Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Blue State exodus

124

Comments

  • TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680

    Definitions of progressive and regressive differ. I think progressing towards freedom is what we should strive for. Most people who use the term progress and label themselves progressive these days sadly are big govt. Fascists.


    If progressive = most fair then Washington's tax structure aside from the regressive B&O tax is easily one of the most progressive.

    If you are an ivory tower, mega corporation, 1%er, eliminate the middle class, enslave the poor, big govt. elitist then California or NY's tax system is what you view as the most progressive. Stop ignoring science, these systems are proven failures that only enrich the elite, corrupt, and their underclass cronies.
    CHRIST
  • Purple_PillsPurple_Pills Member Posts: 2,109
    AZDuck said:

    No they don't. There is a clearly defined definition of "progressive" and "regressive" tax regimes. Here it is:



    In economics, these are terms of art, not value judgments. Washington State has a very regressive tax structure. Oregon's is very progressive. Each has its merits and demerits.

    Washington's tax structure is more fair than Oregon's. Oregon's tax structure favors the wealthy and hurts the middle class and the poor looking to climb socioeconomic ranks.


    Washington's tax structure not only is more fair, it is also a more stable tax revenue system.

    Here in Washington I get to decide when and if I pay sales tax. I have a choice to forgo new clothes, electronics, etc. and invest that money to build and grow wealth. Those folks too stupid to pump their own gas in Oregon do not have that freedom. Income tax = wealthy keeping the rest of us down.

    Income tax screws the little guy:

    http://papers.nber.org/tmp/11474-w24175.pdf
  • UWhuskytskeetUWhuskytskeet Member Posts: 7,113

    Washington's tax structure is more fair than Oregon's. Oregon's tax structure favors the wealthy and hurts the middle class and the poor looking to climb socioeconomic ranks.


    Washington's tax structure not only is more fair, it is also a more stable tax revenue system.

    Here in Washington I get to decide when and if I pay sales tax. I have a choice to forgo new clothes, electronics, etc. and invest that money to build and grow wealth. Those folks too stupid to pump their own gas in Oregon do not have that freedom. Income tax = wealthy keeping the rest of us down.

    Income tax screws the little guy:

    http://papers.nber.org/tmp/11474-w24175.pdf
    It's not about your opinion, he's giving literal definitions.
  • Purple_PillsPurple_Pills Member Posts: 2,109

    It's not about your opinion, he's giving literal definitions.
    "Progressive" and "regressive" are loaded political terms. I disagree with their use in the science of economics. In my political opinion, Washington has a more progressive (as in the most fair to the most, especially non-wealthy) tax system than Oregon (which favors old $).
  • CirrhosisDawgCirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390

    "Progressive" and "regressive" are loaded political terms. I disagree with their use in the science of economics. In my political opinion, Washington has a more progressive (as in the most fair to the most, especially non-wealthy) tax system than Oregon (which favors old $).
    For fuck’s sake, they are defined terms of micro economics. “Progressive” taxes are structured on ability to pay (i.e. Oregon’s income tax) while “regressive” taxes are the same nominal amount regardless of ability to pay (i.e. WA State’s sales tax).

    Do you need a safe space from micro economics?
  • Purple_PillsPurple_Pills Member Posts: 2,109

    For fuck’s sake, they are defined terms of micro economics. “Progressive” taxes are structured on ability to pay (i.e. Oregon’s income tax) while “regressive” taxes are the same nominal amount regardless of ability to pay (i.e. WA State’s sales tax).

    Do you need a safe space from micro economics?
    Again, that's political lingo infecting economics.

    You say Oregon = "ability to pay". That's horseshit. They tax income, not wealth. A system that totally favors old money and the extreme wealthy.

    Meanwhile Washington's tax system is voluntary. I can choose if and when I expend sales tax. Instead of giving that money to the govt., I can instead invest and grow wealth. Washington does not tax nonprepared food so calculate that too into why Washington has the superior tax system for the working poor and middle class.
  • dfleadflea Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 7,287 Swaye's Wigwam






    "Progressive" and "regressive" are loaded political terms. I disagree with their use in the science of economics. In my political opinion, Washington has a more progressive (as in the most fair to the most, especially non-wealthy) tax system than Oregon (which favors old $).

    No. They are simple economic terms with meanings. If you want them to mean something different in your world, that's ok - but you should let others know before having discussions about tax policy first.

    If I pay the same amount of tax as Bill Gates when we decide to buy a toaster, that's a regressive tax. It's called regressive because Bill has more $$$ to pay taxes with than I do, yet we both paid $2.87 in taxes on the toaster.

    If you're not liking the way the terms are used in tax policy discussions, I'm not really sure who you should take it up with. Maybe just leave the terms out of your discussion and use something like "fair" or "equitable" instead. Then your meaning is clear without getting into a big conflict with well established and accepted economic terms.
  • doogiedoogie Member Posts: 15,072
    If you can’t afford a toaster, don’t buy one.
  • PurpleThrobberPurpleThrobber Member Posts: 47,915

    Again, that's political lingo infecting economics.

    You say Oregon = "ability to pay". That's horseshit. They tax income, not wealth. A system that totally favors old money and the extreme wealthy.

    Meanwhile Washington's tax system is voluntary. I can choose if and when I expend sales tax. Instead of giving that money to the govt., I can instead invest and grow wealth. Washington does not tax nonprepared food so calculate that too into why Washington has the superior tax system for the working poor and middle class.
    No. Just no to everything.

    Bizarro world.
  • doogiedoogie Member Posts: 15,072
    dflea said:

    Quit fagging out the thread, assface, or I'll buy 2 fucking toasters and use one to beat you like a rented mule with.
    I’m not the one on a message bored complaining about how the tax on a toaster is Unfair because a different consumer can afford to pay more
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    doogie said:

    I’m not the one on a message bored complaining about how the tax on a toaster is Unfair because a different consumer can afford to pay more
    Reading comprehension never was your strong suit.
  • CirrhosisDawgCirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390
    doogie said:

    I’m not the one on a message bored complaining about how the tax on a toaster is Unfair because a different consumer can afford to pay more
    Who is complaining?

    No one.

    Lots of people are hoping that @dflea beats your dense cranium between two toasters though. Regressive WA sales tax well worth it.
  • doogiedoogie Member Posts: 15,072
    what’s California’s severely underfunded public pensions worth?
  • CirrhosisDawgCirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390
    doogie said:

    what’s California’s severely underfunded public pensions worth?

    30 years of payments starting today and assuming exactly no further gains or earnings. There is no federal recourse to any CA debt.

    Fuck off you faggot @doogie
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    doogie said:

    what’s California’s severely underfunded public pensions worth?

    You have zero clue how pensions work.
  • dfleadflea Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 7,287 Swaye's Wigwam
    edited January 2018
    doogie said:

    I’m not the one on a message bored complaining about how the tax on a toaster is Unfair because a different consumer can afford to pay more
    Neither was I, you stupid fucking cunt. It was just an example of a regressive tax. Kind of like you're an example of a drippy fucking cunt.

    Pay fucking attention and you won't look like such a faggot next time.
  • doogiedoogie Member Posts: 15,072
    You’re whining that Bill Gates pays the same tax as you on a toaster.

    You then drop emotion over your arguement hoping to be shielded from your empty minded dribble because you know, feelings >>> facts.
  • dfleadflea Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 7,287 Swaye's Wigwam
    doogie said:

    You’re whining that Bill Gates pays the same tax as you on a toaster.

    You then drop emotion over your arguement hoping to be shielded from your empty minded dribble because you know, feelings >>> facts.

    No I wasn't.

    I guess you're unable to not be a complete faggot. You're just a whiny fucking bitch.

    And it's "drivel", you stupid fuck - not "dribble".

    Fucking kill yourself.
  • KaepskneeKaepsknee Member Posts: 14,913
    dflea said:

    You didn't go to UW because you're too fucking stupid.

    So fuck yourself.
    And we surely know your concussed ass didn't.
Sign In or Register to comment.