Our tax dollars hard at work

[thefunk]

Don't even get me started on the French, however on the face of it, its a similar issue to the states in the sense that the large minority groups have voted in a socialist. He basically hates the rich and is taxing the top band to 75% (it may be more) with additional one-off fees for homes above 3m euros. I think thats something like 80k euro. Thats basically his manifesto and 7 year policy. His government is also looking at making redundancies illegal (its already virtually impossible to get fired in france anyway). So everyone is hired on a contractual basis only, which is hilarious since companies have effectively found a way round the law.

[Ughmahedhurtz]

So everyone is hired on a contractual basis only, which is hilarious since companies have effectively found a way round the law.

Sorta the same thing starting here in the US where mandated health care for full-time employees is driving employers to cut back to part-time hours. The Law of Unintended Consequences has a way of working around centralized control mechanics.

[crowdx]

Don't even get me started on the French, however on the face of it, its a similar issue to the states in the sense that the large minority groups have voted in a socialist. He basically hates the rich and is taxing the top band to 75% (it may be more) with additional one-off fees for homes above 3m euros. I think thats something like 80k euro. Thats basically his manifesto and 7 year policy. His government is also looking at making redundancies illegal (its already virtually impossible to get fired in france anyway). So everyone is hired on a contractual basis only, which is hilarious since companies have effectively found a way round the law.

Spoken like a true Republication. Go research what socialism actually is. When the rich can get away with paying less tax than the middle class there is something REALLY wrong.

Welfare abuse will always happen but it may actually cost less than the rich with their accountants working the system to pay as little taxes as possible.

[MadMilitia]

Spoken like a true Republication. Go research what socialism actually is. When the rich can get away with paying less tax than the middle class there is something REALLY wrong.

Welfare abuse will always happen but it may actually cost less than the rich with their accountants working the system to pay as little taxes as possible.

Ideally a system should not require taxation. Prior to taxation the old way was through charities and the Church. England only imposed the tax once it became a racket. Quakers who knew better fled the animal farm and taxation without representation.


There is a conflict of interest in the poor brokering with a politician to grab the coffers of the producing class. The politician isn't on the hook nor is the poor in grabbing these assets. Only the rich and the working class whom are now taxed without representation. Or do you think it proper that household income be distributed and decided on by the children?

The clear answer in all of this is voting rights. I concur that voting rights should not be extended to those who pay no taxes. In scope, those who pay no taxes in this country are dependents and they should not have a say in how the system is run. They do need representation but as dependents. There is an important distinction to be had there.

[Ughmahedhurtz]

Spoken like a true Republication. Go research what socialism actually is. When the rich can get away with paying less tax than the middle class there is something REALLY wrong.

Welfare abuse will always happen but it may actually cost less than the rich with their accountants working the system to pay as little taxes as possible.

I completely agree that there is something inherently wrong with one group paying different tax rates than another group based on an arbitrary decision about what the word "rich" means. I propose the most fair solution of all: scrap our entire tax code for a flat consumption tax everyone pays at the register regardless of color, economic status, location, religion, nationality, social status, diplomatic status or any other status or identification. This is the only truly non-discriminatory, incorruptible way to do it, especially considering government's abysmal record of inefficiency over the last 75 years or so.

Wouldn't you agree?

[MadMilitia]

I completely agree that there is something inherently wrong with one group paying different tax rates than another group based on an arbitrary decision about what the word "rich" means. I propose the most fair solution of all: scrap our entire tax code for a flat consumption tax everyone pays at the register regardless of color, economic status, location, religion, nationality, social status, diplomatic status or any other status or identification. This is the only truly non-discriminatory, incorruptible way to do it, especially considering government's abysmal record of inefficiency over the last 75 years or so.

Wouldn't you agree?

I would disagree on the basis that the poorest of Americans pay ZERO income taxes as is.

What he might suggest is that the poorest of Americans pay far more in regressive taxation (payroll, property and sales tax) because they consume at a rate that makes the tax punishing to low income earners.

Mind none of this hints at what the real issue is. The real issue is in social change that has led to dissociated homes, bridge to nowhere programs, rising health risks due to hedonism and general apathy towards Capitalism. This comes back to the unintended consequences you mentioned earlier.

Basically it is just assumed that any possibility which exists should exist for all Americans irrespective of income. This means anything from having children to having cable TV. Accountability is lost on them.

[crowdx]

I completely agree that there is something inherently wrong with one group paying different tax rates than another group based on an arbitrary decision about what the word "rich" means. I propose the most fair solution of all: scrap our entire tax code for a flat consumption tax everyone pays at the register regardless of color, economic status, location, religion, nationality, social status, diplomatic status or any other status or identification. This is the only truly non-discriminatory, incorruptible way to do it, especially considering government's abysmal record of inefficiency over the last 75 years or so.

Wouldn't you agree?

So the person spending their welfare money is then getting taxed on the money given by the tax payer lol. In that case they would probably ask for an increase in welfare to cover the tax LMAO.

[Ughmahedhurtz]

So the person spending their welfare money is then getting taxed on the money given by the tax payer lol. In that case they would probably ask for an increase in welfare to cover the tax LMAO.

I'd say you're beginning to see just how many layers of...fuckedupedness is involved, here.

How long would you say we could run the government at current spending levels if we just outright confiscated every dime of earnings from everyone making over $200,000/year, completely ignoring paying anything down on the national debt? Just a ballpark estimate will do. You can even use 2010 numbers since that's the last complete set of data we have.

[Narij]

So the person spending their welfare money is then getting taxed on the money given by the tax payer lol. In that case they would probably ask for an increase in welfare to cover the tax LMAO.

Social Security is subject to .... social security tax! So there already is a precedent. The way to implement the tax would involve increasing welfare payments to match the added tax so purchasing power remains the same.

[Ughmahedhurtz]

Compare this kid with that other kid.