What a disappointment this forum is

[icanhelp1]

The 16th Amendment to the Constitution authorizes a federal income tax. There is nothing in the Constitution limiting spending or capping benefits.

Did you see the pork in the last 1.2 trillion boondoggle. I believe there’s a movement to do away with the 16th. People pushing for a convention of states to put our elites back in line. Nowhere in the constitution does it authorize taxing people to pay for other people’s debt. Giving billions to illegals or bastardizing the spirit of the constitution.

Both parties are screwing us over, and have been for decades.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

Did you see the pork in the last 1.2 trillion boondoggle. I believe there’s a movement to do away with the 16th. People pushing for a convention of states to put our elites back in line. Nowhere in the constitution does it authorize taxing people to pay for other people’s debt. Giving billions to illegals or bastardizing the spirit of the constitution.

Both parties are screwing us over, and have been for decades.

We should raise taxes on the rich and cut funding for highways and the military. Both parties aren't screwing us over. The deficit always comes down when the Democrats are in charge.

 

[HisArpy]

Allow me to explain how the flat tax is unfair to poor people.

If someone makes $15,000,00 / year, taxing them at 40% means they still have $9,000,000 / year to live on -- quite a comfortable existence.

If someone makes $15,000 / year, taxing them at 40% means they have have $9,000 / year to live on --- less than $800 a month, barely enough to keep a roof over their head and put food on the table.

This is the fallacy everyone uses to justify tax disparity. Just because you're poor doesn't mean you should be allowed to avoid paying YOUR FAIR SHARE.

It's also known as FREELOADING.

 

[ll74]

This is the fallacy everyone uses to justify tax disparity. Just because you're poor doesn't mean you should be allowed to avoid paying YOUR FAIR SHARE.

It's also known as FREELOADING.

Fair is not a percentage of income. 30% of my income is not the same as 30% of others' income.

 

[HisArpy]

Fair is not a percentage of income. 30% of my income is not the same as 30% of others' income.

Mathematically it is EXACTLY the same.

Please pay attention in class from now on.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

This is the fallacy everyone uses to justify tax disparity. Just because you're poor doesn't mean you should be allowed to avoid paying YOUR FAIR SHARE.

It's also known as FREELOADING.

The flat tax has always been a scam to sell a massive tax cut for the rich as "fair".

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

Mathematically it is EXACTLY the same.

Please pay attention in class from now on.

Is it fair that a CEO makes 1000x what a janitor does? Surely he doesn't work 1000x longer or harder?

 

[ll74]

Mathematically it is EXACTLY the same.

Mathematically it is not the same. My number is not the same as your number. Percentage-wise, it's the same calculation.

Please pay attention in class from now on.

Please understand what numbers mean.

 

[HisArpy]

The flat tax has always been a scam to sell a massive tax cut for the rich as "fair".

Ok, let me set you straight.

"The rich" don't pay taxes like you stupid fucks do. Why? Because they acquire assets which provide them with tax breaks to reduce their tax burden.

YOU financial idjits spend your money on the newest shiny object, beer/drugs, and whatever else you can find to show off to your friends who are also financial dipshits that you're "rich" when you obviously aren't.

Raising the tax rate for those who pay no taxes changes NOTHING and only raises the tax for yourselves.

For instance, California has implemented a new charge for utilities in which "the poor" suposedly pay less than "the rich." The assessment is based on, get this, TAXABLE INCOME. You know, that thing "the rich" don't have. In the end, the ONLY people who are going to pay the "higher rate" are you stupidheads.

And you keep thinking this is somehow the "smart" thing to do.

Sop do yourself a favor and THINK for once in your dull wasteland of a life and STOP SCREWING YOURSELF OVER out of spite!

 

[HisArpy]

Is it fair that a CEO makes 1000x what a janitor does? Surely he doesn't work 1000x longer or harder?

No he works smarter. Like the old adage TELLS YOU to do.

 

[HisArpy]

Do yourself a huge favor. Go to the liberry and check out 2 books.

The Richest Man In Babylon by George Clason; and,
Rich Dad, Poor Dad by Robert Kiyosaki.

I'm betting you won't because if you do it'll DESTROY your narratives and teeny tiny worldview.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

No he works smarter. Like the old adage TELLS YOU to do.

Most CEOs are well-connected finance guys who don't know much about making products or even managing people. Did Hunter Biden or Jared Kushner get where they are by being smart?

 

[HisArpy]

Most CEOs are well-connected finance guys who don't know much about making products or even managing people. Did Hunter Biden or Jared Kushner get where they are by being smart?

Yes.


Tell me, does your hypothetical janitor have the chops to manage a multinational corporation? Your hypothetical CEO probably does.

As do Kushner and the rest of that class.

 

[Nicefella]

Most CEOs are well-connected finance guys who don't know much about making products or even managing people. Did Hunter Biden or Jared Kushner get where they are by being smart?

Did you just compare Hunter Biden and Jared Kushner who both probably have the IQ of a bird dropping to CEOs?

No. Not all CEOs are well connected finance guys. Where do you come up with this?

 

[HisArpy]

Did you just compare Hunter Biden and Jared Kushner who both probably have the IQ of a bird dropping to CEOs?

No. Not all CEOs are well connected finance guys. Where do you come up with this?

She's a ninny who believes in and repeats all kinds of strange unworkable ideas that someone put into her head.

 

[HisArpy]

Mathematically it is not the same. My number is not the same as your number. Percentage-wise, it's the same calculation.

Please understand what numbers mean.

PERCENTAGES are percentages. You're trying to substitute dollars for percentage and proving to the world that you're a failure at finance.

30% is 30%. That it APPEARS to be larger for the lower income class because of the dollars involved doesn't change the FACT that it's still 30%.

And of course this totally ignores the reality that "the rich" don't have "income" so they pay no taxes regardless of the percentage rate in the tax tables.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

Did you just compare Hunter Biden and Jared Kushner who both probably have the IQ of a bird dropping to CEOs?

No. Not all CEOs are well connected finance guys. Where do you come up with this?

Every person I've met who's in senior management has been pretty clueless about what the workers at their companies actually do.

 

[Nicefella]

Every person I've met who's in senior management has been pretty clueless about what the workers at their companies actually do.

Then you havent met many senior management people or you work in a pretty shitty environment

 

[HisArpy]

Then you havent met many senior management people or you work in a pretty shitty environment

Or she lies. A lot.

 

[Nicefella]

Or she lies. A lot.

a good senior manager is aware and empathetic of his workers’ needs.

She just needs to stop acting like everyone above a menial worker is an evil fuck

 

[ll74]

PERCENTAGES are percentages. You're trying to substitute dollars for percentage and proving to the world that you're a failure at finance.

No, I'm saying that 30% of two people's pay are two different things. The amount is different unless they make the same exact amount of money.

30% is 30%. That it APPEARS to be larger for the lower income class because of the dollars involved doesn't change the FACT that it's still 30%.

Yes, a percentage is the same, the result is not.

And of course this totally ignores the reality that "the rich" don't have "income" so they pay no taxes regardless of the percentage rate in the tax tables.

Yes... You completely ignore the purpose of money and how it is different for those making much less money than it is for those making a shit ton.

30% has differing impacts on their lives.

But sure.... The percentage is the same. Your ignorance and avoidance of logic is as well.

 

[HisArpy]

a good senior manager is aware and empathetic of his workers’ needs.

She just needs to stop acting like everyone above a menial worker is an evil fuck

She probably doesn't know the difference between empathy and sympathy and why she should never engage in either as a basis for a business or financial decision.

 

[Nicefella]

No, I'm saying that 30% of two people's pay are two different things. The amount is different unless they make the same exact amount of money.

Yes, a percentage is the same, the result is not.


Yes... You completely ignore the purpose of money and how it is different for those making much less money than it is for those making a shit ton.

30% has differing impacts on their lives.

But sure.... The percentage is the same. Your ignorance and avoidance of logic is as well.

I yhink
Though that his point is valid. Rich people frequently engage in tax avoidance and tax sheltering strategy that is unavailable to the middle class. Hence when you tax a rich person you’re not taxing 30% of their assets. You may be taxing a quarter or less of their assets. This is why a flat tax actually hurts the middle class more. I think that point does have validity.

 

[HisArpy]

No, I'm saying that 30% of two people's pay are two different things. The amount is different unless they make the same exact amount of money.

So you agree thatg 30% is 30%, it's the IMPACT that's different.

Yes, a percentage is the same, the result is not.

Again, the impact is different.

Yes... You completely ignore the purpose of money and how it is different for those making much less money than it is for those making a shit ton.

30% has differing impacts on their lives.

But sure.... The percentage is the same. Your ignorance and avoidance of logic is as well.

I'm not the one trying to equate percentage as being the same as financial impact. Please sort your thinking out because you're confused.

 

[ll74]

I yhink
Though that his point is valid.

It is not.

Rich people frequently engage in tax avoidance and tax sheltering strategy that is unavailable to the middle class. Hence when you tax a rich person you’re not taxing 30% of their assets. You may be taxing a quarter or less of their assets. This is why a flat tax actually hurts the middle class more. I think that point does have validity.

I never advocated for a flat tax.