3 ms·
Do you have anything more substantial than an ad hominem to demonstrate that this statement is wrong or misleading?
by vonmoltke 8y ago
Do you have anything more substantial than an ad hominem to demonstrate that this statement is wrong or misleading?
- CPLX 8y agoYes. He says “the actual tax burden has...” but then cites something that doesn’t discuss the tax burden at all, but rather certain marginal income tax rates. FICA is also a percentage tax on income and it’s part of the tax burden. As are many other taxes. The word tax burden has a specific meaning and it’s not being used correctly here. It’s easy to spot because anti tax lobbyists have been making this intentional “mistake” in their argument for decades.
- undersuit 8y ago>It’s easy to spot because anti tax lobbyists have been making this intentional “mistake” in their argument for decades. Look this smaller number of people pay more in total taxation than this larger number of people, and I'm going to use this "fact" to malign all taxation even though it's the intended effect of progressive taxation.
- opo 8y agoThe original article is about federal income tax rates. In one of your messages there was this comment by you: >> When Reagan lowered the tax rates in exchange for eliminating the tax shelters... >We got skyrocketing wealth inequality leading to a near breakdown of the political and social order 30 years later We have been talking about federal taxes in the linked article and in this discussion. It is disingenuous of you to now move the goal posts. That is a much more complex discussion since you need to add in all the other taxes paid - all of which have changed over time, but had little to do with Reagan.