The Scourge of America with Integrity (On Topic Only Please)

[vantexan]

Tryin to reply fairly.

What you are saying is inaccurate.

Having a lot of wealth and the absurd accumulation of wealth are clearly and obviously 2 different levels of wealth.

I clearly stated in my opening post that it is
the absurd accumulation of power resulting from the absurd accumulation of wealth that is the scourge of American society. I never stated that having a lot of wealth while some don’t is the scourge of America as you stated.

I never mentioned in my words or other words haves or have nots and I stated more than once I envy no one.

The progressive tax idea, taken from the US tax table of 1960, is not meant to take away anything, it is meant to de incentivize the absurd accumulation of wealth and the resultant accumulation of power particularly destructive to the governance of the American people.

IMO Absurdly rich individuals and corporations corruptly run the American Government for themselves at the expense of the American public. That my friends, IMO is a scourge to American society.

So how do you decide who has too much wealth and at what point do you start taxing at 91%? You do know a lot of the extremely wealthy avoid taxes altogether by investing in things like municipal bonds? They have layers of protection from the government.

 

[Integrity]

How about not having brackets.

I think flat income tax would possibly work to remove the scourge if the non taxable income threshold was extremely high. 0% under the threshold 91% at and above threshold.

Bean counters would have to work the threshold, just guessing but I think most on the site would be below the taxable threshold.

 

[vantexan]

I think flat income tax would possibly work to remove the scourge if the non taxable income threshold was extremely high. 0% under the threshold 91% at and above threshold.

Bean counters would have to work the threshold, just guessing but I think most on the site would be below the taxable threshold.

You're literally saying either no income tax or 91% of income? Seriously?

 

[Integrity]

So how do you decide who has too much wealth and at what point do you start taxing at 91%? You do know a lot of the extremely wealthy avoid taxes altogether by investing in things like municipal bonds? They have layers of protection from the government.

My idea is not an amount of wealth tax it is a progressive income tax. I would most likely use the US 1960 rate tables and use income levels that reflect todays times. Not sure of the amount. What income amount do you think applying the 91% would de incentivize the absurd accumulation of wealth.

 

[Integrity]

You're literally saying either no income tax or 91% of income? Seriously?

I don’t favor this but yes as a concession to the flat tax proponents I think with a sufficiently high threshold this would possibly meet the goal of de incentivizing the absurd accumulation of wealth.

 

[vantexan]

I don’t favor this but yes as a concession to the flat tax proponents I think with a sufficiently high threshold this would possibly meet the goal of de incentivizing the absurd accumulation of wealth.

So no one pays taxes except the very wealthy who you would leave with just 9% of their income. First off in no way would you be able to collect enough revenue. Secondly if you actually had the power to enact this you'd get your head shot off. Good luck!

 

[...]

I think flat income tax would possibly work to remove the scourge if the non taxable income threshold was extremely high. 0% under the threshold 91% at and above threshold.

Bean counters would have to work the threshold, just guessing but I think most on the site would be below the taxable threshold.

How bout no.

 

[Integrity]

So no one pays taxes except the very wealthy who you would leave with just 9% of their income. First off in no way would you be able to collect enough revenue. Secondly if you actually had the power to enact this you'd get your head shot off. Good luck!

I would guess under my plan you wouldn’t have to worry income taxes anymore, no?

I would like to see the numbers on the revenue collection comment, when you get a chance.

 

[Integrity]

How bout no.

At least under my plan you most like wouldn’t be paying income anymore, correct?

 

[Thebrownblob]

Tryin to reply fairly.

What you are saying is inaccurate.

Having a lot of wealth and the absurd accumulation of wealth are clearly and obviously 2 different levels of wealth.

I clearly stated in my opening post that it is
the absurd accumulation of power resulting from the absurd accumulation of wealth that is the scourge of American society. I never stated that having a lot of wealth while some don’t is the scourge of America as you stated.

I never mentioned in my words or other words haves or have nots and I stated more than once I envy no one.

The progressive tax idea, taken from the US tax table of 1960, is not meant to take away anything, it is meant to de incentivize the absurd accumulation of wealth and the resultant accumulation of power particularly destructive to the governance of the American people.

IMO Absurdly rich individuals and corporations corruptly run the American Government for themselves at the expense of the American public. That my friends, IMO is a scourge to American society.

How much is absurd?

 

[Integrity]

How much is absurd?

A lot.

 

[Thebrownblob]

A lot.

Well to some people you have “a lot”, so maybe they can take yours? You see how your plan is already falling apart? It wasn’t very well thought out my friend.

 

[Thebrownblob]

A lot.

Don’t you have a pool? Why do you have a pool that’s absurd I don’t have a pool and I don’t even think you’ve ever invited me over.

 

[...]

At least under my plan you most like wouldn’t be paying income anymore, correct?

I wouldn't be paying income tax on my plan either.

 

[vantexan]

I would guess under my plan you wouldn’t have to worry income taxes anymore, no?

I would like to see the numbers on the revenue collection comment, when you get a chance.

Are you really of the opinion that the wealthiest can have 91% of their income taken away and we can fund the government? You do know that we're paying close to $900 billion a year in interest now? That if the Fed continues to raise interest rates we'll go over a trillion just on interest?

Am I supposed to be happy that under your plan no one would pay taxes but the super rich? By the way the top 1% in 2020 paid 42.3% of all income taxes.

 

[Thebrownblob]

Are you really of the opinion that the wealthiest can have 91% of their income taken away and we can fund the government? You do know that we're paying close to $900 billion a year in interest now? That if the Fed continues to raise interest rates we'll go over a trillion just on interest?

Am I supposed to be happy that under your plan no one would pay taxes but the super rich? By the way the top 1% in 2020 paid 42.3% of all income taxes.

It’s absurd

 

[BrownFlush]

A lot.

subjective reasoning where absolutes are necessary

 

[Integrity]

Well to some people you have “a lot”, so maybe they can take yours? You see how your plan is already falling apart? It wasn’t very well thought out my friend.

No. I don’t see it that way.

Even if some think I have a lot it would hardly be considered absurd by using a reasonable person approach.

 

[Thebrownblob]

No. I don’t see it that way.

Even if some think I have a lot it would hardly be considered absurd by using a reasonable person approach.

What’s reasonable? you’re speaking in generalities. What you were asking would have to be absolutes. And I’m sorry you’ve been well off for so long you don’t realize that many people would absolutely say you are rich and absurdly so…at least to them.

 

[Integrity]

Don’t you have a pool? Why do you have a pool that’s absurd I don’t have a pool and I don’t even think you’ve ever invited me over.

Again, a reasonable person would hardly think a pool would constitute the absurd accumulation of wealth.