5 ms·

Race, abortion, and an irrational fear of taxation are enough to keep people voting against their self interests. These are important factors to consider when

by skh 8y ago

Race, abortion, and an irrational fear of taxation are enough to keep people voting against their self interests. These are important factors to consider when trying to understand voting patterns in the U.S.

phil21 8y ago
> irrational fear of taxation Curious when it becomes rational? Literally every federal income tax bracket is more than the taxes on "tea" before the revolutionary war. Most of us making decent money in high-cost world city are paying 50% or damn near close to it in taxes. What is left to tax? If you start taking much more from me I simply quit and move to the third world where I can retire today with my current savings. This whole meme of "irrational fear of taxation" is ridiculous. Those that make money pay 50% or so in taxes, and we aren't seeing a whole lot of return for that money. I'd pay 7% more if I moved to the Netherlands today, and get a whole lot more than 7% in additional value.
- WalterSear 8y ago
  What is left to tax are the rich who pay nowhere near what you do. They are also why you are both dissatisfied with your post-tax income, and, to a lesser extent, underwhelmed by what it buys for the government.
  - brain5ide 8y ago
    There's the old adage: the liberals don't care for the poor. They just hate the rich. The point is that, if a tax system relies on some, even arbitrary structure, there will always be a way for a rich person to pay less by restructuring, and the cost of restructuring will always be worth it the richer you are. The main problem of this tax the rich fuckery is that the supposed rules usually bleed onto the middle class in 10 to 20 years due to trying to make the ends meet. Also, the unsolicited spending, of course, but that's another story.
    - _nalply 8y ago
      Perhaps we should tax something very human that nobody can escape? Economy can be displayed as flows of money, labor and goods. We should look hard at these flows and think where even the rich can't evade by restructuring. I don't have a pre-made solution, only ideas. The crucial idea is that one rich person is a person after all. What do people do? They consume, give money to others and export funds. Catch them when they do that. They can't avoid eating and sleeping. Therefore switching the focus of taxation onto things nobody can avoid would be something society needs to contemplate and perhaps tackle. A completely novel way would be something I call affluence source tax. It is similar to a value added tax, however it is levied on everything a rich person does: buying stuff, paying for labor and rent, bartering, and especially for exporting funds! Forget taxing legal entities because they are always being restructured to minimise taxing. Just look at the people themselves, not the legal entities. Probably this wouldn't be the granddaddy of all taxing solutions, and most surely the rich will be successful in stopping this, but at least nobody can stop me thinking about this problem.
      - jfnixon 8y ago
        So you are going to tax the necessities? Right, only the 'rich.' How do you define 'rich'? High income? What about the small business owner who retires, sells, and gets that one large payday? You gonna tax her like she earns that much every year? High net worth? What if that net worth is structured so it looks like some other entity controls it? The very wealthy will employ clever people to beat your plan every single day and twice on Sunday, just like they do today. Buffett pays a lower rate than his secretary for a reason.
        _nalply 8y ago
        No, flat tax everything. The trick is: catch the people not the companies. Because the rich consume and send funds a lot they will be taxed a lot. Now to your example that some other entity controlling the net worth, this won't help because if the rich person wants to buy a private jet with the help of that other entity, the other entity will just pay taxes instead. Because people are taxed, not companies, rich people can't avoid taxation. It is just an idea.
- skh 8y ago
  Your complaint appears to be about the rate of your taxation and the return on benefits from taxation but not on the concept of taxation. This is related to but not the same thing as a fear of taxation. A number of people in the U.S. have taken your stance further and declare taxation as theft. Such people tend to single mindedly vote for anyone who says they’ll lower taxes and not consider someone who says they want to better spend what taxes are used for.
  - jfnixon 8y ago
    "Such people tend to single-mindedly vote for anyone who says they'll (sic) lower taxes..." Proof, please. A cite or three to peer reviewed studies will do.
    - skh 8y ago
      Do you have the ability prove all assertions that you think are true? Do you have the ability to cite three peer reviewed studies to back up all claims you believe to be true? Like everyone else my opinions are formed by a combination of experience, anecdotal evidence, and locigal deductions from facts. This is especially so in the realm of politics where one tends to make sweeping statements about large groups of people. I’ve encountered many people who claim taxation is theft and heard their views on other political matters. This experience has led me to the conclusion that people who say that taxation is theft largely vote a certain way. Of course I might be wrong. This is a forum where people post their opinions. Asking someone to be prepared to cite three peer reviewed articles for each opinion is weird. You know I probably can’t cite such articles so I guess that you make the request in an attempt to point out that there are things I think are true that I can’t prove. I suppose you think this diminishes the merits of my opinions. I think you are wrong. Your request says more about you than it does about my opinion.
purplezooey 8y ago
pretty much

by skh 8y ago

phil21 8y ago

> irrational fear of taxation Curious when it becomes rational? Literally every federal income tax bracket is more than the taxes on "tea" before the revolutionary war. Most of us making decent money in high-cost world city are paying 50% or damn near close to it in taxes. What is left to tax? If you start taking much more from me I simply quit and move to the third world where I can retire today with my current savings. This whole meme of "irrational fear of taxation" is ridiculous. Those that make money pay 50% or so in taxes, and we aren't seeing a whole lot of return for that money. I'd pay 7% more if I moved to the Netherlands today, and get a whole lot more than 7% in additional value.

WalterSear 8y ago
What is left to tax are the rich who pay nowhere near what you do. They are also why you are both dissatisfied with your post-tax income, and, to a lesser extent, underwhelmed by what it buys for the government.
- brain5ide 8y ago
  There's the old adage: the liberals don't care for the poor. They just hate the rich. The point is that, if a tax system relies on some, even arbitrary structure, there will always be a way for a rich person to pay less by restructuring, and the cost of restructuring will always be worth it the richer you are. The main problem of this tax the rich fuckery is that the supposed rules usually bleed onto the middle class in 10 to 20 years due to trying to make the ends meet. Also, the unsolicited spending, of course, but that's another story.
  - _nalply 8y ago
    Perhaps we should tax something very human that nobody can escape? Economy can be displayed as flows of money, labor and goods. We should look hard at these flows and think where even the rich can't evade by restructuring. I don't have a pre-made solution, only ideas. The crucial idea is that one rich person is a person after all. What do people do? They consume, give money to others and export funds. Catch them when they do that. They can't avoid eating and sleeping. Therefore switching the focus of taxation onto things nobody can avoid would be something society needs to contemplate and perhaps tackle. A completely novel way would be something I call affluence source tax. It is similar to a value added tax, however it is levied on everything a rich person does: buying stuff, paying for labor and rent, bartering, and especially for exporting funds! Forget taxing legal entities because they are always being restructured to minimise taxing. Just look at the people themselves, not the legal entities. Probably this wouldn't be the granddaddy of all taxing solutions, and most surely the rich will be successful in stopping this, but at least nobody can stop me thinking about this problem.
    - jfnixon 8y ago
      So you are going to tax the necessities? Right, only the 'rich.' How do you define 'rich'? High income? What about the small business owner who retires, sells, and gets that one large payday? You gonna tax her like she earns that much every year? High net worth? What if that net worth is structured so it looks like some other entity controls it? The very wealthy will employ clever people to beat your plan every single day and twice on Sunday, just like they do today. Buffett pays a lower rate than his secretary for a reason.
      - _nalply 8y ago
        No, flat tax everything. The trick is: catch the people not the companies. Because the rich consume and send funds a lot they will be taxed a lot. Now to your example that some other entity controlling the net worth, this won't help because if the rich person wants to buy a private jet with the help of that other entity, the other entity will just pay taxes instead. Because people are taxed, not companies, rich people can't avoid taxation. It is just an idea.
skh 8y ago
Your complaint appears to be about the rate of your taxation and the return on benefits from taxation but not on the concept of taxation. This is related to but not the same thing as a fear of taxation. A number of people in the U.S. have taken your stance further and declare taxation as theft. Such people tend to single mindedly vote for anyone who says they’ll lower taxes and not consider someone who says they want to better spend what taxes are used for.
- jfnixon 8y ago
  "Such people tend to single-mindedly vote for anyone who says they'll (sic) lower taxes..." Proof, please. A cite or three to peer reviewed studies will do.
  - skh 8y ago
    Do you have the ability prove all assertions that you think are true? Do you have the ability to cite three peer reviewed studies to back up all claims you believe to be true? Like everyone else my opinions are formed by a combination of experience, anecdotal evidence, and locigal deductions from facts. This is especially so in the realm of politics where one tends to make sweeping statements about large groups of people. I’ve encountered many people who claim taxation is theft and heard their views on other political matters. This experience has led me to the conclusion that people who say that taxation is theft largely vote a certain way. Of course I might be wrong. This is a forum where people post their opinions. Asking someone to be prepared to cite three peer reviewed articles for each opinion is weird. You know I probably can’t cite such articles so I guess that you make the request in an attempt to point out that there are things I think are true that I can’t prove. I suppose you think this diminishes the merits of my opinions. I think you are wrong. Your request says more about you than it does about my opinion.

purplezooey 8y ago

pretty much