The "tax the rich" folks are funny.

I feel like you're being kind of dumb unless you actually make a point of why one conflicts with the other.

Film Rep wrote:

There are literally companies whose sole purpose in life is to help people and businesses limit their tax liability.

Can you rephrase that line?

I honestly do not know what you mean there.

Let me break it down:

"There are literally companies whose sole purpose in life is to help people"

You're talking about places like Planned Parenthood, right?

"and businesses limit their tax liability"

This could man a lot of things.

Businesses limit their own tax liability?

OK, they pay less in taxes if their payroll is higher or their profits in general are lower. Is that what you mean?

The rich could mean people who have high salaries or high wealth in general.

Wealth is not taxed. Income is.

Say a CEO makes one million in gross wages. They pay a lot in taxes. This limits their ability to buy nice boats and exotic cars which hurts those industries. So, is that it? You are concerned that they are limited in the luxury items they could buy if their taxes were lower or those affected industries?

Drug kingpins get away untaxed. Is that good or bad?

We should tax people preportionate to how much of a burden they are to society.

For instance, all the homeless people who are camping out on the street should be paying more for city sanitaion and cleanup services compared to those of us who obey the laws and try to maintian a clean and safe place for ourselves and other citizens.

Internet influencers should pay more taxes for how much they are dumbing down the population.

Obese and deliberately unhealthy people should pay more for their healthcare.

Food companies that use High Fructose Corn Syrup and excessive amounts of refined sugar in their products should pay more in taxes along with certain kombucha compaines whose product tatstes awful.

Surfers should pay more for the luxury of riding the waves while the rest of us have to spend hours upon hours stuck in traffic.

All policticians should pay a hypocrisy tax. This tax should be doubled for Democrtats and tripled for commies.

All junkies, alcoholics, methheads, and soccer moms should pay a tax for their general burden and unproducivity to society as a whole.

Film Rep wrote:

What is wrong with these people? Are they really that dumb? 🤔

There are literally companies whose sole purpose in life is to help people and businesses limit their tax liability.

There are a number of good arguments as to why the "tax the rich" slogan is dumb. You managed to not make any of them. A bit like saying "Are smokers really that dumb? There are literally companies whose sole purpose in life is to make cigarettes." You're starting from a reasonable premise and then throwing out a nonsensical argument in support of that premise.

Film Rep wrote:

There are literally companies whose sole purpose in life is to help people and businesses limit their tax liability.

Yes, and they advise to use events like the Met Gala as deductibles and get tickets to be sold as "donations" to avoid paying tax.

The only tax paid that night was by the waiting staff.

So yes, get the rich to pay the taxes due instead and give those hard working citizens a cut!

Tax “rich” individuals

Do not tax highly business’s

That’s the big difference. Business’s create jobs and when you tax then too much they look overseas for cheaper labor. In contrast I don’t care how much you tax a billionaire. They don’t need all that money.

Mountain High wrote:

Tax “rich” individuals

Do not tax highly business’s

That’s the big difference. Business’s create jobs and when you tax then too much they look overseas for cheaper labor. In contrast I don’t care how much you tax a billionaire. They don’t need all that money.

How are these businesses going to look overseas for restaurant workers and truck drivers?

It seems pretty obvious that "the income" needs to be taxed such that the bills can be paid.

Since a relatively few people make a massive portion of the "the income", it stands to reason that they should pay most of the taxes. The make most of "the income".

Taxing poor people is fairly pointless. They're poor because they have no income to tax. Duh.

I don't entirely disagree with the PP on business taxes BUT way to many "companies" are now simply pass-through tax-avoidance schemes that individuals use to shield income.

Maybe...... wrote:

I feel like you're being kind of dumb unless you actually make a point of why one conflicts with the other.

Yes, I agree. Lets try again.

Yes, the folks who are so against taxing the rish need to do some math.

1) Very large companies exert huge pressure on infrastucture like roads and airports and the list is endless. Amazon for one pays basically no tax. Can you even imagine how much more of our infrastructure they use everyday compared to you and me? They "create jobs" sure, but that wont matter when everything falls apart.

2) If you dont buy any argument at all about why a rich person/co should pay more (because its unfair I guess is the argument) try this: Do the math! If you want to continue to brag about living in the greatest country in the world, and not have the country crumbling around you, you just plain need money. And people who make tons of $ are just going to have to pay a percent like everyone else, which mean they pay more dollars. If you aint got no $ you cant pay much. With the country slowly sliding toward accumulation of all the money at the top, this becomes even more important. Im all for capitalism, but it has some issues and we can handle them if we are smart. But we are not.

Personally, we could not increase taxes on the rich if we just insisted that people and companies pay something, anything! A tiny percent of trillions is a lot Amazon, Apple, Google....!

I would like someone to provide the specific ways the rich avoid taxes.

This is important for two reasons. 1. It will identify the specific rules that must be changed. I'm tired of hearing tax the rich but no politician seems to fix the rules. It seems as though they don't want to lose the campaign sound bite, It also seems like the definition of what is fair is "more today than yesterday." A year after Obama claimed he was making the rich pay their fair share we had the same problem. 2. It will help us realize if we are talking about the same issue (wages, wealth, unrealized capital gains, unique write-offs or other items).

I wonder what AOC's tax returns looked like when she was a bartender?

"Tax the rich" is idle left wing rhetoric, meant to inflame emotions of folks who do not think for themselves very well.

Maybe...... wrote:

I feel like you're being kind of dumb unless you actually make a point of why one conflicts with the other.

The tax the rich crowd has repeatedly pushes for tax code that lets wall steet hedge funds and speculators pay far less than corporations that are actually creating products and providing value. If you want to "tax the rich" wouldn't you want at least an equal tax burder for those that provide minimal if any value to the economy vs those that actually produce?

Any dividends to shareholders is double taxed. The corporation pays a tax then the shareholder pays a tax on top of that.

We do not get more stuff because the government steals money from one person and gives it to another. All that does is allows the person on the receiving end to spend money that someone else worked to earn. We get more stuff because entrepreneurs make more, and better things for the public to buy at lower prices. Plus they employ the public in the process. The government makes no goods for consumption. The government can only steal from one person from another. This is why the only money the federal government should collect should be spent on the common defense and maintaining the rule of law, you know as it says in Article 1 section 8 of the constitution, what a novel idea!

The top 1% already pays something like 40% of all taxes and the top 10% almost all taxes. The rich already pay more than their share.

Libertarian Capitalist wrote:

The top 1% already pays something like 40% of all taxes and the top 10% almost all taxes. The rich already pay more than their share.

So why tax the poor at all?

There's a lot of economic technicalities that are 'wrong' with the tax the rich argument.

But ultimately - why the hell do we tax poor people? For example people who get paid by the government and are financially struggling. Getting away from the technicalities of it, the philosophy of that just doesn't make sense.

lolwut wrote:

Film Rep wrote:

What is wrong with these people? Are they really that dumb? 🤔

There are literally companies whose sole purpose in life is to help people and businesses limit their tax liability.

There are a number of good arguments as to why the "tax the rich" slogan is dumb. You managed to not make any of them.

It's like English is still a thing. Weird.