4 ms·

> Plus, someone’s got to pay for everything: Bizarrely, even experts miss this obvious fact. If not income taxes, then how does government pay the bills? Incom

> Plus, someone’s got to pay for everything: Bizarrely, even experts miss this obvious fact. If not income taxes, then how does government pay the bills? Income taxes are usually the most progressive tax, so no income tax usually means less wealthy people pay more. If government spends less, what services are cut? No income tax != free lunch. Someone has to pay.

dillydogg 3y ago
Yeah it's very funny hearing my dad talk about how nice it is to have no income tax in Washington (he's a dentist). But when you tell him that the relatively higher income tax is worse for poor people he doesn't seem to agree. Washington is certainly a progressive state on the whole, but the taxation is horrible.
- wolverine876 3y ago
  > relatively higher income tax is worse for poor people How is it worse for poor people?
  - dillydogg 3y ago
    Poor people spend more of their income on things that have sales tax. In other words, someone who is worried about their 401k is probably spending less of their income each month by percentage compared to someone living paycheck to paycheck. https://itep.org/whopays-7th-edition/#sales-and-excise-taxes https://itep.org/whopays-7th-edition/#sales-and-excise-taxes
lobocinza 3y ago
Governments can do less and spend more wisely.
- wolverine876 3y ago
  What solution does that offer? People have been debating what to keep and cut for generations, as well as ways to improve spending; I don't see any low-hanging fruit or big improvements there.
  - lobocinza 3y ago
    > What solution does that offer? Really? If people weren't forced to pay as much taxes as they have today they would have more resources to invest in what really matters to them instead of having a bunch of bureacrauts wasting it. > I don't see any low-hanging fruit or big improvements there. There are tons of low-hanging fruits, at least in South America, the issue is that government doesn't exist to provide services and seek the interests of the population. Government is just a big mafia and things are corrupt and inneficient by design because their true goal is to fill their pockets.
    - wolverine876 3y ago
      > Really? Are you surprised I'm just not accepting the trope as God-given truth? Get used to it. :) > If people weren't forced to pay as much taxes as they have today they would have more resources to invest in what really matters to them instead of having a bunch of bureacrauts wasting it. And they'd have less services provided by government. Anyway, your claim is a trope, but let's actually examine it: People want government to do certain things; government does things that "really matter". Nobody gets exactly what they want from anything - the restaurant, their family members, employers, etc., or from government. I know the word 'bureaucrat' has been demonized, but that's not evidence (in fact, it's evidence IME of right-wing propaganda). I personally know some government bureaucrats well, and they are serious professionals, completely committed to their job and to public service. Government waste is long been a trope of the right-wing propaganda, as a way to persuade people to cut taxes (for the wealthy) and reduce government's influence (which democratically counters that of powerful people), but I've never seen evidence that government is more wasteful than other sizeable institutions - if you've seen the inside of a mid-sized corporation, you would recognize it. Same with churches, non-profits etc etc. If you have evidence, that's one thing. Just repeating these claims doesn't make them true. It makes them ripe to be challenged. > There are tons of low-hanging fruits, at least in South America, the issue is that government doesn't exist to provide services and seek the interests of the population. Government is just a big mafia and things are corrupt and inneficient by design because their true goal is to fill their pockets. Who is there only to provide services? Don't businesses also want to fill their pockets? Also, we are grouping all of South America, from Columbia to Argentina, into one broad generalization?

dillydogg 3y ago

Yeah it's very funny hearing my dad talk about how nice it is to have no income tax in Washington (he's a dentist). But when you tell him that the relatively higher income tax is worse for poor people he doesn't seem to agree. Washington is certainly a progressive state on the whole, but the taxation is horrible.

wolverine876 3y ago
> relatively higher income tax is worse for poor people How is it worse for poor people?
- dillydogg 3y ago
  Poor people spend more of their income on things that have sales tax. In other words, someone who is worried about their 401k is probably spending less of their income each month by percentage compared to someone living paycheck to paycheck. https://itep.org/whopays-7th-edition/#sales-and-excise-taxes https://itep.org/whopays-7th-edition/#sales-and-excise-taxes

lobocinza 3y ago

Governments can do less and spend more wisely.

wolverine876 3y ago
What solution does that offer? People have been debating what to keep and cut for generations, as well as ways to improve spending; I don't see any low-hanging fruit or big improvements there.
- lobocinza 3y ago
  > What solution does that offer? Really? If people weren't forced to pay as much taxes as they have today they would have more resources to invest in what really matters to them instead of having a bunch of bureacrauts wasting it. > I don't see any low-hanging fruit or big improvements there. There are tons of low-hanging fruits, at least in South America, the issue is that government doesn't exist to provide services and seek the interests of the population. Government is just a big mafia and things are corrupt and inneficient by design because their true goal is to fill their pockets.
  - wolverine876 3y ago
    > Really? Are you surprised I'm just not accepting the trope as God-given truth? Get used to it. :) > If people weren't forced to pay as much taxes as they have today they would have more resources to invest in what really matters to them instead of having a bunch of bureacrauts wasting it. And they'd have less services provided by government. Anyway, your claim is a trope, but let's actually examine it: People want government to do certain things; government does things that "really matter". Nobody gets exactly what they want from anything - the restaurant, their family members, employers, etc., or from government. I know the word 'bureaucrat' has been demonized, but that's not evidence (in fact, it's evidence IME of right-wing propaganda). I personally know some government bureaucrats well, and they are serious professionals, completely committed to their job and to public service. Government waste is long been a trope of the right-wing propaganda, as a way to persuade people to cut taxes (for the wealthy) and reduce government's influence (which democratically counters that of powerful people), but I've never seen evidence that government is more wasteful than other sizeable institutions - if you've seen the inside of a mid-sized corporation, you would recognize it. Same with churches, non-profits etc etc. If you have evidence, that's one thing. Just repeating these claims doesn't make them true. It makes them ripe to be challenged. > There are tons of low-hanging fruits, at least in South America, the issue is that government doesn't exist to provide services and seek the interests of the population. Government is just a big mafia and things are corrupt and inneficient by design because their true goal is to fill their pockets. Who is there only to provide services? Don't businesses also want to fill their pockets? Also, we are grouping all of South America, from Columbia to Argentina, into one broad generalization?