How Stupid Is Governor Ron Desantis?

#652
#652
whodeycin85 said:
This is where removing taxes will start... There is already legislation on the ways and means for ending federal income tax and have a consumption tax
Click to expand...
That would be very dumb and a massive wealth transfer from the poor to the rich
 
#656
#656
NashVol11 said:
That would be very dumb and a massive wealth transfer from the poor to the rich
Click to expand...
how do the rich get richer here from the poor?

at worst its: the rich get to keep more of their money as the poor now have to pay for what they vote for. thats not wealth transfer, its stopping the wealth transfer.

somewhere in the middle: the large tax burden on the middle class is decreased.

at best its: everybody actually pays something based on their level of spending.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85
#657
#657
NashVol11 said:
It's not something that requires waiting and seeing, replacing a progressive tax with a flat one is a money-saver for rich people at the expense of the poor
Click to expand...
Seems to me there are plenty of jobs in the farming sector coming clear....so maybe that bottom 50% that don't pay taxes can actually contribute More
 
#658
#658
LouderVol said:
how do the rich get richer here from the poor?

at worst its: the rich get to keep more of their money as the poor now have to pay for what they vote for. thats not wealth transfer, its stopping the wealth transfer.

somewhere in the middle: the large tax burden on the middle class is decreased.

at best its: everybody actually pays something based on their level of spending.
Click to expand...
The rich keep more of their money, the poor pay more than they did before, but how is it a wealth transfer? It seems like you answered your own question
 
#662
#662
NashVol11 said:
Pure semantics, it is rich getting richer and poor getting poorer regardless of how you choose to label it
Click to expand...
its not semantics. its an important distinction that correctly frames what is actually happening. you want to call it semantics because you don't like the result.

the only reason the poor are getting poorer is because they voted for a bunch of stuff they can't afford. they were expecting other people to pay for them, despite their wants being counter to the wants of the people paying.

I believe this nation will never get fixed until everyone has to write a check to the IRS. the vast majority of people have no clue of the consequences of what they vote for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77, whodeycin85, UT_Dutchman and 1 other person
#663
#663
LouderVol said:
its not semantics. its an important distinction that correctly frames what is actually happening. you want to call it semantics because you don't like the result.

the only reason the poor are getting poorer is because they voted for a bunch of stuff they can't afford. they were expecting other people to pay for them, despite their wants being counter to the wants of the people paying.

I believe this nation will never get fixed until everyone has to write a check to the IRS. the vast majority of people have no clue of the consequences of what they vote for.
Click to expand...
When the austerity bus comes to town its going to be ugly AF
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85
#664
#664
LouderVol said:
its not semantics. its an important distinction that correctly frames what is actually happening. you want to call it semantics because you don't like the result.

the only reason the poor are getting poorer is because they voted for a bunch of stuff they can't afford. they were expecting other people to pay for them, despite their wants being counter to the wants of the people paying.

I believe this nation will never get fixed until everyone has to write a check to the IRS. the vast majority of people have no clue of the consequences of what they vote for.
Click to expand...
It is 100% semantics, lol. You are arguing about the label used to describe the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, when I do not care about the label at all
 
#665
#665
NashVol11 said:
It is 100% semantics, lol. You are arguing about the label used to describe the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, when I do not care about the label at all
Click to expand...
The rich would lose every single tax loophole their accountants can come up with. I'd think they would pay more. They consume more and can't hide…obviously devils in the details
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85
#666
#666
volfanhill said:
The rich would lose every single tax loophole their accountants can come up with. I'd think they would pay more. They consume more and can't hide…obviously devils in the details
Click to expand...
I get the point you're making but I don't think the bill would ever look like this, if it doesn't benefit the rich then it won't have any support IMO
 
#667
#667
LouderVol said:
how do the rich get richer here from the poor?

at worst its: the rich get to keep more of their money as the poor now have to pay for what they vote for. thats not wealth transfer, its stopping the wealth transfer.

somewhere in the middle: the large tax burden on the middle class is decreased.

at best its: everybody actually pays something based on their level of spending.
Click to expand...

This is something Milton Friedman talked about a lot. The rich live much longer and collect income for fewer years (college + grad school + earlier retirement), and SS and Medicare become wealth transfers from the lower middle class/middle class to the wealthy. The guy that drove a bus for the city from ages 18 to 65 and dies at 70 is paying for my Dad's Medicare.

It's not a meaningful transfer to the super wealthy, but it's still a wealth transfer.
 
#668
#668
NashVol11 said:
I get the point you're making but I don't think the bill would ever look like this, if it doesn't benefit the rich then it won't have any support IMO
Click to expand...
I have a very good friend. He's 46 and retired this year. His wife is 43 and he wants her to retire next year. He's worth about $3 million. I asked about health insurance. He laughed and said Obamacare. Draw down theminimum on some retirement accounts. Counts as income. Keep it at $7,000 grand and boom free health care essentially. He and his wife are accountants so I didn't double check his math.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85
#669
#669
NashVol11 said:
It's not something that requires waiting and seeing, replacing a progressive tax with a flat one is a money-saver for rich people at the expense of the poor
Click to expand...
Brings up the age old question of why poor people are poor. In today's world its mostly making bad decisions. The game of life is a tough one for lots of people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MWR and whodeycin85
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top