Increasing Taxes On The Wealthy And Corporations Is Extremely Popular And Has Been For Years

[DBA]

A Gallup tracking poll only buttresses the findings of those surveys. Over the course of several years, Gallup asked people whether they thought certain sectors of the country paid their "fair share" in taxes. Bottom line: Americans haven't thought that "upper-income" individuals and corporations have paid their fair share for many, many years.

Here's how many respondents said upper-income people don't pay their fair share:

• 2019: 62%
• 2018: 62%
• 2017: 63%

People were even less impressed with the contributions of corporations:

• 2019: 69%
• 2018: 66%
• 2017: 67%

Given that reality, Senate Republicans up for reelection next year might just take a pass on heading up opposition to Biden’s eventual bill unless they can find an entirely different point of contention. But by all means, McConnell, keep on crowing about Democrats raising taxes on wealthy individuals and corporations to pay for making high-speed internet available in rural areas. Hear, hear!

Republicans have already lost the argument over infrastructure and they seem to know it

Senate Republicans removed all the non-mystery of whether they might become part of the solution to America's infrastructure problems on Thursday when Minority Leader Mitch McConnell declared bipartisan outreach dead. "That package that they're putting...

www.dailykos.com

But don't worry, that money will trickle up to you, when we get it. No really.

Raising taxes and regulations on corporations is a Chinese dream. Jobs will move out of the US. I guess if you don’t have a job and just want handouts from the government, this sounds like a fine idea as long as you get your check every month. Unfortunately, that is where much of the country is at this point. Lazy, spoiled and uninformed.

 

[DBA]

Popular to everyone but the MAGArats/ultra right wingers and GOP legislators

As we see here

Yeah, because many of us are the “wealthy” and are pragmatic. When the low-life’s can vote to take my money, we have a problem. Seems to be we are pretty close to that point. It is kind of like government controlled looting and we all know how much Democrats are in favor of looting.

 

[BluesLegend]

Increasing Taxes On The Wealthy And Corporations Is Extremely Popular And Has Been For Years

Excuse me, where does the middle class have trillions of dollars in pension and savings invested? Yes in corporations you stupid fuck. ^^^

 

[Oddball]

Free lunch is always popular with the looter class.

Yes, it is.
December 24 2017

President Trump kicked off his holiday weekend at Mar-a-Lago Friday night at a dinner where he told friends, "You all just got a lot richer," referencing the sweeping tax overhaul he signed into law hours earlier.
The president has spent many weekends of his presidency so far at the "Winter White House," where initiation fees cost $200,000, annual dues cost $14,000.
www.cbsnews.com › news › trump-mar-a-lago-christmas-trip

Me keeping what's mine in the first place isn't a "free lunch", looter.

 

[Oddball]

A Gallup tracking poll only buttresses the findings of those surveys. Over the course of several years, Gallup asked people whether they thought certain sectors of the country paid their "fair share" in taxes. Bottom line: Americans haven't thought that "upper-income" individuals and corporations have paid their fair share for many, many years.

Here's how many respondents said upper-income people don't pay their fair share:

• 2019: 62%
• 2018: 62%
• 2017: 63%

People were even less impressed with the contributions of corporations:

• 2019: 69%
• 2018: 66%
• 2017: 67%

Given that reality, Senate Republicans up for reelection next year might just take a pass on heading up opposition to Biden’s eventual bill unless they can find an entirely different point of contention. But by all means, McConnell, keep on crowing about Democrats raising taxes on wealthy individuals and corporations to pay for making high-speed internet available in rural areas. Hear, hear!

Republicans have already lost the argument over infrastructure and they seem to know it

Senate Republicans removed all the non-mystery of whether they might become part of the solution to America's infrastructure problems on Thursday when Minority Leader Mitch McConnell declared bipartisan outreach dead. "That package that they're putting...

www.dailykos.com

But don't worry, that money will trickle up to you, when we get it. No really.

It really doesn't matter whether corporate taxes are raised..... they still won't pay any taxes. Too many loopholes and prices would skyrocket if they did pay.

Very true. The tax code is set up to benefit big corporations. Some make billions in profits yet pay no tax. What a deal...yet more proof we live in a failed state.
No Federal Taxes for Dozens of Big, Profitable Companies

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

A Gallup tracking poll only buttresses the findings of those surveys. Over the course of several years, Gallup asked people whether they thought certain sectors of the country paid their "fair share" in taxes. Bottom line: Americans haven't thought that "upper-income" individuals and corporations have paid their fair share for many, many years.

Here's how many respondents said upper-income people don't pay their fair share:

• 2019: 62%
• 2018: 62%
• 2017: 63%

People were even less impressed with the contributions of corporations:

• 2019: 69%
• 2018: 66%
• 2017: 67%

Given that reality, Senate Republicans up for reelection next year might just take a pass on heading up opposition to Biden’s eventual bill unless they can find an entirely different point of contention. But by all means, McConnell, keep on crowing about Democrats raising taxes on wealthy individuals and corporations to pay for making high-speed internet available in rural areas. Hear, hear!

Republicans have already lost the argument over infrastructure and they seem to know it

Senate Republicans removed all the non-mystery of whether they might become part of the solution to America's infrastructure problems on Thursday when Minority Leader Mitch McConnell declared bipartisan outreach dead. "That package that they're putting...

www.dailykos.com

But don't worry, that money will trickle up to you, when we get it. No really.

> Here's how many respondents said upper-income people don't pay their fair share: 2019: 62%
> People were even less impressed with the contributions of corporations: 2019: 69%

50% of people have below-average intelligence.

Also, about 50% of Americans pay no Federal income taxes themselves, so something is quite selfish about those figures.

These people think they have a privilege that I pay for, and allows them to demand that their neighbors, who are more successful than themselves due to their intelligence, luck, and/or hard work should pay more? Why do they feel they have a right to demand other's who pay even more taxes than they do, pay yet more?

Must be a Democrat thing.

The wealthiest among us pay most of the taxes, and that pays for most of the operations of the government, including schools, roads, law and order, defense, energy, etc. Personally, I am thankful and wish them even greater future success, but I do pay a tidy sum of taxes myself.

Demonizing the successful has to stop. We need to encourage success. Everyone would love to be successful. Everyone can be, if they strive to do so, every day.

Being successful in money matters is one thing. Success in life may have nothing to do with lucre.

> Being successful in money matters is one thing. Success in life may have nothing to do with lucre.

It's a good point; money surely isn't everything, but if one can't provide for oneself and one's family, and contribute to society in some way, then one is arguably not successful in life. There are certainly higher levels of success obtainable.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Progressive taxation on consumption is reasonable.

Actually? It's tremendously complicated.

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

A Gallup tracking poll only buttresses the findings of those surveys. Over the course of several years, Gallup asked people whether they thought certain sectors of the country paid their "fair share" in taxes. Bottom line: Americans haven't thought that "upper-income" individuals and corporations have paid their fair share for many, many years.

Here's how many respondents said upper-income people don't pay their fair share:

• 2019: 62%
• 2018: 62%
• 2017: 63%

People were even less impressed with the contributions of corporations:

• 2019: 69%
• 2018: 66%
• 2017: 67%

Given that reality, Senate Republicans up for reelection next year might just take a pass on heading up opposition to Biden’s eventual bill unless they can find an entirely different point of contention. But by all means, McConnell, keep on crowing about Democrats raising taxes on wealthy individuals and corporations to pay for making high-speed internet available in rural areas. Hear, hear!

Republicans have already lost the argument over infrastructure and they seem to know it

Senate Republicans removed all the non-mystery of whether they might become part of the solution to America's infrastructure problems on Thursday when Minority Leader Mitch McConnell declared bipartisan outreach dead. "That package that they're putting...

www.dailykos.com

But don't worry, that money will trickle up to you, when we get it. No really.

> Here's how many respondents said upper-income people don't pay their fair share: 2019: 62%
> People were even less impressed with the contributions of corporations: 2019: 69%

50% of people have below-average intelligence.

Also, about 50% of Americans pay no Federal income taxes themselves, so something is quite selfish about those figures.

These people think they have a privilege that I pay for, and allows them to demand that their neighbors, who are more successful than themselves due to their intelligence, luck, and/or hard work should pay more? Why do they feel they have a right to demand other's who pay even more taxes than they do, pay yet more?

Must be a Democrat thing.

The wealthiest among us pay most of the taxes, and that pays for most of the operations of the government, including schools, roads, law and order, defense, energy, etc. Personally, I am thankful and wish them even greater future success, but I do pay a tidy sum of taxes myself.

Demonizing the successful has to stop. We need to encourage success. Everyone would love to be successful. Everyone can be, if they strive to do so, every day.

I'll have to unpack a few things here to answer.

50% of people have below-average intelligence.

This is true, this means that what people want and what is smart aren't always the same thing. For instance believing that reducing the amount of taxes the government receives has no consequences on infrastructure projects, pensions, and other ESSENTIAL services that make a first-world nation a first-world nation.

The fact of the matter is that in a society, ( a very rich society) the government plays an essential role in funding a minimum standard of living that is available to all its citizens.

So the question then becomes is how we pay for it. Democrats propose that those that can afford it the best pay a proportionally larger share. Republicans seem to suggest that either no one pays for them as the last tax reduction said or that we lower the standards of the services or don't provide them at all.

These people think they have a privilege that I pay for, and allows them to demand that their neighbors, who are more successful than themselves due to their intelligence, luck, and/or hard work should pay more? Why do they feel they have a right to demand other's who pay even more taxes than they do, pay yet more?

A "privilege" is something only available to one person but not another. Roads are available to everybody, high-quality healthcare is available to everybody that the bill proposes to target for tax increases, the same goes for access to housing, education, child care on all the other things the proposal suggests to offer for its citizens.

And the reason Democrats feel that we have a right to ask that of those that are more successful is that those that are more successful can afford it better than those that struggle to pay their bills. The difference in the quality of life between someone who earns 400k instead of 500k a year is more marginal than the difference between making 40k instead of 50k.

Demonizing the successful has to stop. We need to encourage success. Everyone would love to be successful. Everyone can be, if they strive to do so, every day.

The problem is not everyone can be successful as is proven by the millions of people who aren't. Poverty is not a choice neither is falling sick or not being smart enough to go to college, or being a certain color, or living in a school district with inadequate resources, or any of a million reasons a person will not turn up rich. Demonizing the successful has little to do with it ( although I would argue that a lot of people who are successful aren't above acting like demons to increase their succes)

What this bill proposes is to make a system that allows a greater chance of success for ALL Americans, and increases the minimum standard of living for all Americans and proposes a way to fund that plan.

>>50% of people have below-average intelligence.
> This is true, this means that what people want and what is smart aren't always the same thing. For instance believing that reducing the amount of taxes the government receives has no consequences on infrastructure projects, pensions, and other ESSENTIAL services that make a first-world nation a first-world nation.

It's simpler than that. It's a math thing. 50% of the population also has below-average looks. 50% of the population has below-average income, etc.

>The fact of the matter is that in a society, ( a very rich society) the government plays an essential role in funding a minimum standard of living that is available to all its citizens.

I disagree with that. The role of government is to ensure its citizens have equal opportunity to achieve the success they desire. It does not need to fund a minimum standard of living for anyone but the truly disabled. It needs to get the heck out of the able-bodied people's way. Why do you need a handout? Can't you fund your own standard of living? What you argue in favor of is Communism. And what you end up with is everyone, excpet those in power, living under this so-called minimum standard of living, instead of letting everyone be responsible for their own success and reap the rewards they sow with their hard work.

>So the question then becomes is how we pay for it. Democrats propose that those that can afford it the best pay a proportionally larger share. Republicans seem to suggest that either no one pays for them as the last tax reduction said or that we lower the standards of the services or don't provide them at all.

If everyone paid the same proportion, the wealthiest people would still pay way more than the poorer people, and the really poor would still pay virtually nothing. Instead, you propose that someone who already pays 200 times the taxes you do, should pay even more. Why do you feel entitled to demand they pay more, when they already pay so much more than you? When we drive across a tool bridge, we all get the same benefit, and we pay the same amount whether we are driving a 1986 civic or a 2020 Bugatti.

>A "privilege" is something only available to one person but not another.

Yes, I was referring to the privileged folks who pay no taxes, but reap some benefits (even get tax refunds!) at the expanse of others.

>The problem is not everyone can be successful as is proven by the millions of people who aren't.

I disagree. Everyone can be successful, if they strive to do so each and every day. But yeah, people who expect success to simply fall in their laps are very unlikely to ever be successful.

Regards,
Jim

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Eat the rich

Until you become one of them.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Go ahead and raise taxes on businesses and corporations. Just as long as you understand going in that you the consumer will be the ones paying for it.

Following that “logic” I guess we shouldn’t tax corporations at all.

Doesn't matter how you spin it, the bottom line is any product cost is directly related to business expense.

 

[gipper]

Go ahead and raise taxes on businesses and corporations. Just as long as you understand going in that you the consumer will be the ones paying for it.

Following that “logic” I guess we shouldn’t tax corporations at all.

Doesn't matter how you spin it, the bottom line is any product cost is directly related to business expense.

Yet don’t you think under your wonderful free market capitalism (which doesn’t exist and is a fairy tale), that a company can only price it’s product at what the market will bear and consumers will pay? If priced too high, consumers don’t buy and competitors under cut. Right?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

A Gallup tracking poll only buttresses the findings of those surveys. Over the course of several years, Gallup asked people whether they thought certain sectors of the country paid their "fair share" in taxes. Bottom line: Americans haven't thought that "upper-income" individuals and corporations have paid their fair share for many, many years.

Here's how many respondents said upper-income people don't pay their fair share:

• 2019: 62%
• 2018: 62%
• 2017: 63%

People were even less impressed with the contributions of corporations:

• 2019: 69%
• 2018: 66%
• 2017: 67%

Given that reality, Senate Republicans up for reelection next year might just take a pass on heading up opposition to Biden’s eventual bill unless they can find an entirely different point of contention. But by all means, McConnell, keep on crowing about Democrats raising taxes on wealthy individuals and corporations to pay for making high-speed internet available in rural areas. Hear, hear!

Republicans have already lost the argument over infrastructure and they seem to know it

Senate Republicans removed all the non-mystery of whether they might become part of the solution to America's infrastructure problems on Thursday when Minority Leader Mitch McConnell declared bipartisan outreach dead. "That package that they're putting...

www.dailykos.com

But don't worry, that money will trickle up to you, when we get it. No really.

It really doesn't matter whether corporate taxes are raised..... they still won't pay any taxes. Too many loopholes and prices would skyrocket if they did pay.

Very true. The tax code is set up to benefit big corporations. Some make billions in profits yet pay no tax. What a deal...yet more proof we live in a failed state.
No Federal Taxes for Dozens of Big, Profitable Companies

Yeah, depreciation is awful!!!!

DURR

 

[forkup]

I disagree with that. The role of government is to ensure its citizens have equal opportunity to achieve the success they desire. It does not need to fund a minimum standard of living for anyone but the truly disabled

If you believe the job of the government is to provide equal opportunity to its citizen you do not disagree and believe in a minimum standard of living.

At that point, you believe education has to be available to all its citizens. You believe that healthcare should be available to all its citizens. At that point, you believe that not being able to afford daycare should not be a hindrance in taking a job, etc. etc. You can not both believe in equal opportunity and then refuse to consider that not everybody starts from the same economic reality and that that difference in itself makes for basic inequalities

Why do you need a handout? Can't you fund your own standard of living?

That depends. Do you consider being able to go to a doctor a handout? Or being able to go to college without having to pay the cost for the next 20 years. Or when I get really sick not having to file for bankruptcy despite being insured? I personally want for nothing by the way. I personally don't find it unreasonable to be expected to contribute a proportionally larger share to society. After all, I don't know if I or my child at a certain point in my life will fall on harder times and at that point need some help.

What you argue in favor of is Communism.

Nope not at all. What I argue for is a Social Democracy. As exists in dozens of first-world countries.

Instead, you propose that someone who already pays 200 times the taxes you do, should pay even more. Why do you feel entitled to demand they pay more

I don't feel entitled, I feel socially responsible. I feel that if I believe in equal opportunity and that the government should provide it. Then I have to take up the responsibility to ensure that the government has the funds to do so. This means taxing the strongest so I give the weakest a more equal starting point.

Yes, I was referring to the privileged folks who pay no taxes, but reap some benefits (even get tax refunds!) at the expanse of others.

I think this is the first time I ever have seen being poor being described as a privilege.

I disagree. Everyone can be successful if they strive to do so each and every day.

Everyone can win the lottery, does that mean not winning the lottery is simply a matter of insufficient dedication?
In my reply, I gave examples of simply bad luck most of us deal with it in their lifetime, none of them have to do with the insufficient application.

 

[Oddball]

I disagree with that. The role of government is to ensure its citizens have equal opportunity to achieve the success they desire. It does not need to fund a minimum standard of living for anyone but the truly disabled

If you believe the job of the government is to provide equal opportunity to its citizen you do not disagree and believe in a minimum standard of living.

At that point, you believe education has to be available to all its citizens. You believe that healthcare should be available to all its citizens. At that point, you believe that not being able to afford daycare should not be a hindrance in taking a job, etc. etc. You can not both believe in equal opportunity and then refuse to consider that not everybody starts from the same economic reality and that that difference in itself makes for basic inequalities

Why do you need a handout? Can't you fund your own standard of living?

That depends. Do you consider being able to go to a doctor a handout? Or being able to go to college without having to pay the cost for the next 20 years. Or when I get really sick not having to file for bankruptcy despite being insured? I personally want for nothing by the way. I personally don't find it unreasonable to be expected to contribute a proportionally larger share to society. After all, I don't know if I or my child at a certain point in my life will fall on harder times and at that point need some help.

What you argue in favor of is Communism.

Nope not at all. What I argue for is a Social Democracy. As they exist in dozens of first-world countries.

Instead, you propose that someone who already pays 200 times the taxes you do, should pay even more. Why do you feel entitled to demand they pay more

I don't feel entitled, I feel socially responsible. I feel that if I believe in equal opportunity and that the government should provide it. And then I take up the responsibility to ensure that the government has the funds to do so. This means taxing the strongest so I give the weakest a more equal starting point.

Yes, I was referring to the privileged folks who pay no taxes, but reap some benefits (even get tax refunds!) at the expanse of others.

I think this is the first time I ever have seen being poor being described as a privilege.

I disagree. Everyone can be successful if they strive to do so each and every day.

Everyone can win the lottery, does that mean not winning the lottery is simply a matter of insufficient dedication?
In my reply, I gave examples of simply bad luck most of us deal with it in their lifetime, none of them have to do with the insufficient application.

If you believe the job of the government is to provide equal opportunity to its citizen you do not disagree and believe in a minimum standard of living.

 

[daveman]

Eat the rich

Until you become one of them.

I remember Bernie railing against millionaires and billionaires...until he became a millionaire. Then only billionaires were the bad guys.

 

[daveman]

Popular to everyone but the MAGArats/ultra right wingers and GOP legislators

As we see here

How much of what other people earned is your fair share?

Since Lesh doesn't want to answer this question, I open it up to everybody.

How much of what other people earned is your fair share?

 

[there4eyeM]

Progressive taxation on consumption is reasonable.

Actually? It's tremendously complicated.

Reasonable doesn't necessarily mean simple. Simple doesn't necessarily mean reasonable.

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

Popular to everyone but the MAGArats/ultra right wingers and GOP legislators

As we see here

How much of what other people earned is your fair share?

Since Lesh doesn't want to answer this question, I open it up to everybody.

How much of what other people earned is your fair share?

> How much of what other people earned is your fair share?

It's a negative number for the large majority of people.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

It's easy for corrupt politicians to manipulate the intellectually-lowest demographic of a nation into believing that “the wealthy” are to be robbed for the benefit of this demographic. They are always taken off-guard when they find themselves being the targets rather than the beneficiaries of this robbery, and yet they always fall for the same scam over and over again.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

50% of people have below-average intelligence.

It's simpler than that. It's a math thing. 50% of the population also has below-average looks. 50% of the population has below-average income, etc.

And many of them do not know the difference between average and median.