17 Replies to “Progressive Taxes explained — Greedy Harry gets what he deserves [Darleen Click]”

1. dicentra says:

   November 11, 2014 at 10:34 am

   Flat tax! Flat tax!

2. eCurmudgeon says:

   November 11, 2014 at 10:58 am

   Tarriffs!

3. bgbear says:

   November 11, 2014 at 1:43 pm

   That’s weird, my comments disappeared.

4. Darleen says:

   November 11, 2014 at 1:54 pm

   that is weird, bgbear, because I just looked to see if it’s in moderation, and nothing is there.

5. bgbear says:

   November 11, 2014 at 3:24 pm

   Thanks. Nothing much. I’ll write it shorter.

   Just saying, I always assumed that the justification for progressive taxes is that a person earning $1m/year is using more resources to get there than the guy only earning $10K/year. This is true for most cases. However, what makes dollar 999 different from dollar 99,999? Or to put another way, Why would 10 guys making $100,000 each pay less taxes than one guy earning $1M? Chances are the 10 guys are using up a lot of resources as well.

   I am not even going to try factor in job creation. I am not an economist. Just trying to look at it simply.

6. McGehee says:

   November 11, 2014 at 3:40 pm

   I always assumed that the justification for progressive taxes is that a person earning $1m/year is using more resources to get there

   Nope. It’s naked Marxism: from each according to his ability.

7. BigBangHunter says:

   November 11, 2014 at 4:13 pm

   – The Progtards have a slightly different version:

   – From each according to their gullibility, too each according to their sloth.

8. bgbear says:

   November 11, 2014 at 4:27 pm

   I know, I am talking about how it was sold to the “stupid” people.

9. Darleen says:

   November 11, 2014 at 4:52 pm

   I believe the “uses more infrastructure” meme is a deliberate distraction. A lot of folks are paying for things through their taxes they will never ever use (think museums, art exhibits, orchestras, etc concentrated on the east & west coasts).

   We all should pay taxes in the most equitable manner, just as we pay for any other goods or services. If I’m running a grocery store and these 3 brothers come in and buy a gallon of ice cream a piece, I don’t charge them different rates depending on their caste.

   Progressive taxes deliberately separate people to get them focused on each other rather than on the government.

10. TaiChiWawa says:

    November 11, 2014 at 7:30 pm

    Except the video asserts that the brothers are equal in capabilities and opportunities. Is this realistic?

11. Bob Belvedere says:

    November 11, 2014 at 7:36 pm

    McGehee wrote: It’s naked Marxism: from each according to his ability.

    Quite, but probe a little more deeper and it is a way to discourage and ultimately destroy creativity which leads to individuality.

12. newrouter says:

    November 11, 2014 at 8:11 pm

    > I always assumed that the justification for progressive taxes is that a person earning $1m/year is using more resources to get there than the guy only earning $10K/year. This is true for most cases.<

    no. that 1 million peep might be using the existing resources to his advantage more so than the 10k guy. some peeps are more clever than others.

13. newrouter says:

    November 11, 2014 at 8:12 pm

    cont.

    for example: uber et al.

14. John Bradley says:

    November 11, 2014 at 8:32 pm

    I always assumed that the justification for progressive taxes is that a person earning $1m/year is using more resources to get there than the guy only earning $10K/year.

    Ahh, but since free market transactions are inherently win-win, one could argue that the $1M guy is producing so much more societal good, enriching the lives of everyone who’s transacted with him, that he should be taxed less than the relatively useless (to society :rolleyes:) $10K guy.

    Not that anyone should be taxed on their income in the first place.

15. BigBangHunter says:

    November 12, 2014 at 4:06 am

    – Part of the ruining classes redistribution of wealth entails redistributing a good swatch of the public’s wealth into the governments political pork barrels. They could not do that without an income tax.

    – The common excuse has always been “The Electorate demands so much from government so it’s simply necessary.” i.e;see:Affordable health care act.

    – The last I heard they have signed up (maybe) <7 million people out of 360+ million at a cost of 2.5 billion not counting subsidies. How the fuck is that "insuring everyone". It's not working and will repeal itself eventually.

16. Bob Belvedere says:

    November 12, 2014 at 5:38 am

    If they say it enough times, BBH, it will come true! Magic!

    There’s no place like home [shoe click]
    There’s no place like home [shoe click]
    There’s no place like home [shoe click]
    There’s no place like home [shoe click]…POOF!

    The Big Lie as ruby shoes.

17. bgbear says:

    November 12, 2014 at 11:11 am

    Thanks for the comments, it will help me with arguments with others.

    I like newsrouters argument about some people using resources more cleverly than others. Very true, two farmers with equal resources can have very different success.

    When I said “true for most cases” I did not mean I bought into progressive taxes just that it was generally true that it takes more resources to generate a million than it does to generate a thousand but, so what? Each dollar earned is equivalent whether it is the first or the last.

    I think that the underlying envy the government relies on is that if a guy earns $40K and pays say 20% in taxes (making up stuff here) he takes home $32K where as the guy who earns $1M gets to take home $800K.

Comments are closed.