If a Progressive Tax system is okay, why not Progressive Cost?

[pornstarwannabe]

Progressive Cost similar to a Progressive Tax. Those that can afford to pay more should pay more.

Is this not the next logical jump in Liberalism?

Imagine trying to buy a $20K car. The middle income guy making $50K per year pays $20K, but the guy making $60K (that amounts to a pay increase of 20% compared to the $50K earner) pays 20% more for that same product. Or maybe we use a different formula. Either way, the $60K earner pays more for the same product.

Sound crazy?

 

[mercury14]

Progressive Cost similar to a Progressive Tax. Those that can afford to pay more should pay more.

Is this not the next logical jump in Liberalism?

Imagine trying to buy a $20K car. The middle income guy making $50K per year pays $20K, but the guy making $60K (that amounts to a pay increase of 20% compared to the $50K earner) pays 20% more for that same product. Or maybe we use a different formula. Either way, the $60K earner pays more for the same product.

Sound crazy?

We already have that. Rich folks get a $60k Lexus, middle class folks get a $20k Taurus, and poor ones get a used 1992 Toyota Corolla with transmission problems.

 

[pornstarwannabe]

We already have that. Rich folks get a $60k Lexus, middle class folks get a $20k Taurus, and poor ones get a used 1992 Toyota Corolla with transmission problems.

Nice dodge of the question. Under my proposed scenario, does it make sense for the $60K earner to pay more than the $50K earner? If not, then why?

 

[XdOu™]

eh, if you say so..

 

[phrodeau]

I could list dozens of occasions where the cost is pay-what-you-can.

 

[renard_ruse]

Progressive Cost similar to a Progressive Tax. Those that can afford to pay more should pay more.

Is this not the next logical jump in Liberalism?

Imagine trying to buy a $20K car. The middle income guy making $50K per year pays $20K, but the guy making $60K (that amounts to a pay increase of 20% compared to the $50K earner) pays 20% more for that same product. Or maybe we use a different formula. Either way, the $60K earner pays more for the same product.

Sound crazy?

Actually it makes more sense than taxing people more for earning more. Particularly when you consider that the "poor" get EBT and other subsidies to buy stuff. Those just above or somewhat above the "poor" would benefit, people who don't have a lot of spending money who also don't get all the government giveaways. The lower middle and middle middle classes would benefit from this, particularly as it relates to discretionary spending. Therefore, neither the Democrats nor the Republicans would support it.

 

[pornstarwannabe]

Seems that Liberals would love the idea. People pay more because they can afford to pay more.

 

[about_average]

Progressive Cost similar to a Progressive Tax. Those that can afford to pay more should pay more.

If you want to regulate the cost of all goods and increase business's cost of operations, go for it. I'm sure it will be very popular with business owners.

 

[Liar]

 

[Liar]

Progressive Cost similar to a Progressive Tax. Those that can afford to pay more should pay more.

Is this not the next logical jump in Liberalism?

Imagine trying to buy a $20K car. The middle income guy making $50K per year pays $20K, but the guy making $60K (that amounts to a pay increase of 20% compared to the $50K earner) pays 20% more for that same product. Or maybe we use a different formula. Either way, the $60K earner pays more for the same product.

Sound crazy?

In theory it's nothing wrong with the idea. If a business want to apply that price model, there's nothing stopping them, is there?

Do you want the Government to force a price model upon private businesses?

 

[Liar]

Many businesses in the food industry already do this, by the way. You just don't notice until you scratch the surface.

They have three different brands of basic foodstuffs - canned beans, pasta, pickles, whatever. Either sold at different stores, discount supermarkets for the cheap brand, local mid-range grocery stores for the "regular" brand, and the upscale delicatessen for the premium brand. Or sometimes side by side in the same store shelves. And with different price tags. Rich people buy the fancy stuff and pay more. Poor people buy the cheap stuff. (Ok, they don't HAVE to, but let's face it, most of them do.)

But yeah, it's the same product. Same production line, same frickin packing, same cost for the producer. Just a different label.

That way they can compete on different markets, without increased cost.

 

[pornstarwannabe]

In theory it's nothing wrong with the idea. If a business want to apply that price model, there's nothing stopping them, is there?

Do you want the Government to force a price model upon private businesses?

I am talking same product, not different level. And yes, the gov't should enforce it (they are creative, you know). Anything wrong with that?

 

[Sean Renaud]

Too much work.

 

[Liar]

I am talking same product, not different level.

What do you mean by level?

And yes, the gov't should enforce it (they are creative, you know). Anything wrong with that?

Methinks you be trollin'.

 

[pornstarwannabe]

What do you mean by level?

Methinks you be trollin'.

It's hypothetical. not trolling.

 

[Liar]

It's hypothetical. not trolling.

So you ARE in fact in favor of more Government intrusion than even any self proclaimed socialist on this board?

 

[pornstarwannabe]

So you ARE in fact in favor of more Government intrusion than even any self proclaimed socialist on this board?

Not personally, no. It's a hypothetical question. Libs are all in favor of a progressive tax. So I wanted to delve further into the progressive cost as the next logical jump, and then get their responses/opinions.

 

[XdOu™]

Methinks you be trollin'.

lol... i don't troll, i freepost!


weeeeeeeee!

 

[hogjack]

Individuals should not have the right to purchase goods or services not approved by the government.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Not personally, no. It's a hypothetical question. Libs are all in favor of a progressive tax. So I wanted to delve further into the progressive cost as the next logical jump, and then get their responses/opinions.

It's not really a logical jump though. It's quite possible, probable even that the exact things a progressive tax helps to alleviate would be at least partially exacerbated by progressive pricing.

 

[Liar]

Not personally, no. It's a hypothetical question. Libs are all in favor of a progressive tax. So I wanted to delve further into the progressive cost as the next logical jump, and then get their responses/opinions.

You might want to look up the meaning of the word trolling then. Cause this is it.

I guess their response would be "that's pretty stupid".

 

[pornstarwannabe]

You might want to look up the meaning of the word trolling then. Cause this is it.

I guess their response would be "that's pretty stupid".

Why would t be stupid? If Liberals believe that salaries should be subjected to a progressive tax, why not also subject what we pay for items to this same progressive tactic?

 

[Morwen]

The government is run like a mafia by ancient families. They don't give a shit about you, your stupid parties, your commonplace ideas. They own the banks and the intel agencies, and through that the armies.

 

[Liar]

Why would t be stupid? If Liberals believe that salaries should be subjected to a progressive tax, why not also subject what we pay for items to this same progressive tactic?

Taxes are how the Government charges people for the things they provide. If the Government changes the tax code, that's the Government telling the Government what form of business model Government should have.

If the Government dictates what your Slurpee costs, that's the Government telling Private Business what business model Private Business should have. Unless one is an actual card carrying Socialist who think the Government should own the means of production (and most Liberals don't), that's stupid. Government can levvy taxes on businesses, and encourage certain practices by incentive, but dictating them how and where to make money? Stupid.

 

[MidgetClown]

At Progressive you can choose the coverage that is right for you.