalds.
Conservatives try to get this passed so that the rich only have to pay their measly tax amount, not a percentage, instead of what that tax percentage SHOULD be.
A flat tax is a boon for the rich and an anchor around the neck for the poor. What this results in is a net DROP in what percentage of income the rich pay and a net INCREASE in the tax percentage the poor pay. Just do the math.
Likewise, dropping an income tax, and increasing sales taxes, or consumption taxes, does the exact same thing as a flat tax. It increases the percentage of income paid by the poor while the rich get off relatively scot-free.
Frankly, I am surprised that I have to explain this. Those with higher incomes KNOW they get away with paying less tax while stiffing the poor under both of these schemes.
- Joined
- 14 Feb 09
- Moves
- 12541
17 Jun 21
@averagejoe1 saidI'll think we'll just get rid of the rich and greedy and sort out the other problems later.
This your moment, Musty!
🤔🤔🤔
We are poor now so being poor later won't matter 😉
17 Jun 21
@averagejoe1 saidInsignificant FOR YOU. You're white. And straight. And cis-gender.
Indeed, A shame that liberals do not delve into these matters instead of writing post after post about gender race and other insignificant issues.
Not so insignificant for non-whites or LGBTQ+.
- Joined
- 14 Feb 09
- Moves
- 12541
17 Jun 21
@Ponderable
30 million you retire.
Anything over is taken.
If you lose any it's your fault.
Anything under 30 million total wealth and you can keep going.
All assets are in the total...not just cash.
It could work 🤔
@very-musty saidClearly you have a "win-lose" mentality when it comes to wealth.
So we live in a world where the rich get richer and the poor stay poor.
So... would you agree that each individual could only make a certain amount of money?
If so...how much?
Once they reach the limit where would you put that extra money?
A billionaire is someone who has a million dollars 1000 times.
What can they buy that a regular millionaire can't?
I think ...[text shortened]... ne time.
Not 30 million a year that you build up.
30 million total wealth cannot be surpassed.
And seemingly you conflate "wealth" with "money". Although for most of us, a distinction between "wealth" and "money" is not so important, when you're trying to implement good financial policy for a nation, the distinction is very important.
A country can print money, but that does not create wealth. (e.g. Venezuela and hyper-inflation). Wealth consists of goods and services. Money is a median of exchange, and for ordinary people over short periods of time can be an okay way to store wealth. Over the long term, cash does not store wealth. (just consider what $1 bought in 1970 versus now).
So in your world, if I had $29,700,000 in the bank and owned a $300,000 house, I'd be done. I would be barred from remodeling my kitchen because then my house would be worth $301,000 and that would put me over the limit. Even if I did the work myself, the government would need to prevent it.
If I wanted to restore antique cars in my spare time, nope. That would create value and must not be done. I could only do it if someone else owned the car and I didn't get paid.
But if I did restore an antique car, that would increase the total wealth of the nation, because there'd collectively be one more valuable car. If I were to sell it, it would in some small way drive down the cost of cars for everyone because there is one more car on the market and no new person has been added to need a car. Even if I don't sell it, it has diminished my desire to buy a car, and hence I'm not driving up the cost others have to pay for a car.
Wealth creation is much more productive when we see the true "win-win" nature. When someone produces an item of value or provides a service that has value, the whole society wins.
Edit: Currently, I have a decent job that is thankfully the result of someone, somewhere, trying to get richer. The fact that some of those people are more wealthy than I doesn't bother me. I consider this arrangement to be a "win-win" and I hope those that have invested in the company I work for gain wealth while continue to pay me the agreed upon amount.
17 Jun 21
@very-musty saidCan't believe I took this thread seriously.
@techsouth
You're over the age barrier of 64 right?
In hindsight, it's obviously just some sort of satire against liberal wealth envy. No one could really believe this was a good idea, not even leftists.
Keep 'em coming. I'll try to play along with the satire next time.
Everyone knows that the production of goods and services is the ONLY way to enrich society and it could only spread misery if we inhibited it.
17 Jun 21
@very-musty saidThere Is no emoji for this imbecile
@Ponderable
30 million you retire.
Anything over is taken.
If you lose any it's your fault.
Anything under 30 million total wealth and you can keep going.
All assets are in the total...not just cash.
It could work 🤔