4 ms·

That’s the point. It’s not crazy. Tariffs are regressive taxes. Rich people buy more stuff, sure, but as a percentage of their income they net out as beneficiar

That’s the point. It’s not crazy. Tariffs are regressive taxes. Rich people buy more stuff, sure, but as a percentage of their income they net out as beneficiaries of shifting taxes from income to spending. It’s totally rational if you want to increase taxes on the bottom 80% to subsidize the top 20% (and especially top 5%).

water9 1y ago
[flagged]
- vaidhy 1y ago
  A tariff across the board is same as a sales tax (rather a value added tax, as it is dependent on the value of goods). I would love to understand why you think it is punitive for the ultra rich.
  - fsckboy 1y ago
    sales taxes are based on the value of the goods. value added taxes are paid on the profit made on the good, and are paid by the seller (because the buyer doesn't know what the profit is). value added taxes are basically corporate income taxes
    - ndsipa_pomu 1y ago
      Here in the UK, the value added tax (VAT) is calculated from the sales price to the customer. Companies can claim back VAT that they pay for parts etc so that VAT is pretty much only paid by the customer
  - water9 1y ago
    because tariffs only raised the prices of goods that can’t be bought anywhere else. The thing is America can make pretty much everything and by doing so it forces more American labor, which is more expensive for the ultra rich, who owned the companies that the laborers work for. The biggest factor, however, is that it impacts the velocity of money. The hundred dollars that you spend on an American business goes to another American and the cycle continues in America enriching everybody instead of immediately fleeing overseas, which just access a devaluation of the currency
- nine_zeros 1y ago
  Tariff is a sales tax
- ash_091 1y ago
  How is income tax regressive?
  - quantified 1y ago
    A flat tax would be. It's been flattening in the US.
    - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
      > A flat tax would be No. A flat tax is proportional [1]. [1] https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/042415/what-are-differences-between-regressive-proportional-and-progressive-taxes.asp https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/042415/what-are-dif...
      - Marsymars 1y ago
        Also from investopedia: > While a flat tax imposes the same tax percentage on all individuals regardless of income, many see it as a regressive tax. > A regressive tax imposes a larger tax burden on those with lower incomes than those with higher incomes because a larger portion of a lower-income individual's total funds goes to the tax. While higher-income taxpayers pay the same percentage, their greater incomes make the financial burden easier to bear. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/flattax.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/flattax.asp
- usefulcat 1y ago
  > A tariff as you might recall is punitive for the ultra rich people If by 'ultra rich people' you mean the owners of capital, then no, not really. Those businesses hurt by tariffs will almost always raise prices until they are at least breaking even, otherwise they couldn't survive. Yes, such business might lose some sales, so their 'ultra rich' owners might end up slightly less 'ultra rich', but don't forget that there will also be other businesses that will very much benefit from the tariffs (because market prices will go up when any part of the market is hit with tariffs), so their owners will become more wealthy. So to sum up, with tariffs: * some businesses may be hurt * some businesses may be helped * government gets more tax revenue * consumers get higher prices The 'ultra rich' don't care if food, clothing, cars, etc cost 5 or 10 or 20 percent more because they already have way more disposable income than they need. And even if they do take a hit, going from an annual income of $1M to $500k is not nearly as bad as going from $50k to $40k. Apart from hurting some businesses and helping others, tariffs are no different than a regressive tax increase.
jauntywundrkind 1y ago
Which matches the rest of the seeming plutocratic moves afoot in the past 6 months. Taking huge chunks out of American opportunism (defunding science, health care, education, space, and so much else), blowing a huge chunk out of social welfare programs: that's going to cause amazing downgrades for most people. Paths to success closed, cost of getting by vastly higher. (All while walking over all over habeus corpus, while collecting & colating data of everyone in the homeland, while building concentration camps and tossing random hairdressers in international terrorism dungeons; denigrating the population generally, humiliating basic rights of man.) But the plutocratic class doesn't really notice the change. The Global Elite E1 Barbarian class (of Michael O Church 3 ladders) doesn't notice or care. They stay about the same, but the sinking tide leaves many other boats grounded. It sure seems like there's an international conspiracy of the very wealthy to screw over the land of opportunity right now. And there's 219+53 people in congess and two in the White House happily helping aid and abet this pushing opporunity off the cliff. Fits perfectly hand in glove with the Network State ideology (which seeks to make who you know and what connections you've gathered define your environment) and the Christofascist ideology (which says religion should rule), both of which resent government as it is, which are part of the broader long campaign to "starve the beast". But to regionalize this situation to the US feels like it misses how the real nature of the E1 Global Barbarian Elite's desire to make clear their ascent over all others.
- abnercoimbre 1y ago
  You're effectively saying humanity replaced monarchies with a global (often faceless) ruling class.
  - quantified 1y ago
    Yup, that's it. The analysis fits. Brexit helped push the UK on the same path.
    - kbelder 1y ago
      >Brexit helped push the UK on the same path. The EU has mastered the "global (often faceless) ruling class". No Brexit needed for that one.
486sx33 1y ago
[dead]
gpsx 1y ago
To be fair, the portion of the tariffs passed on to the consumer is a regressive tax. The portion of the tariff that is covered by the American companies is more complicated and probably goes mostly against the wealthy. (Then, of course, there’s the portion of the tariffs, covered by the foreign companies, which is article is saying it’s not a large portion.) There is hope the consumer is not completely screwed. We will have to see how it turns out. (I am not a fan of tariffs or the administration, but I am ok with people who are.)
thewileyone 1y ago
> It’s totally rational if you want to increase taxes on the bottom 80% to subsidize the top 20% (and especially top 5%). Nothing rational about plutocracies or oligarchies.
- danans 1y ago
  What system of reason are you using? To take the perspective of the oligarchs and plutocrats, if they can get away with it (avoiding the pitchforks), why isn't it rational? That doesn't make it fair or just, or sustainable for societies or humanity, but it can be rational.
minraws 1y ago
Personally I can understand tariffs on high end goods but taxes on low-end goods or raw materials is insane. Any country doing it has hobbled it's industry for decades and some might prove that they don't work even if you keep these tariffs on for centuries... But politicians will politic what can we do huh... Really feels like no side, opinion or thought of every day folks matters anywhere.
- K0balt 1y ago
  I believe it was MIT that ran a study a couple of decades ago that proved that people were unable to influence policy through voting because the effectiveness of lobbying put the vote inputs below the noise floor?
  - bluefirebrand 1y ago
    Yup. Our votes basically don't matter because our democracy is captured by lobbyists
    - omnimus 1y ago
      Seems like the votes somehow matter. If Trump didn’t win there wouldn’t be tarifs right?
      - ndsipa_pomu 1y ago
        That's assuming that the voting machines accurately counted the votes and weren't tampered with
        david-gpu 1y ago
        Tom Scott provided an excellent explanation of why electronic voting is a terrible idea. Original: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=w3_0x6oaDmI https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=w3_0x6oaDmI Follow-up: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LkH2r-sNjQs https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LkH2r-sNjQs
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
buuuuutee 1y ago
[dead]

water9 1y ago

[flagged]

vaidhy 1y ago
A tariff across the board is same as a sales tax (rather a value added tax, as it is dependent on the value of goods). I would love to understand why you think it is punitive for the ultra rich.
- fsckboy 1y ago
  sales taxes are based on the value of the goods. value added taxes are paid on the profit made on the good, and are paid by the seller (because the buyer doesn't know what the profit is). value added taxes are basically corporate income taxes
  - ndsipa_pomu 1y ago
    Here in the UK, the value added tax (VAT) is calculated from the sales price to the customer. Companies can claim back VAT that they pay for parts etc so that VAT is pretty much only paid by the customer
- water9 1y ago
  because tariffs only raised the prices of goods that can’t be bought anywhere else. The thing is America can make pretty much everything and by doing so it forces more American labor, which is more expensive for the ultra rich, who owned the companies that the laborers work for. The biggest factor, however, is that it impacts the velocity of money. The hundred dollars that you spend on an American business goes to another American and the cycle continues in America enriching everybody instead of immediately fleeing overseas, which just access a devaluation of the currency
nine_zeros 1y ago
Tariff is a sales tax
ash_091 1y ago
How is income tax regressive?
- quantified 1y ago
  A flat tax would be. It's been flattening in the US.
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > A flat tax would be No. A flat tax is proportional [1]. [1] https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/042415/what-are-differences-between-regressive-proportional-and-progressive-taxes.asp https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/042415/what-are-dif...
    - Marsymars 1y ago
      Also from investopedia: > While a flat tax imposes the same tax percentage on all individuals regardless of income, many see it as a regressive tax. > A regressive tax imposes a larger tax burden on those with lower incomes than those with higher incomes because a larger portion of a lower-income individual's total funds goes to the tax. While higher-income taxpayers pay the same percentage, their greater incomes make the financial burden easier to bear. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/flattax.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/flattax.asp
usefulcat 1y ago
> A tariff as you might recall is punitive for the ultra rich people If by 'ultra rich people' you mean the owners of capital, then no, not really. Those businesses hurt by tariffs will almost always raise prices until they are at least breaking even, otherwise they couldn't survive. Yes, such business might lose some sales, so their 'ultra rich' owners might end up slightly less 'ultra rich', but don't forget that there will also be other businesses that will very much benefit from the tariffs (because market prices will go up when any part of the market is hit with tariffs), so their owners will become more wealthy. So to sum up, with tariffs: * some businesses may be hurt * some businesses may be helped * government gets more tax revenue * consumers get higher prices The 'ultra rich' don't care if food, clothing, cars, etc cost 5 or 10 or 20 percent more because they already have way more disposable income than they need. And even if they do take a hit, going from an annual income of $1M to $500k is not nearly as bad as going from $50k to $40k. Apart from hurting some businesses and helping others, tariffs are no different than a regressive tax increase.

jauntywundrkind 1y ago

Which matches the rest of the seeming plutocratic moves afoot in the past 6 months. Taking huge chunks out of American opportunism (defunding science, health care, education, space, and so much else), blowing a huge chunk out of social welfare programs: that's going to cause amazing downgrades for most people. Paths to success closed, cost of getting by vastly higher. (All while walking over all over habeus corpus, while collecting & colating data of everyone in the homeland, while building concentration camps and tossing random hairdressers in international terrorism dungeons; denigrating the population generally, humiliating basic rights of man.) But the plutocratic class doesn't really notice the change. The Global Elite E1 Barbarian class (of Michael O Church 3 ladders) doesn't notice or care. They stay about the same, but the sinking tide leaves many other boats grounded. It sure seems like there's an international conspiracy of the very wealthy to screw over the land of opportunity right now. And there's 219+53 people in congess and two in the White House happily helping aid and abet this pushing opporunity off the cliff. Fits perfectly hand in glove with the Network State ideology (which seeks to make who you know and what connections you've gathered define your environment) and the Christofascist ideology (which says religion should rule), both of which resent government as it is, which are part of the broader long campaign to "starve the beast". But to regionalize this situation to the US feels like it misses how the real nature of the E1 Global Barbarian Elite's desire to make clear their ascent over all others.

abnercoimbre 1y ago
You're effectively saying humanity replaced monarchies with a global (often faceless) ruling class.
- quantified 1y ago
  Yup, that's it. The analysis fits. Brexit helped push the UK on the same path.
  - kbelder 1y ago
    >Brexit helped push the UK on the same path. The EU has mastered the "global (often faceless) ruling class". No Brexit needed for that one.

486sx33 1y ago

[dead]

gpsx 1y ago

To be fair, the portion of the tariffs passed on to the consumer is a regressive tax. The portion of the tariff that is covered by the American companies is more complicated and probably goes mostly against the wealthy. (Then, of course, there’s the portion of the tariffs, covered by the foreign companies, which is article is saying it’s not a large portion.) There is hope the consumer is not completely screwed. We will have to see how it turns out. (I am not a fan of tariffs or the administration, but I am ok with people who are.)

thewileyone 1y ago

> It’s totally rational if you want to increase taxes on the bottom 80% to subsidize the top 20% (and especially top 5%). Nothing rational about plutocracies or oligarchies.

danans 1y ago
What system of reason are you using? To take the perspective of the oligarchs and plutocrats, if they can get away with it (avoiding the pitchforks), why isn't it rational? That doesn't make it fair or just, or sustainable for societies or humanity, but it can be rational.

minraws 1y ago

Personally I can understand tariffs on high end goods but taxes on low-end goods or raw materials is insane. Any country doing it has hobbled it's industry for decades and some might prove that they don't work even if you keep these tariffs on for centuries... But politicians will politic what can we do huh... Really feels like no side, opinion or thought of every day folks matters anywhere.

K0balt 1y ago
I believe it was MIT that ran a study a couple of decades ago that proved that people were unable to influence policy through voting because the effectiveness of lobbying put the vote inputs below the noise floor?
- bluefirebrand 1y ago
  Yup. Our votes basically don't matter because our democracy is captured by lobbyists
  - omnimus 1y ago
    Seems like the votes somehow matter. If Trump didn’t win there wouldn’t be tarifs right?
    - ndsipa_pomu 1y ago
      That's assuming that the voting machines accurately counted the votes and weren't tampered with
      - david-gpu 1y ago
        Tom Scott provided an excellent explanation of why electronic voting is a terrible idea. Original: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=w3_0x6oaDmI https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=w3_0x6oaDmI Follow-up: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LkH2r-sNjQs https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LkH2r-sNjQs

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

buuuuutee 1y ago

[dead]