Where big promises meet economic reality.

[Anomalism]

There’s a common idea on the left that taxing the rich can fund massive social programs without burdening the rest of the population. It’s emotionally appealing, but economically impossible. While rich individuals do hold a lot of wealth, the broader truth is that the middle and upper-middle classes, because of their sheer numbers, account for the majority of national income and consumption. That’s where most taxable economic activity occurs. Large scale public investments require broad participation. Just taxing the rich more won't make these things possible. Countries with strong safety nets, such as those in Scandinavia, reflect this in practice with high taxes across income levels. Pretending otherwise isn't logical and sets the public up for disappointment through unrealistic expectations.

 

[BluesLegend]

Tax the rich is nothing but a Dem SCAM they use to dupe stupid people into voting for Democrats.

 

[Anomalism]

Tax the rich is nothing but a Dem SCAM they use to dupe stupid people into voting for Democrats.

Simple, emotionally charged, and easy to repeat. It's perfect for influencing people that don't actually dig into the issues.

 

[BluesLegend]

Simple, emotionally charged, and easy to repeat. It's perfect for influencing people that don't actually dig into the issues.

What's hilarious is, their Dem leaders in congress have ammassed personal fortunes of 10's and in some cases 100's of millions of dollars, on a congressional salary, while duping these idiots to vote Dem with 'tax the rich' and 'pay their fair share'.

Dem leaders must laugh at parties over how STUPID the Dem sheeple voters are.

 

[Correll]

There’s a common idea on the left that taxing the rich can fund massive social programs without burdening the rest of the population. It’s emotionally appealing, but economically impossible. While rich individuals do hold a lot of wealth, the broader truth is that the middle and upper-middle classes, because of their sheer numbers, account for the majority of national income and consumption. That’s where most taxable economic activity occurs. Large scale public investments require broad participation. Just taxing the rich more won't make these things possible. Countries with strong safety nets, such as those in Scandinavia, reflect this in practice with high taxes across income levels. Pretending otherwise isn't logical and sets the public up for disappointment through unrealistic expectations.

I am also concerned that if the participation of the lower earners is too low, that they will get the feeling of NOT having skin in the game.


And thus getting the idea that advocating for spending is from their perspective, a "free lunch".

 

[Woodznutz]

The rich have a lot of wealth but don't keep very much of it in cash. In order to extract more money from them would force them to sell some of their non-cash assets. If some of those assets were business assets it might lead to workers losing their jobs.

Let's say a rich person's yacht must be sold to pay increased taxes. Such yachts are almost always used for business purposes such as rentals for cruises, shoreside events like weddings and parties. These activities and maintenance employ lots of people that would lose their jobs if the yacht was sold. Also, most of the time the yacht isn't fully paid for so there is little left for the government after the sale.

 

[Anomalism]

I am also concerned that if the participation of the lower earners is too low, that they will get the feeling of NOT having skin in the game.


And thus getting the idea that advocating for spending is from their perspective, a "free lunch".

Sure, I agree.

When lower earners feel disconnected from the tax system, it can lead to the feeling that social programs are just giveaways without shared responsibility. Broad participation helps ensure everyone has a stake in the system, which can foster a greater sense of ownership and accountability. Finding the right balance in taxation and public investment would be key, not only for economic sustainability but also for maintaining social cohesion.

 

[j-mac]

There’s a common idea on the left that taxing the rich can fund massive social programs without burdening the rest of the population. It’s emotionally appealing, but economically impossible. While rich individuals do hold a lot of wealth, the broader truth is that the middle and upper-middle classes, because of their sheer numbers, account for the majority of national income and consumption. That’s where most taxable economic activity occurs. Large scale public investments require broad participation. Just taxing the rich more won't make these things possible. Countries with strong safety nets, such as those in Scandinavia, reflect this in practice with high taxes across income levels. Pretending otherwise isn't logical and sets the public up for disappointment through unrealistic expectations.

Is this you admitting that "Taxing the rich" was the biggest lie Dems put forward? Sure sounds like it....

 

[Anomalism]

The rich have a lot of wealth but don't keep very much of it in cash. In order to extract more money from them would force them to sell some of their non-cash assets. If some of those assets were business assets it might lead to workers losing their jobs.

Let's say a rich person's yacht must be sold to pay increased taxes. Such yachts are almost always used for business purposes such as rentals for cruises, shoreside events like weddings and parties. These activities and maintenance employ lots of people that would lose their jobs if the yacht was sold. Also, most of the time the yacht isn't fully paid for so there is little left for the government after the sale.

Agreed.

Forcing them to raise cash for taxes by selling such assets can have complex ripple effects. Selling a business asset might impact employees, local economies, or ongoing investments. It’s not just about grabbing cash but understanding the economic consequences.

 

[shockedcanadian]

There’s a common idea on the left that taxing the rich can fund massive social programs without burdening the rest of the population. It’s emotionally appealing, but economically impossible. While rich individuals do hold a lot of wealth, the broader truth is that the middle and upper-middle classes, because of their sheer numbers, account for the majority of national income and consumption. That’s where most taxable economic activity occurs. Large scale public investments require broad participation. Just taxing the rich more won't make these things possible. Countries with strong safety nets, such as those in Scandinavia, reflect this in practice with high taxes across income levels. Pretending otherwise isn't logical and sets the public up for disappointment through unrealistic expectations.

The problem is that when taxes are collected they are spent on big boondoggles, often of their own voting bloc. So, handouts to people, big raises to unions and expansion of government.

These jobs never seem to disappear so you have to fill a vacuum with more tax collecting.

Take Canadas police state. Police have such expanding budgets each year and they have to repeatedly manufacture threats, often of the young and poor; just to justify their existence.

As Musk said "eventually you make so many laws that everything is illegal". That in essence is what a police state represents. "Everything is illegal and everyone is a criminal as long as some son of a cop covertly says so". It's destroyed our economy, reputation and fiscal health.

We have MANY police "couples" who pull in $400-600k a year. Think about that, two government employees of the largest budget eaters making over half a million dollars. We have MANY individuals making over $200k a year...as cops. Bankrupting us and with little accountability.

You follow us at your own peril...

 

[Anomalism]

Is this you admitting that "Taxing the rich" was the biggest lie Dems put forward? Sure sounds like it....

I'm not a partisan. I keep trying to make that clear. Lol

I don't have to wear anything the Democrats put forward because I'm not some thoughtless follower. I’m not here to parrot anything from any party. I just want to look at issues critically and honestly.

 

[berg80]

There’s a common idea on the left that taxing the rich can fund massive social programs without burdening the rest of the population. It’s emotionally appealing, but economically impossible. While rich individuals do hold a lot of wealth, the broader truth is that the middle and upper-middle classes, because of their sheer numbers, account for the majority of national income and consumption. That’s where most taxable economic activity occurs. Large scale public investments require broad participation. Just taxing the rich more won't make these things possible. Countries with strong safety nets, such as those in Scandinavia, reflect this in practice with high taxes across income levels. Pretending otherwise isn't logical and sets the public up for disappointment through unrealistic expectations.

Personally, I don't know anyone who believes taxing the rich is a panacea for all things. But I would say most people don't think the uber rich should get a tax cut funded by cuts to services for the sick and the poor.

 

[Independent thinker]

There’s a common idea on the left that taxing the rich can fund massive social programs without burdening the rest of the population. It’s emotionally appealing, but economically impossible. While rich individuals do hold a lot of wealth, the broader truth is that the middle and upper-middle classes, because of their sheer numbers, account for the majority of national income and consumption. That’s where most taxable economic activity occurs. Large scale public investments require broad participation. Just taxing the rich more won't make these things possible. Countries with strong safety nets, such as those in Scandinavia, reflect this in practice with high taxes across income levels. Pretending otherwise isn't logical and sets the public up for disappointment through unrealistic expectations.

In simple math, our national debt is 37 trillion dollars. You could confiscate every single dollar the one percenters have and it wouldn't even come close to paying off that 37 trillion dollars. So, obviously, we have a spending problem.

 

[j-mac]

I'm not a partisan. I keep trying to make that clear. Lol

I don't have to wear anything the Democrats put forward because I'm not some thoughtless follower. I’m not here to parrot anything from any party. I just want to look at issues critically and honestly.

Ok, so let's be honest....What was the last Republican you voted for in National office?

 

[Anomalism]

Personally, I don't know anyone who believes taxing the rich is a panacea for all things. But I would say most people don't think the uber rich should get a tax cut funded by cuts to services for the sick and the poor.

I have definitely met a number of people that either believe just that, or simply haven't thought about it deeper than that.

 

[Woodznutz]

Agreed.

Forcing them to raise cash for taxes by selling such assets can have complex ripple effects. Selling a business asset might impact employees, local economies, or ongoing investments. It’s not just about grabbing cash but understanding the economic consequences.

Also, as there isn't enough currency in the economy more money would have to be printed to pay for those assets. This would certainly be inflationary.

 

[Anomalism]

Ok, so let's be honest....What was the last Republican you voted for in National office?

You're free to not believe me. I'm not going to try to pass your test.

 

[Woodznutz]

The problem is that when taxes are collected they are spent on big boondoggles, often of their own voting bloc. So, handouts to people, big raises to unions and expansion of government.

These jobs never seem to disappear so you have to fill a vacuum with more tax collecting.

Take Canadas police state. Police have such expanding budgets each year and they have to repeatedly manufacture threats, often of the young and poor; just to justify their existence.

As Musk said "eventually you make so many laws that everything is illegal". That in essence is what a police state represents. "Everything is illegal and everyone is a criminal as long as some son of a cop covertly says so". It's destroyed our economy, reputation and fiscal health.

Interesting. A cop once stated, "You're all crooks. We just haven't caught you yet."

 

[j-mac]

You're free to not believe me. I'm not going to try to pass your test.

That's because you haven't....So, while you may be trying hard to pass yourself off as a moderate, you continue to vote for the very people destroying the nation...And, I'll even go one step further, and point to your alignment in here, according your history of likes given shows that you side with pure partisans from the left....You can't hide that with the ruse....

 

[Mac1958]

Neither party, by itself, is going to do what OBVIOUSLY has to be done -- cut spending AND significantly increase personal income taxes on the top end.

So, because our elected "leaders" (ha) are incapable of working together for the good of the country, we might want to expect some serious problems in the not-too-distant future.