Elizabeth Warren proposes 'wealth tax' on Americans with more than $50 million in assets
Comments
-
You guys are like the Kunt who immediately start talking about Firemen and the Police the moment anyone starts talking about cutting state spending.HHusky said:
You missed the liberation of the concentration camps? Ever driven an interstate highway? Do you own any shares of public companies? Will you lose your savings if your bank goes tits up?SFGbob said:
Why would anyone look to the government to make their life better?allpurpleallgold said:
Start voting for people that will make people’s lives better. I always see this shit about “the government”. The government is made up of people. Elect better people and you’ll get better results.Fenderbender123 said:I love how creative politicians have to be when they're trying to take more money from people. If they would actually spend tax dollars on shit we wanted, or on shit that's actually necessary to maintain a healthy, civilized society, there wouldn't even be a need for taxes. People would just donate. Instead, they spend our money in the shittiest, most inefficient way possible, so they have to get creative and try to trick people into supporting tax increases by making us think "Yeah, fuck wealthy people. Those fuckers don't need all that wealth...it's just, like, sitting there totally unused, man. Those greedy, arrogant, unskilled, lazy, fat, racist good-for-nothing rich people only got rich by making me poor anyway. So let's tax the fuck out of them. Sure, that won't improve my standard of living because the government sure as fuck isn't going to make my life any better with that money. But that's not important. What's important is that I can sit here and feel good about all those wealthy people getting fucked over. Fuck yeah!"
The republicans deserve a lot of credit for electing Trump. He’s not the guy but they took their shot to get away from scumbag politicians. More than I can say for a shit load of democrats that won’t even take a shot.
Asking for a friend.
Providing for a national defense is right there in the Constitution. Paying for grandma's hip replacement, I can't find that shit in the Constitution. -
I love the self-styled constitutional scholars on this boardSFGbob said:
You guys are like the Kunt who immediately start talking about Firemen and the Police the moment anyone starts talking about cutting state spending.HHusky said:
You missed the liberation of the concentration camps? Ever driven an interstate highway? Do you own any shares of public companies? Will you lose your savings if your bank goes tits up?SFGbob said:
Why would anyone look to the government to make their life better?allpurpleallgold said:
Start voting for people that will make people’s lives better. I always see this shit about “the government”. The government is made up of people. Elect better people and you’ll get better results.Fenderbender123 said:I love how creative politicians have to be when they're trying to take more money from people. If they would actually spend tax dollars on shit we wanted, or on shit that's actually necessary to maintain a healthy, civilized society, there wouldn't even be a need for taxes. People would just donate. Instead, they spend our money in the shittiest, most inefficient way possible, so they have to get creative and try to trick people into supporting tax increases by making us think "Yeah, fuck wealthy people. Those fuckers don't need all that wealth...it's just, like, sitting there totally unused, man. Those greedy, arrogant, unskilled, lazy, fat, racist good-for-nothing rich people only got rich by making me poor anyway. So let's tax the fuck out of them. Sure, that won't improve my standard of living because the government sure as fuck isn't going to make my life any better with that money. But that's not important. What's important is that I can sit here and feel good about all those wealthy people getting fucked over. Fuck yeah!"
The republicans deserve a lot of credit for electing Trump. He’s not the guy but they took their shot to get away from scumbag politicians. More than I can say for a shit load of democrats that won’t even take a shot.
Asking for a friend.
Providing for a national defense is right there in the Constitution. Paying for grandma's hip replacement, I can't find that shit in the Constitution.
-
That was how they were able to get it passed in Congress. The interstate system was seen as not only adding in National Defense but it's text book definition of Federal spending on behalf of the "General Welfare."RaceBannon said:Ike sold the interstate freeway system as national defense
Like a wall
Shit the government is supposed to do -
Fuck off.2001400ex said:
After saying you don't care how the tax cut was sold. Now you care how the interstate system was sold?RaceBannon said:Ike sold the interstate freeway system as national defense
Like a wall
Shit the government is supposed to do -
Would be better off with a VAT approach plus a flat tax on earned income (say, somewhere between 17 and 34%, rather easily). High end consumers would pay through the nose. Poor people wouldn't.HHusky said:
I think the bigger problem with the 70% marginal tax rate is that it wouldn't raise that much money. I've already said I'd stop fetishizing investment income. Much simpler than taxing you rich guys 70% on your declared income exceeding $10 million.RaceBannon said:HHusky said:
You driving a tank these days, Race?RaceBannon said:Ike sold the interstate freeway system as national defense
Like a wall
Shit the government is supposed to do
Do we need a 70% tax rate to run interstate roads
Problem solved.
Next.
-
I'm not a Con-law scholar but I've read the damn thing.MariotaTheGawd said:
I love the self-styled constitutional scholars on this boardSFGbob said:
You guys are like the Kunt who immediately start talking about Firemen and the Police the moment anyone starts talking about cutting state spending.HHusky said:
You missed the liberation of the concentration camps? Ever driven an interstate highway? Do you own any shares of public companies? Will you lose your savings if your bank goes tits up?SFGbob said:
Why would anyone look to the government to make their life better?allpurpleallgold said:
Start voting for people that will make people’s lives better. I always see this shit about “the government”. The government is made up of people. Elect better people and you’ll get better results.Fenderbender123 said:I love how creative politicians have to be when they're trying to take more money from people. If they would actually spend tax dollars on shit we wanted, or on shit that's actually necessary to maintain a healthy, civilized society, there wouldn't even be a need for taxes. People would just donate. Instead, they spend our money in the shittiest, most inefficient way possible, so they have to get creative and try to trick people into supporting tax increases by making us think "Yeah, fuck wealthy people. Those fuckers don't need all that wealth...it's just, like, sitting there totally unused, man. Those greedy, arrogant, unskilled, lazy, fat, racist good-for-nothing rich people only got rich by making me poor anyway. So let's tax the fuck out of them. Sure, that won't improve my standard of living because the government sure as fuck isn't going to make my life any better with that money. But that's not important. What's important is that I can sit here and feel good about all those wealthy people getting fucked over. Fuck yeah!"
The republicans deserve a lot of credit for electing Trump. He’s not the guy but they took their shot to get away from scumbag politicians. More than I can say for a shit load of democrats that won’t even take a shot.
Asking for a friend.
Providing for a national defense is right there in the Constitution. Paying for grandma's hip replacement, I can't find that shit in the Constitution.
Feel free to quote from the grandam's hip replacement clause. -
I'm not saying it couldn't work, but it seems like evasion would be an ongoing problem. Much more so than with treating investment income as ordinary income.PurpleThrobber said:
Would be better off with a VAT approach plus a flat tax on earned income (say, somewhere between 17 and 34%, rather easily). High end consumers would pay through the nose. Poor people wouldn't.HHusky said:
I think the bigger problem with the 70% marginal tax rate is that it wouldn't raise that much money. I've already said I'd stop fetishizing investment income. Much simpler than taxing you rich guys 70% on your declared income exceeding $10 million.RaceBannon said:HHusky said:
You driving a tank these days, Race?RaceBannon said:Ike sold the interstate freeway system as national defense
Like a wall
Shit the government is supposed to do
Do we need a 70% tax rate to run interstate roads
Problem solved.
Next. -
Which is a proven horrible ideaHHusky said:
I'm not saying it couldn't work, but it seems like evasion would be an ongoing problem. Much more so than with treating investment income as ordinary income.PurpleThrobber said:
Would be better off with a VAT approach plus a flat tax on earned income (say, somewhere between 17 and 34%, rather easily). High end consumers would pay through the nose. Poor people wouldn't.HHusky said:
I think the bigger problem with the 70% marginal tax rate is that it wouldn't raise that much money. I've already said I'd stop fetishizing investment income. Much simpler than taxing you rich guys 70% on your declared income exceeding $10 million.RaceBannon said:HHusky said:
You driving a tank these days, Race?RaceBannon said:Ike sold the interstate freeway system as national defense
Like a wall
Shit the government is supposed to do
Do we need a 70% tax rate to run interstate roads
Problem solved.
Next.
Good one -
I’m just breaking your balls, Bob, with a friendly reminder that throughout our history, government has improved our standard of living immensely. This is especially true of the State of California.SFGbob said:
Yeah, no doubt that's what he had in mind dams and aqueducts when he said:YellowSnow said:
Dams and aqueducts don’t get built by private enterprise.SFGbob said:
Why would anyone look to the government to make their life better?allpurpleallgold said:
Start voting for people that will make people’s lives better. I always see this shit about “the government”. The government is made up of people. Elect better people and you’ll get better results.Fenderbender123 said:I love how creative politicians have to be when they're trying to take more money from people. If they would actually spend tax dollars on shit we wanted, or on shit that's actually necessary to maintain a healthy, civilized society, there wouldn't even be a need for taxes. People would just donate. Instead, they spend our money in the shittiest, most inefficient way possible, so they have to get creative and try to trick people into supporting tax increases by making us think "Yeah, fuck wealthy people. Those fuckers don't need all that wealth...it's just, like, sitting there totally unused, man. Those greedy, arrogant, unskilled, lazy, fat, racist good-for-nothing rich people only got rich by making me poor anyway. So let's tax the fuck out of them. Sure, that won't improve my standard of living because the government sure as fuck isn't going to make my life any better with that money. But that's not important. What's important is that I can sit here and feel good about all those wealthy people getting fucked over. Fuck yeah!"
The republicans deserve a lot of credit for electing Trump. He’s not the guy but they took their shot to get away from scumbag politicians. More than I can say for a shit load of democrats that won’t even take a shot.
Start voting for people that will make people’s lives better. I always see this shit about “the government”. The government is made up of people. Elect better people and you’ll get better results.
You'd be hard pressed to any significant new dams built in this country these days anyway. Something tells me he was thing about roads and ports when he made that statement. All of those would fall into the category of "general welfare."
True though it would be damned hard to build anymore dams in today’s climate. Good thing for all you SFO folks that your forefathers damned up Yosemite before anyone cared about the environment. -
Proven how?RaceBannon said:
Which is a proven horrible ideaHHusky said:
I'm not saying it couldn't work, but it seems like evasion would be an ongoing problem. Much more so than with treating investment income as ordinary income.PurpleThrobber said:
Would be better off with a VAT approach plus a flat tax on earned income (say, somewhere between 17 and 34%, rather easily). High end consumers would pay through the nose. Poor people wouldn't.HHusky said:
I think the bigger problem with the 70% marginal tax rate is that it wouldn't raise that much money. I've already said I'd stop fetishizing investment income. Much simpler than taxing you rich guys 70% on your declared income exceeding $10 million.RaceBannon said:HHusky said:
You driving a tank these days, Race?RaceBannon said:Ike sold the interstate freeway system as national defense
Like a wall
Shit the government is supposed to do
Do we need a 70% tax rate to run interstate roads
Problem solved.
Next.
Good one
