4 ms·

The Tax Foundation... Founded by the Chairman and CFO of General Motors, and the President of Exxon to ostensibly "improve lives through tax policy research" b

The Tax Foundation... Founded by the Chairman and CFO of General Motors, and the President of Exxon to ostensibly "improve lives through tax policy research" but has in its 86 years of existence NOT ONCE supported: - increasing individual taxes - increasing business taxes (actively the opposite) - the existence of excise taxes - the existence of tax credits and generally argues for "significantly smaller" government, "significantly smaller" budgets and such. While it describes itself as non-partisan, it is generally rated: - heavily business-friendly - conservative - center-right to right I am shocked that such an organization, founded by "titans of industry" would claim that we need to tax the wealthy far less and tax the corporations they own and run far less. Entirely shocked.

s1artibartfast 2y ago
Do you think the numbers are fake?
- FireBeyond 2y ago
  I think the numbers are intentionally deceptive. Billionaires aren't generally billionaires because of their salaried jobs. There are trusts and corporations and all manner of entities that "absorb" the majority of their income. Like Peter Thiel's tax-free $5B Roth IRA account. If every person in Houston deposited the maximum they were allowed into their account, it wouldn't equal what self-dealing and obfuscation allowed Thiel to deposit (how many people have share portfolios that they control AND control the valuation thereof). The Tax Foundation knows that the 1% doesn't have all their income captured under "Elon Musk, SSN XYZ" when he files his tax return. But they still like to paint it as such, because it advances their talking points. Like a sibling said, when you look at the wealth controlled and earned, pointing to just the total paid is garbage, because there's no proportion. "Oh, they paid 1.5 times more than [demographic]" means very little when they control 70x the wealth of that other demographic. Source: https://www.propublica.org/article/lord-of-the-roths-how-tech-mogul-peter-thiel-turned-a-retirement-account-for-the-middle-class-into-a-5-billion-dollar-tax-free-piggy-bank https://www.propublica.org/article/lord-of-the-roths-how-tec...
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    The numbers provided arent estimates, they are the actual data on total income tax collected and who paid it. If money isnt collected because of tax shelters, then it isnt represented. This is why looking at actual collection data is more useful than just looking at tax brackets.
blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
I don’t understand your point. The person you’re replying to made an argument by quoting factual numbers. Those numbers seem to have sources. Are you saying the numbers are wrong or that their argument has incorrect logic? If not, why does it matter whether the source is biased or rated some way (by whom)? Their information is from public government data, by the way.
- FireBeyond 2y ago
  “The 1% paid more in tax than the next 9% combined” is a great soundbite. Even completely accurate. Makes it sound like the 1% part their fair share, or rather, even more than (which is the Foundations goal)… But then if you learn that that 1%s earnings are dozens of times more than that next 9%, you realize “hey, it’s not that proportional or progressive as they’d have us believe”. The Tax Foundation openly wants the rich to pay less tax.

s1artibartfast 2y ago

Do you think the numbers are fake?

FireBeyond 2y ago
I think the numbers are intentionally deceptive. Billionaires aren't generally billionaires because of their salaried jobs. There are trusts and corporations and all manner of entities that "absorb" the majority of their income. Like Peter Thiel's tax-free $5B Roth IRA account. If every person in Houston deposited the maximum they were allowed into their account, it wouldn't equal what self-dealing and obfuscation allowed Thiel to deposit (how many people have share portfolios that they control AND control the valuation thereof). The Tax Foundation knows that the 1% doesn't have all their income captured under "Elon Musk, SSN XYZ" when he files his tax return. But they still like to paint it as such, because it advances their talking points. Like a sibling said, when you look at the wealth controlled and earned, pointing to just the total paid is garbage, because there's no proportion. "Oh, they paid 1.5 times more than [demographic]" means very little when they control 70x the wealth of that other demographic. Source: https://www.propublica.org/article/lord-of-the-roths-how-tech-mogul-peter-thiel-turned-a-retirement-account-for-the-middle-class-into-a-5-billion-dollar-tax-free-piggy-bank https://www.propublica.org/article/lord-of-the-roths-how-tec...
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  The numbers provided arent estimates, they are the actual data on total income tax collected and who paid it. If money isnt collected because of tax shelters, then it isnt represented. This is why looking at actual collection data is more useful than just looking at tax brackets.

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago

I don’t understand your point. The person you’re replying to made an argument by quoting factual numbers. Those numbers seem to have sources. Are you saying the numbers are wrong or that their argument has incorrect logic? If not, why does it matter whether the source is biased or rated some way (by whom)? Their information is from public government data, by the way.

FireBeyond 2y ago
“The 1% paid more in tax than the next 9% combined” is a great soundbite. Even completely accurate. Makes it sound like the 1% part their fair share, or rather, even more than (which is the Foundations goal)… But then if you learn that that 1%s earnings are dozens of times more than that next 9%, you realize “hey, it’s not that proportional or progressive as they’d have us believe”. The Tax Foundation openly wants the rich to pay less tax.