5 ms·

A bunch of things happened. Women entered the workforce in large numbers almost doubling the labor pool across the 1970s. This instantly stagnated wages. Meanw

by hajile 4y ago

A bunch of things happened. Women entered the workforce in large numbers almost doubling the labor pool across the 1970s. This instantly stagnated wages. Meanwhile, all the things those women were doing at home weren't free, so cost of living also skyrockets. Pretty soon the reasonable "right to work from home" becomes "go to work or go broke" Welfare state kicked off in earnest and corporate taxes were increased to compensate while it was removed from your pay via wages not keeping up with inflation. Related to welfare, 60% of people pay ZERO or NEGATIVE income taxes. Rich people are paying for all those negative taxes and taking it out of YOUR paycheck. Then, because they are paying most of the taxes, they are the people politicians actually listen to. You are outright lied to about inflation. The calculations were changed in 1980 by the incoming Reagan administration to make it look like their policies were more effective than they actually were. CPI indicates that inflation from 2000 to 2020 was right at 50%, but if you look at price comparisons for stuff in 2000 and stuff now, they've generally gone up 100% or more. You can see these shenanigans represented in things like how the wholesale inflation index is currently 2-3% higher than the CPI rate. When your employer says "we're giving you a 2% cost of living because that's the CPI" and real inflation is actually 4%, this adds up over the years. Finally, even after accounting for everything, almost everyone is STILL getting screwed relative to inflation. We as devs think we have "the good life", but we're generally making LESS than median salary adjusted for inflation compared to programmers 30-50 years ago despite being massively more productive.

zaik 4y ago
> Rich people are paying for all those negative taxes and taking it out of YOUR paycheck. If somebody is able to get richer by lowering your pay they will eventually do so, taxes or not.
SahAssar 4y ago
> Related to welfare, 60% of people pay ZERO or NEGATIVE income taxes Are you against a progressive tax rate?
- InTheArena 4y ago
  Progressive tax rate implies that taxes actually being paid at some rate. That’s not the case here
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > Progressive tax rate implies that taxes actually being paid at some rate. That’s not the case here. Yes it is. Both zero and negative numbers have been recognized as actual values for...quite a long time. Progressive taxation means that the first derivative of taxes is on average decreasing with increasing income, it does not imply that taxes (or, a fortiori, as the upthread comment is actually referring to, the net of taxes less transfers) is always positive.
- yucky 4y ago
  What rate should the people paying 0 in federal income tax (roughly half of the population) actually pay in order to make the progressive tax system work better?
  - claudiulodro 4y ago
    Follow up question: what rate should the 25% of the population who are minors[1] and the half of older adults who are retired[2] pay? Combined, these groups are ~40% of the US population as far as I can tell. [1] https://www.aecf.org/resources/the-changing-child-population-of-the-united-states#:~:text=Today%2C%20the%20number%20of%20children,all%20time%20low%20of%2024%25 https://www.aecf.org/resources/the-changing-child-population.... [2] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/11/04/amid-the-pandemic-a-rising-share-of-older-u-s-adults-are-now-retired/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/11/04/amid-the-pa...
- hajile 4y ago
  I'm not strictly against the idea, but progressive tax rates are NEVER progressive. The rich just suppress wages and use that money to pay the extra amount they're charged. They use TONS of games to hide money or claim losses where none exist. Even worse, the money they keep from your paycheck that doesn't stay in their pocket due to tax loopholes gets them even more influence with politicians. No matter how you slice that, the poor see ZERO benefit from this type of progressive tax. Sales taxes are MUCH better. If the poor need a break, then cut sales taxes on food, medicine, and other subsistence items. Now everyone pays for exactly what they use. Because it is upfront, there are fewer games to be played. Because it is exchanged for an immediate good or service, all the crazy "losses" claims also go away. You trading stocks? Tax time for you (this will also cut down on day trading and stabilize the stock market). You trying to move your money into something to hedge? Tax time for you. Taking out a massive loan backed by your stocks? Maybe we should tax that too. Getting a huge house with lots of stuff driving up your carbon footprint? Tax all that stuff too. This tax seems like it's ACTUALLY progressive. It punishes extravagant spending and (through inflation) it taxes leaving your liquid assets sitting around. People don't have to spend billions every year on personal income tax filing either.
VictorPath 4y ago
> Related to welfare, 60% of people pay ZERO or NEGATIVE income taxes 57% of people paid no federal income tax last year, not 60%. Also, this percentage is much higher than the pre-Covid period, so this percentage means nothing outside that context.
- hajile 4y ago
  First, you are quibbling over 3%. Even on the low end before COVID, we're still talking 47% of people. Second, to my knowledge, those statistics relate to filing and don't include people who may pay X in taxes, but receive X+Y back in other benefits. If you pay $2000 in taxes, but receive $10,000 in benefits, then you are paying net -$8000 into the system.

by hajile 4y ago

zaik 4y ago

> Rich people are paying for all those negative taxes and taking it out of YOUR paycheck. If somebody is able to get richer by lowering your pay they will eventually do so, taxes or not.

SahAssar 4y ago

> Related to welfare, 60% of people pay ZERO or NEGATIVE income taxes Are you against a progressive tax rate?

InTheArena 4y ago
Progressive tax rate implies that taxes actually being paid at some rate. That’s not the case here
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > Progressive tax rate implies that taxes actually being paid at some rate. That’s not the case here. Yes it is. Both zero and negative numbers have been recognized as actual values for...quite a long time. Progressive taxation means that the first derivative of taxes is on average decreasing with increasing income, it does not imply that taxes (or, a fortiori, as the upthread comment is actually referring to, the net of taxes less transfers) is always positive.
yucky 4y ago
What rate should the people paying 0 in federal income tax (roughly half of the population) actually pay in order to make the progressive tax system work better?
- claudiulodro 4y ago
  Follow up question: what rate should the 25% of the population who are minors[1] and the half of older adults who are retired[2] pay? Combined, these groups are ~40% of the US population as far as I can tell. [1] https://www.aecf.org/resources/the-changing-child-population-of-the-united-states#:~:text=Today%2C%20the%20number%20of%20children,all%20time%20low%20of%2024%25 https://www.aecf.org/resources/the-changing-child-population.... [2] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/11/04/amid-the-pandemic-a-rising-share-of-older-u-s-adults-are-now-retired/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/11/04/amid-the-pa...
hajile 4y ago
I'm not strictly against the idea, but progressive tax rates are NEVER progressive. The rich just suppress wages and use that money to pay the extra amount they're charged. They use TONS of games to hide money or claim losses where none exist. Even worse, the money they keep from your paycheck that doesn't stay in their pocket due to tax loopholes gets them even more influence with politicians. No matter how you slice that, the poor see ZERO benefit from this type of progressive tax. Sales taxes are MUCH better. If the poor need a break, then cut sales taxes on food, medicine, and other subsistence items. Now everyone pays for exactly what they use. Because it is upfront, there are fewer games to be played. Because it is exchanged for an immediate good or service, all the crazy "losses" claims also go away. You trading stocks? Tax time for you (this will also cut down on day trading and stabilize the stock market). You trying to move your money into something to hedge? Tax time for you. Taking out a massive loan backed by your stocks? Maybe we should tax that too. Getting a huge house with lots of stuff driving up your carbon footprint? Tax all that stuff too. This tax seems like it's ACTUALLY progressive. It punishes extravagant spending and (through inflation) it taxes leaving your liquid assets sitting around. People don't have to spend billions every year on personal income tax filing either.

VictorPath 4y ago

> Related to welfare, 60% of people pay ZERO or NEGATIVE income taxes 57% of people paid no federal income tax last year, not 60%. Also, this percentage is much higher than the pre-Covid period, so this percentage means nothing outside that context.

hajile 4y ago
First, you are quibbling over 3%. Even on the low end before COVID, we're still talking 47% of people. Second, to my knowledge, those statistics relate to filing and don't include people who may pay X in taxes, but receive X+Y back in other benefits. If you pay $2000 in taxes, but receive $10,000 in benefits, then you are paying net -$8000 into the system.