3 ms·

Most motivated people with the means to scrape enough cash together to even try to start something dislike legislation and the idea of "redistribution" because

by d33lio 6y ago

Most motivated people with the means to scrape enough cash together to even try to start something dislike legislation and the idea of "redistribution" because usually these plans raise far less money than politicians think, but moreover the politicians coming up with these plans have already proven they have no clue how to spend taxpayer dollars. To be frank, as a supporter of capitalism - I generally support the notion of high taxes in europe because the populations who pay these taxes clearly see HUGE societal benefits as a result of half their income evaporating. There also seems to be more respect of the people's money from these gov'ts regarding how they spend taxpayer money is spent and with a clear aim to help the people NOT partisan goals, wars etc. I may be incorrect here (open to correction) but it seems like US politicians (federally at least) seem entitled to taxpayer dollars. Most forget that until WW2 the idea of federal witholding simply wasn't a thing and many middle class families were flushed with savings. Unfortunately, both sides are at fault in the US. The only way this is going to change for the better is to cease the cycle of one political party only pandering to it's base instead of motivated and able americans.

RangerScience 6y ago
> to cease the cycle sooo ranked choice voting? :D
stvswn 6y ago
I don't really agree with you characterization of where our taxes go -- federally, 64% of the government budget is related to mandatory spending, almost all of which is social security, medicare, and medicaid. 15% of the budget goes to the military. That makes the U.S. the largest military spender in the world. 15% of the budget may seem expensive, but it's not fair to compare it to Western Europe. NATO is a big reason why western europe does not need to spend more on their own defense. I believe that's a good thing - it's in the United States' best interest to avoid rearmament in Europe, and Europe has never been at (relative) peace for so long as it has been since the emergence of the post-WWII consensus -- but they do in fact have more money for more non-defense discretionary spending than we do as a result. The Euro area spends 1.4% of GDP on military spending while being protected by an umbrella of security provided by the U.S., which spends 3.7% of GDP on the military. Again, I think this is good for the U.S., we benefit from the liberal world order that we enforce, but I think it has to be taken into context when the EU is described as a great example of how to spend tax money on wise social programs.
- d33lio 6y ago
  "mandatory spending" - right I take a bigger issue with programs like student loan debt forgiveness which would be a slap in the face to poor people like myself who worked their way through college in order to no longer be burdened by loans. Not to mention the fact that without a refresh of regulation on universities (specifically graduate degrees) loan forgiveness would just further embolden universities to increase tuition. The issue with taxes in this country is that the budget is expected to always be met WITH excess. That's the disgusting part, the assumption that "well we can go over and shell out benefits to our beneficiaries (people who voted for us) and the american tax payer will foot the bill" is atrocious. Both parties are guilty of this, however I also find it ironic that Americans (specifically privileged americans) seem to think that "taxing the rich" is a solution, when a) rich people already pay an overwhelming majority of taxes, b) the rich will always find ways to out-smart the government and avoid taxes they deem as unfit and c) even if you taxed earners above $400k 95% of their income it would only amount to maybe a trillion dollars - so not even close to bringing the national deficit down.
  - heavyset_go 6y ago
    > I take a bigger issue with programs like student loan debt forgiveness which would be a slap in the face to poor people like myself who worked their way through college in order to no longer be burdened by loans This is like saying that a cheap cure for cancer would be a slap in the face to people who drained their life savings battling cancer, and to the families of those who lost.
    - d33lio 6y ago
      To be frank, conflating healthcare and higher education is quite a mental leap. Yes, they both have problems and are "free" in other countries - in either case, nothing is really "free".

by d33lio 6y ago

RangerScience 6y ago

> to cease the cycle sooo ranked choice voting? :D

stvswn 6y ago

I don't really agree with you characterization of where our taxes go -- federally, 64% of the government budget is related to mandatory spending, almost all of which is social security, medicare, and medicaid. 15% of the budget goes to the military. That makes the U.S. the largest military spender in the world. 15% of the budget may seem expensive, but it's not fair to compare it to Western Europe. NATO is a big reason why western europe does not need to spend more on their own defense. I believe that's a good thing - it's in the United States' best interest to avoid rearmament in Europe, and Europe has never been at (relative) peace for so long as it has been since the emergence of the post-WWII consensus -- but they do in fact have more money for more non-defense discretionary spending than we do as a result. The Euro area spends 1.4% of GDP on military spending while being protected by an umbrella of security provided by the U.S., which spends 3.7% of GDP on the military. Again, I think this is good for the U.S., we benefit from the liberal world order that we enforce, but I think it has to be taken into context when the EU is described as a great example of how to spend tax money on wise social programs.

d33lio 6y ago
"mandatory spending" - right I take a bigger issue with programs like student loan debt forgiveness which would be a slap in the face to poor people like myself who worked their way through college in order to no longer be burdened by loans. Not to mention the fact that without a refresh of regulation on universities (specifically graduate degrees) loan forgiveness would just further embolden universities to increase tuition. The issue with taxes in this country is that the budget is expected to always be met WITH excess. That's the disgusting part, the assumption that "well we can go over and shell out benefits to our beneficiaries (people who voted for us) and the american tax payer will foot the bill" is atrocious. Both parties are guilty of this, however I also find it ironic that Americans (specifically privileged americans) seem to think that "taxing the rich" is a solution, when a) rich people already pay an overwhelming majority of taxes, b) the rich will always find ways to out-smart the government and avoid taxes they deem as unfit and c) even if you taxed earners above $400k 95% of their income it would only amount to maybe a trillion dollars - so not even close to bringing the national deficit down.
- heavyset_go 6y ago
  > I take a bigger issue with programs like student loan debt forgiveness which would be a slap in the face to poor people like myself who worked their way through college in order to no longer be burdened by loans This is like saying that a cheap cure for cancer would be a slap in the face to people who drained their life savings battling cancer, and to the families of those who lost.
  - d33lio 6y ago
    To be frank, conflating healthcare and higher education is quite a mental leap. Yes, they both have problems and are "free" in other countries - in either case, nothing is really "free".