What, no Joe Manchin thread?

[Goofyboy 3012]

Im not the democrat party and never said i was presenting any democrat ideas, so please, don’t turn on them based on my point of view. I also don’t expect what I suggested to ever occur. If it were, I’d give zero fucks about a handful of billionaires only keeping a portion of their vast wealth.


Oh, and up until recently, I was a pretty hardcore Libertarian. Then I realized that while that looks good on paper, it’s a terrible idea in practice.

[jimmyjazz 45206]

3 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Why?  How does it effect you?

That's a question which makes my knee jerk, inasmuch as it harkens to the entire problem with the modern right.  "Hey, it doesn't hurt ME, I'm fine with it."

The whole point the left should be selling is that selfishness is bad.  Limiting one's perception of the value of a given legal construct based wholly on how it affects one's self, as opposed to society as a whole, is how we got into this mess in the first place.

[Biff Tannen 45211]

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

That's a question which makes my knee jerk, inasmuch as it harkens to the entire problem with the modern right.  "Hey, it doesn't hurt ME, I'm fine with it."

The whole point the left should be selling is that selfishness is bad.  Limiting one's perception of the value of a given legal construct based wholly on how it affects one's self, as opposed to society as a whole, is how we got into this mess in the first place.

Wait, are you agreeing or disagreeing?

[TwiceHorn 30851]

10 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

I thought about that, but I actually think I was right to use "conservative." I think what we're seeing from Republicans today is true conservatism, freed of all its ideological window dressing that used to work to seduce people who, for various reasons, weren't really comfortable calling themselves liberal. Conservatism is first and foremost reactionary and conservatives are first and foremost reactionist, and at times of social upheaval that reaction has always and will always manifest itself in truly ugly ways. People like you, Brisket, GoLL, etc. all used to consider yourselves conservatives and felt the appeal of much of the idealogical window dressing that it used to dress itself up with, but when faced with social upheaval none of y'all reacted the way the reactionists did. 

Well, again, I feel like that's an accurate portrait of the "conservatives" making up the current GOP, but not conservatives broadly.

I have found myself wondering what the fuck I was thinking as they led me along the primrose path to this shitstorm.  Although I was doing a lot of at least internal bitching as I trod that path.

But this article, that I posted in the "welcome back" thread gives a more nuanced depiction of conservatives.  https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/01/brooks-true-conservatism-dead-fox-news-voter-suppression/620853/

"Reactionary" used to be a rather pejorative term for extreme conservatives.

Brooks I believe uses the term "incrementalist" (or someone does), to describe conservatism more broadly.  That fits my views better than reactionary, and always has.

[jimmyjazz 45206]

2 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Wait, are you agreeing or disagreeing?

I'm saying that people shouldn't form their opinions of rights, laws, etc. solely on how they affect them, but rather how they affect everyone.

[TwiceHorn 30851]

28 minutes ago, Smax said:

 

 

As a lifelong GOP who has been moving left to the dem party, you 2 just lost my vote with this, no ifs ands or butts this policy will make me cringe and accept the shitshow of the GOP and pour money and support into the GOP to fight this measure in every way I can.

I'm not sure how serious he was about 99%.

But a less confiscatory, but higher tax rate for the ultra-wealthy doesn't bother me.

More is still more.  It's not as much as 100% tax free, but it's still more.

And, I'm not sure how that incentive of "more-more" really works with the ultra wealthy.  

I think most of us strive to at least be financially secure, but once you've moved past financially secure into fuck you money, and double-triple-ultra fuck you money, how much striving is really going on?  Is it anything more than "quien es mas macho?"

I might even argue that the majority of the "innovators'" societal contribution comes before they get into the top tax bracket.  Income and wealth are a "trailing indicator" on that end of things.  Also, as a person directly involved in innovation and innovation promotion policy, the consensus is that innovators will innovate without vast financial rewards, or even recognition, or patents, even.

And, I believe that there are a ton of ultra-wealthy whose societal contribution is minimal (financial sector, principally).

And how does that disincent people from striving in anything but the most highly theoretical way?  Ninety percent of Americans lack the income/wealth to be considered financially secure, even.  Are they just going to throw in the towel and say, "fuck it, I'm going on UBI" because the ultra wealthy pay at a 50% tax bracket?

Edited December 23, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[Goofyboy 3012]

The bigger issue is that we can’t really tax them near the level they need to be taxed because Musk isn’t worth $200 billion cash (guessing at his actual wealth).

I don’t know the answer. I do know that the balance is off. Too few have too much and control too much.

[workswithseed 2012]

38 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Why?  How does it effect you?

They buy goods and services. They employ people. They give to charity. They help 3rd world countries. Do you think rich people hoard money w/o trying to make more, or trying to help people? I won't say they're great people either, but that's how they effect us.

[Biff Tannen 45211]

2 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

They buy goods and services. They employ people. They give to charity. They help 3rd world countries. Do you think rich people hoard money w/o trying to make more, or trying to help people? I won't say they're great people either, but that's how they effect us.

And it all trickles down right?

[bolverk 29097]

43 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, again, I feel like that's an accurate portrait of the "conservatives" making up the current GOP, but not conservatives broadly.

I have found myself wondering what the fuck I was thinking as they led me along the primrose path to this shitstorm.  Although I was doing a lot of at least internal bitching as I trod that path.

But this article, that I posted in the "welcome back" thread gives a more nuanced depiction of conservatives.  https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/01/brooks-true-conservatism-dead-fox-news-voter-suppression/620853/

"Reactionary" used to be a rather pejorative term for extreme conservatives.

Brooks I believe uses the term "incrementalist" (or someone does), to describe conservatism more broadly.  That fits my views better than reactionary, and always has.

Don't want to put words into your mouth or question your beliefs, but there's a strong case to be made that Trump did does represent a different type of conservative. I want to say what you and Brooks are describing is the "neoconservative" wing of the GOP you/I grew up with. What Trump espoused during his candidacy and administration was more of a "paleoconservative" vision.

It was only recently that I came across a Wiki page citing Trump as an example of that ideology, which led me to this article. It also cites Pat Buchanan as a modern-day paleocon and draws the same parallel between him and Trump that I've been making for the past couple of years on this board but actually puts a name to it. It's part of the story I've told several times about how Buchanan's rising brand of conservatism led me away from the GOP in young adulthood.

https://www.vox.com/2016/5/6/11592604/donald-trump-paleoconservative-buchanan

Edited December 23, 2021 by bolverk
does

[workswithseed 2012]

3 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

And it all trickles down right?

Like blood off of a guillotine blade. 

[Bullneck 18771]

 

 

[JohnnyRage 1617]

4 hours ago, Smax said:

Raise taxes but limiting the ability to gain worth, fuck you Im grabbing my AR

You're grabbing your $600 gun?? Shhheeeeeett

[StassneyHorn 6446]

Affect

Effect

learn it 

[Bullneck 18771]

2 hours ago, workswithseed said:

They buy goods and services. They employ people. They give to charity. They help 3rd world countries. Do you think rich people hoard money w/o trying to make more, or trying to help people? I won't say they're great people either, but that's how they effect us.

Moron. Other than Bill Gates what billionaire has tried to help anyone?

Edited December 23, 2021 by Bullneck

[Bullneck 18771]

4 hours ago, Smax said:

Because its unamerican for the government to limit a persons personal and professional growth. The idea that some think its ok for the government to put in restraints on how much a person can earn, is terrifying to me. This is supposed to be the land of opportunity, bust your ass, reap the rewards. Now if we start placing limitations on what those rewards are?

 

Someone mentioned above, you reach a billion you won no need for more, does that person not understand that houses in high value areas can be several hundred million dollars, now add in vacation homes, planes, yatchs.upkeep well there a billion right there. 

Raise taxes but limiting the ability to gain worth, fuck you Im grabbing my AR

[fattyflattie 4633]

I don’t see why the Elon hate. Dude seems to be at least trying.  Fucking Bezos taking a 70k annual salary and still claiming deductions and whatnot is bitchmade.  I’m 100x more disgusted with him and his inability to pay his share than any other notable B.  They need to get together and code red that fucker  

[MonkeyCigarette 143]

2 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

I don’t see why the Elon hate. Dude seems to be at least trying.  Fucking Bezos taking a 70k annual salary and still claiming deductions and whatnot is bitchmade.  I’m 100x more disgusted with him and his inability to pay his share than any other notable B.  They need to get together and code red that fucker  

Also Elon owned Senator Karen on Twitter this week in a hilarious way. How do we not love him again now that he’s redeemed himself from that horrible Wario skit on SNL:

“Let’s change the rigged tax code so The Person of the Year will actually pay taxes and stop freeloading off everyone else.”

Elon then clapped back by sharing a Fox News article that calls her a “fraud” with the caption: “Stop projecting”. 

“You remind me of when I was a kid and my friend’s angry Mom would just randomly yell at everyone for no reason,” he added. 

Then, he wrote: “Please don’t call the manager on me, Senator Karen.”

[Bullneck 18771]

 

 

[Anastasis 23214]

Katie Porter DNE Rachel Maddow in any way shape or form. 

[Bullneck 18771]

2 minutes ago, MonkeyCigarette said:

Also Elon owned Senator Karen on Twitter this week in a hilarious way. How do we not love him again now that he’s redeemed himself from that horrible Wario skit on SNL:

“Let’s change the rigged tax code so The Person of the Year will actually pay taxes and stop freeloading off everyone else.”

Elon then clapped back by sharing a Fox News article that calls her a “fraud” with the caption: “Stop projecting”. 

“You remind me of when I was a kid and my friend’s angry Mom would just randomly yell at everyone for no reason,” he added. 

Then, he wrote: “Please don’t call the manager on me, Senator Karen.”

Hey, DC, if I don't see you again before you get crowd sourced, I just want to say peace out, have nice life, no one likes you, you're a disingenuous moron, and thanks for playing. Bye.

[JimmyJames 12267]

4 hours ago, Smax said:

 

 

As a lifelong GOP who has been moving left to the dem party, you 2 just lost my vote with this, no ifs ands or butts this policy will make me cringe and accept the shitshow of the GOP and pour money and support into the GOP to fight this measure in every way I can.

Good. Go fuck your self snd lick some other boots troll. You are wasting your worthless time here. Your posts mean zero. Fuck off. 

[Beantown Express 2.0 6528]

37 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

Moron. Other than Bill Gates what billionaire has tried to help anyone?

Uh, the greatest billionaire ever, Donald J Trump, helped this country become great again and…. Shit I can’t even finish this without laughing out loud.

 Mark Cuban did help the people of Dallas that were Mavericks fans enjoy a championship so that should count for something. 

[Anastasis 23214]

42 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

Moron. Other than Bill Gates what billionaire has tried to help anyone?

You are brain damaged. 

[Willfully Horn 7890]

Our tax code raises a couple of percentage points for differences in income of tens, or a couple hundred thousand, bucks. The rate ceases to increase somewhere north of 0.5M. If the tax rate caps at 90%, it would still be less than the highest rate our country has levied.

Billionairestans choose to value individuals over society, even though society has  asked others to give their all. Their lives. Somewhere, billionairestans’ moral compasses have lost their bearings.

Edited December 23, 2021 by Willfully Horn
Claro

[henrygandorf 28885]

3 hours ago, MonkeyCigarette said:

Also Elon owned Senator Karen on Twitter this week in a hilarious way. How do we not love him again now that he’s redeemed himself from that horrible Wario skit on SNL:

“Let’s change the rigged tax code so The Person of the Year will actually pay taxes and stop freeloading off everyone else.”

Elon then clapped back by sharing a Fox News article that calls her a “fraud” with the caption: “Stop projecting”. 

“You remind me of when I was a kid and my friend’s angry Mom would just randomly yell at everyone for no reason,” he added. 

Then, he wrote: “Please don’t call the manager on me, Senator Karen.”

[Sawbonz 26893]

10 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

And it all trickles down right?

That’s not what he’s saying. I’ll use me as tiny example. My overhead goes up based on my productivity. The busier I am the more staff I need, the more supplies,space, etc. Of course the busier I am the more money I generate. After my overhead is paid, and after the tax man takes his cut, I get what’s left. Also the more productive I am the more I am away from family, leisure activities etc. there is a limit to how much I am willing to work relative to how high the top tax rate is. If it’s too high, I will work less. Meaning less staff, supplies, and $ to the govt. That’s just human nature. Cap income and you cap productivity. It’s why it takes 9 months to schedule your total joint in Canada vs a few  weeks here. I would imagine everyone in all walks of life is that way. With billionaires it’s probably not time spent working but capital put at risk. Why risk it if the govt is going to take 99% of it?

[Johnny Sack 8397]

18 hours ago, StassneyHorn said:

In 3 days some of you will be sitting in a church celebrating the birth of a foreign speaking middle eastern child, a refugee, to a woman impregnated before she was married to another man and so poor she delivered in a barn.

and some of you won’t bat a fucking eye as you go on living like shitheaps.

He was born in a manger because there was no room in the inn not because Joseph, a skilled tradesmen, couldn’t afford a room.  They weren’t refugees at the time. They were in Bethlehem because a census was ordered and it was Joseph’s home town.  The town of David. Joseph was a direct descendant of David (and Solomon).  
 

None of this really matters. But your post has a dubious factual premise.  

[CooterBrown 17760]

Eliminate capital gains advantages for individuals/entities that hold accounts that have an accumulated worth over $1B. Tax the gains as income.

Eliminate long term trust funds. They get a maximum 25 year life span and then they are liquidated and taxed as income.

[PenelopeWitherspoon 18508]

10 hours ago, workswithseed said:

They buy goods and services. They employ people. They give to charity. They help 3rd world countries. Do you think rich people hoard money w/o trying to make more, or trying to help people? I won't say they're great people either, but that's how they effect us.

They also get corporate welfare thanks to the taxpayer.  The TAXPAYER pays for education which employs the people that work for their companies.  The TAXPAYER pays for programs like medicaid and foodstamps that go to their employees when they do not make enough.  The TAXPAYER in a lot of ways foots the bill for their infrastructure.  The TAXPAYER pays for aid if a natural disaster occurs thanks to their products (Oil and Gas, looking right at you).

The real average wage of the American worker in the US has been stagnant since Nixon.  Hell, if the average nominal wage had kept pace, the average American worker would be pulling in 100k per year.  As it is, they are pulling in 50k per year.  All that trickle down bullshit is just that, bullshit.  

[PenelopeWitherspoon 18508]

8 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

I don’t see why the Elon hate. Dude seems to be at least trying.  Fucking Bezos taking a 70k annual salary and still claiming deductions and whatnot is bitchmade.  I’m 100x more disgusted with him and his inability to pay his share than any other notable B.  They need to get together and code red that fucker  

Elon Musk is a not a great human being.  Has been for a long, long time.  

[jimmyjazz 45206]

8 hours ago, Bullneck said:

Moron. Other than Bill Gates what billionaire has tried to help anyone?

There are several,  most notably Warren Buffett, George Soros, and Michael Bloomberg.

Now, some "give billions", but a small percentage of their worth -- for instance, Mark Zuckerberg is said to have given $2.7B, but his net worth is more than 30X that amount.  The guys I listed have given some 20% - 65% of their substantial wealth away.

Edited December 23, 2021 by jimmyjazz

[SimonBolivar 10697]

8 hours ago, StassneyHorn said:

Affect

Effect

learn it 

I usually just write around it in academic settings lulz...Impact! Influence! Caused!

[Bullneck 18771]

22 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Elon Musk is a not a great human being.  Has been for a long, long time.  

Does anyone remember the whole "guy who rescued the boys in Thailand is a pedo" story, or know what it was about?  It seemed kind of out-of-left field.

[Sawbonz 26893]

30 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

They also get corporate welfare thanks to the taxpayer.  The TAXPAYER pays for education which employs the people that work for their companies.  The TAXPAYER pays for programs like medicaid and foodstamps that go to their employees when they do not make enough.  The TAXPAYER in a lot of ways foots the bill for their infrastructure.  The TAXPAYER pays for aid if a natural disaster occurs thanks to their products (Oil and Gas, looking right at you).

The real average wage of the American worker in the US has been stagnant since Nixon.  Hell, if the average nominal wage had kept pace, the average American worker would be pulling in 100k per year.  As it is, they are pulling in 50k per year.  All that trickle down bullshit is just that, bullshit.  

This is a disingenuous argument. The top 1% pay 40% of the federal taxes. The top 10% pay 70%. They also employ many if not most of the 90%. You can argue they should pay more but the idea that they don’t already pay the lion's share is false 

[PenelopeWitherspoon 18508]

3 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

This is a disingenuous argument. The top 1% pay 40% of the federal taxes. The top 10% pay 70%. They also employ many if not most of the 90%. You can argue they should pay more but the idea that they don’t already pay the lion's share is false 

The richest pay lower effective tax rates than I do..  So much of their income is shielded.  It is complete bullshit that because I am a salaried worker who gets paid very well, that my tax rate should be demonstrably higher than someone like Mitt Romney (my effective tax rate was higher than his in 2012 when he was running, and it has only gone up from there).  

 

[Sawbonz 26893]

9 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

The richest pay lower effective tax rates than I do..  So much of their income is shielded.  It is complete bullshit that because I am a salaried worker who gets paid very well, that my tax rate should be demonstrably higher than someone like Mitt Romney (my effective tax rate was higher than his in 2012 when he was running, and it has only gone up from there).  

 

Again you are not addressing what I am saying. 10% pay 90%. 1% pay 40%. Everyone above the poverty line needs to contribute. I would be for taxing all income the same regardless of source. That would fix the effective tax rate discrepancy. I would never agree to a wealth tax

 

eta I would be for higher top marginal rates and more brackets as well

Edited December 23, 2021 by Sawbonz

[PenelopeWitherspoon 18508]

Just now, Sawbonz said:

Again you are not addressing what I am saying. 10% pay 90%. 1% pay 40%. Everyone above the poverty line needs to contribute. I would be for taxing all income the same regardless of source. That would fix the effective tax rate discrepancy. I would never agree to a wealth tax

We are never going to agree.  You are talking about a completely different measurement than I am.  Even using a flat tax, the 1% would always pay more of the total revenue in.  There is THAT much of a discrepancy of income and wealth in this country.  Effective tax rate is what everyone should be looking at, and a lot of billionaires have miniscule effective tax rates and that is fucking bullshit.  They should not have lower effective tax rates than people that make less.  

I do not disagree that everyone should have skin in the game, but I also think that we need to increase the tax level to above the poverty line.  You shouldn't pay tax on money that goes to things like housing or food.  

[StassneyHorn 6446]

1 hour ago, Johnny Sack said:

He was born in a manger because there was no room in the inn not because Joseph, a skilled tradesmen, couldn’t afford a room.  They weren’t refugees at the time. They were in Bethlehem because a census was ordered and it was Joseph’s home town.  The town of David. Joseph was a direct descendant of David (and Solomon).  
 

None of this really matters. But your post has a dubious factual premise.  

No all of that is wrong. You should file a complaint with Pope Benedict if you think he was not a refugee

Edited December 23, 2021 by StassneyHorn

[SimonBolivar 10697]

1 hour ago, Johnny Sack said:

He was born in a manger because there was no room in the inn not because Joseph, a skilled tradesmen, couldn’t afford a room.  They weren’t refugees at the time. They were in Bethlehem because a census was ordered and it was Joseph’s home town.  The town of David. Joseph was a direct descendant of David (and Solomon).  
 

 

[Sawbonz 26893]

8 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

You shouldn't pay tax on money that goes to things like housing or food.  

Why not? 

[MonkeyCigarette 143]

2 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Why not? 

The easiest thing to do is to remember that a lot of people on here are espousing insane tax and social policies that would never get a millisecond of serious debate in legislative chambers, but because they say it with such pomp and confidence I forget they are just bitter losers on the internets.

[PenelopeWitherspoon 18508]

3 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Why not? 

Why do businesses get to deduct things like rent and depreciation for buildings when individual taxpayers do not?  See how this works?  

[Sawbonz 26893]

1 minute ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Why do businesses get to deduct things like rent and depreciation for buildings when individual taxpayers do not?  See how this works?  

So now you are wanting to treat businesses and individuals the same? I thought we were talking about taxing individuals. 

[SimonBolivar 10697]

7 minutes ago, MonkeyCigarette said:

The easiest thing to do is to remember that a lot of people on here are espousing insane tax and social policies that would never get a millisecond of serious debate in legislative chambers, but because they say it with such pomp and confidence I forget they are just bitter losers on the internets.

Who cares? You can't debate on something unless it's going to happen?

[StassneyHorn 6446]

Whenever Joe Manchin tells me that Jesus wasn’t a refugee, over the objections of Pope Benedict and Pope Francis, only then will I believe it.

[Harrison Bergeron 1798]

9 hours ago, StassneyHorn said:

Affect

Effect

learn it 

I laugh at most of the CR, but this makes me ragey. 

[JimmyJames 12267]

17 minutes ago, MonkeyCigarette said:

The easiest thing to do is to remember that a lot of people on here are espousing insane tax and social policies that would never get a millisecond of serious debate in legislative chambers, but because they say it with such pomp and confidence I forget they are just bitter losers on the internets.

Yeah that’s a neg.  Fuck off with this pompous and meaningless crap.

[PenelopeWitherspoon 18508]

17 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

So now you are wanting to treat businesses and individuals the same? I thought we were talking about taxing individuals. 

Why not?  Businesses get deductions for a lot of crazy shit that individuals don't.  That is more of that corporate welfare for you.  Why not make them the same?  If a business can depreciate a building where it resides or take rent payments and only pay tax on net income, individuals should be able to do the same thing.  Individuals basically pay a Gross Revenue Tax.  Businesses get a net income tax.  It is fucking bullshit.

[workswithseed 2012]

1 hour ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

They also get corporate welfare thanks to the taxpayer.  The TAXPAYER pays for education which employs the people that work for their companies.  The TAXPAYER pays for programs like medicaid and foodstamps that go to their employees when they do not make enough.  The TAXPAYER in a lot of ways foots the bill for their infrastructure.  The TAXPAYER pays for aid if a natural disaster occurs thanks to their products (Oil and Gas, looking right at you).

The real average wage of the American worker in the US has been stagnant since Nixon.  Hell, if the average nominal wage had kept pace, the average American worker would be pulling in 100k per year.  As it is, they are pulling in 50k per year.  All that trickle down bullshit is just that, bullshit.  

They're also tax payers, but yes corporate welfare should be nil. I mean I don't think they're gods among men, since they themselves are just men, but the question was why should we care if it doesn't affect us, and those are the ways we're affected.