Anti-Economics

Discussion in 'Political Action Forum' started by DComeaux, Jan 21, 2021.

  1. pintail2222

    pintail2222 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    32,185
    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2002
    Location:
    Collier Co. Florida
    Powell wanted to keep inflation in check. At around 2%.

    The job of the Fed is supposed to keep unemployment as low as possible according to the Humphrey Hawkins Full Employment Act....
     
  2. JP

    JP Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    14,191
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2000
    Location:
    Indian Territory, Oklahoma
    Lets look at the math:

    Top ordinary income tax bracket went down from 39.6% to 37% which is a 6.5% reduction.

    The base bracket went down from 15% to 12% which is a 20% reduction.

    Who got the big end of that stick?


    The top 1% of earners (taxable income) pay ~30% of taxes.

    Those with taxable income above ~$124K pay 71%! of taxes.

    The wife and I paid ~$44K in taxes for 2019.

    ~51% of citizens pay no income taxes.

    We live in the Parasitic United States of America.
     
  3. Lawrence1

    Lawrence1 New Member

    Messages:
    27
    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2021
    Location:
    Howard, Ohio
    Ahh, the ol' whining about the progressive tax.

    The system that the real experts came up with, men who have actually thought about it past their own wallets. So they reduced the tax burden on the people who can least afford to pay, leaving more money in the pockets of low-wage earners, who are likely to spend all of that money on essential goods and stimulate the economy. There is beauty hidden in this system.

    But why a progressive tax? Here's the Lawrence condensed version. Historically, when governments allowed all the money to flow to the top, eventually the peasants picked up their pitchforks and murdered them, starting the process all over again. Now with a progressive system the poor with the opportunity to advance go right on being poor and the rich (here's the beauty) go right on being rich!
     
  4. JP

    JP Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    14,191
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2000
    Location:
    Indian Territory, Oklahoma
    And, you think the Founding Fathers weren’t cognizant of this history? Ergo, the First and Second Amendments as the firewall against the shelf life of our experiment. Now, you know why those are currently under such relentless attack by the left. Your “trickle up” economic theory is problematic due to the regressive nature of progressive taxation. Does the rising tide not lift all boats? Should talent and initiative not be rewarded? Are participation trophies acceptable instead?
     
    IV Hunt, wingmatt and OneShotBandit like this.
  5. BigSkyDuk

    BigSkyDuk Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    2,310
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2018
    Actually, the system the real experts think is best is not an income tax at all. The real experts believe that a Value Added Tax (VAT) is the most economically efficient because it doesn't distort economic behavior. Income taxes, especially when the tax code is as complicated and full of special interest carve outs as ours is, are behavior distortion machines. The most obvious distortion is the hiding of what should be taxable income. Then you have things like Section 179 depreciation, which motivates business owners to go out and spend money on capital purchases they may or may not need at the end of the year because they can write them off in full and reduce their taxable income. On the lower income end of the spectrum, you have things like the Earned Income Tax Credit which can actually penalize people who increase their wages and lose the credit. You have things like tax credits for installing solar panels, or an energy efficient furnace which are designed to influence people towards achieving a social goal but distort normal economic behavior along the way. The income tax code is a piggybank for special interests.

    Like @JP said, our tax code is already progressive enough. When half the country isn't paying into the system, don't you think that alienates them from it? Don't you think everyone should have some skin in the game? I do--I mean, otherwise you just have a hundred million people who can perpetually vote to spend other people's money. Where's the incentive for them to be judicious in their spending? And for the other half who does pay, where's the incentive for them to give a **** about the poor, who frankly come off as ungrateful free riders? It's nothing but divisive.
     
  6. API

    API PAF-CA Flyway Moderator

    Messages:
    37,473
    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Location:
    SoCal
    Essentially our culture’s message has become, “why bother to achieve when there is sufficient reward for just being there”.
     

Share This Page