That is a good question and one that could be debated. Billionaires would certainly qualify, in my opinion.

When you don't like the actual facts you are telling me "we" should look at the numbers "another way". This is capitulation of the argument. Can't argue against actual facts like "the rich actually do pay their fair share", so have to re-arrange the argument and obfuscate it.

Its completely irrelevant what someone's net worth is when they are already shouldering 40% of the tax burden.

Looks like when you venture outside of unstuckpolitics "take the guillotine to the rich", your arguments run into quite a lot of walls.

No, it's not. (Also, I don't concede your numbers are correct.)

This whole thread is just a lot of stating the obvious, ignoring certain things that go into a functioning society.

It is common knowledge the world is better now. It is also true, at the same time, that it still functions in a morally grotesque way. Does that mean UP is right about everything? No. But they are right about a lot. Are the libertarians and right wingers on BFI and this thread right about everything? No. But they aren't saying things that are entirely false, they're just conveniently ignoring components that are a part of the human condition.

Poor people aren't the only parasites on Earth. All humans are parasites. We all use up resources. We all have to live with each other. We all understand wtf is going on. We know how the world works. The real question, regarding how to maintain order, prosperity, and a morally acceptable ecology of systems to perpetuate humanity, is how do you provide the greatest utility for the largest number of people?

We understand efficient allocation of resources and optimal settings are tethered to pure meritocracy. But that is only to an extent. There is a balance that must be struck because we aren't just units of economics productivity (we are, but that isn't all we are)...We are human beings.

So when Tien, reasonably imo, says wtf @ my nominal tax burden and Max Cut says we should be looking at %, they are both right imo. Just because the poor on average do less in every metric doesn't mean we go eugenics or tether ourselves to lassez faire principles 100%...The "hard left" ToothSayer keeps focusing on is a reaction to the blatant corruption that is going on in the world. This is a natural reaction and he repeatedly parrots it as if it is some pathogen in human society. It's not. It's natural. And it is one, ONE faction in the reaction to the political environment. There is more to the story and everyone knows it. There definitely are left wing nut jobs and I read UP all the time and there are some cringe worthy opinions going on in there...But it's not nearly as bad as what he and someone like JuanValdez act like it is. Also, this forum was shut down bc Mat Sklansky, possibly drunk, was in a heated argument with multiple posters and lashed out in the form of shutting down an entire subforum. So he is incorrect in whatever assertion he tried to make there. That forum has now changed in a mixed way imo. The issues that have arisen in moderation here are exactly the problems that exist in the politics forum now. Terrible posting is not being reprimanded. It's going unfettered, so you have deliberately obtuse and bad faith dialogue ruling the conversation. All noise, and a waste of time to engage...I left. I can't learn anything and I certainly can't offer anything if it's going to be dominated by dishonesty. To a lesser extent, it feels like BFI gets like that at times too.

Social media has put sunlight on some real disgusting corners of our world, and people, but it has also created an infinite feedback loop of incomplete, disingenuous, and misleading information that the average person seems engorge in 24/7/365. At the behest of monetary incentive, we are getting hypnotized by cookies, bro...We are getting great info and terrible info at the same time and everyone is getting confused. For clicks...

Point being, it doesn't really matter person X is perpetually more productive than person Y. What matters is how best to allocate resources for outcome Z...

I would say that a natural function of incentive and self preservation allows us to gravitate towards Z, but also within us is the natural inclination to deny ourselves a healthier movement towards Z. Too much greed, too much corruption, and yes, too many people are too stupid. The real question is how best to navigate all that in a most prosperous, productive way while also being morally just? It takes a great deal of cognitive dissonance to bluntly state we're operating in the best possible fashion rn, nor even close to it. imo...

GDP per capita in Russia was $11,288 in 2018.

But I hear the equality was out of this world.

I am personally worse for your lack of posting, TeflonDawg, but that type of thoughtful posting seems largely wasted there at this time. Cheers.

It wasn't.

Is Z "better standard of living for all participants"?

We aren't in a perfect system, but a system that increasingly punishes and puts less incentives for person X to be productive will not get you closer to outcome Z.

The far left are 100% convinced that getting to outcome Z involves wealth taxes, more income taxes on the rich, punishing the rich, limiting how much wealth they are "allowed" to have.

In their mind, the evil "jerb" creators are enslaving the poor and stealing from them. That this is a zero sum game where only the rich are winning.

This line of thinking and political policies derived from it NEVER gets you to outcome Z.

lol

Lower the population = more for everybody.

Juk

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Status-Anxi.../dp/0141014865

Juk

Thanks, I appreciate that.

I mean, that's a yes, but lost in that is that, again, while it is true now is GOAT to be alive, there is a clear imbalance among all human beings regardless of their individual merit and circumstance and how they function within those two factions.

It is not lost on me that fairy tales and unicorns is or ever will be Z. Just that we definitely drag our feet to approach Z out of greed, convenience, and indifference.

Taxes are inherently punitive...

Quoted is a giant straw man to me.

There is no need to fixate on whatever you perceive to be "the far left" if you are interested in talking about the actual, real problems within the American tax code.

I think the tax code is all ****ed up. Convoluting that is the irresponsible spending that has gone on for, like, ever.

It is clear and obvious we can do better, we just don't want to. Factions of the left and right clamor about things that are true, but there is too much corruption and incompetence...

I never look at who pays taxes and think, oh those ****ers should pay more or oh, those ****ers pay nothing. The budget is a numbers game within a set of obligations our politicians agree on (while listening to the input of only who they want ldo). I just see a bunch of rich *******s arguing about how to spend my money, and among them are greedy, incompetent, and indifferent people lost in the nonsense of the day. There is plenty of blame to go around...and it really doesn't matter who is lazy and who works hard. The whole point of taxation is to give incentive to behavior. Our incentive system is all ****ed up, needs recalibration, and to change with the times. And the people who write the rules, currently and past, have not and are not helping.

I can see it now

Eugenics Party

JOY '20

Why? That a quintessential socialist belief that is proven to not work.

Take money from people with a track record of deploying capital efficiently and building profitable businesses.

Re-distribute it to populist leaders who have no track record of building anything of economic value.

What could possibly go wrong?

Teflon

You may disagree with me here, but the tax code is doing what is supposed to do. Generating increasingly large amounts of cash for the government every single year.

From 2013 -> 2018, tax inflow has increased by 20%. And with 2020 numbers, 2013 -> 2020 projected increase by 30%.

You don't have a problem collecting taxes, you have a problem deciding what to do with those tax receipts as a country.

No, it isn't.

Hey Bill Gates, What do you think?

https://markets.businessinsider.com/...0-1-1028791394

This is false.

And to the point of my prior post, it isn't particularly important what the system or belief is. What matters is that you pay the bills. America doesn't pay their bills and hasn't since at least Reagan. It has been snowballing ever since. We exacerbate this problem perennially and refuse to do the right thing. We refuse to do any right thing, really...

America is capable of not only paying its bills, but doing so in a more effective, efficient, and responsible way. It just doesn't want to

To an extent, yeah, but it's supposed to do more than just collect money. It's supposed to give incentive to productive behavior. Or punish the most productive behavior/activity the least. And satisfy a moral objective in the process. Obviously not easy, and up for contentious debate, but it is clear it isn't really doing the whole job very well imo

Now that may sound good in a vacuum and I'm out of my depth pushing back on this w knowledge and I don't have the time/inclination to research, but this is ignoring a whole lotta context and cherry picking several years. Not saying you're wrong, just saying this isn't painting a full picture no matter the extent of its validity. I'm pretty sure there is more going on here than just that...

I have a problem with corruption. And people choosing not to do the right thing, or not even trying

In actuality, I have a problem with a multitude of things wrt taxation. Like I said, the code is all ****ed up. We don't even collect taxes right iyam

I don't really like how you pose "I don't have a problem collecting taxes". I don't think that's accurate. I don't look at it like that. I look at it like, we owe X, what's the best way to pay for it? If you look at the problem objectively, then it's entirely possible the numbers game results in it being incorrect that you should be paying $400k. It's possible you should be paying $200k or $600k. Literally no one looks at their tax bill not in disgust. And if you are, then stop looking just to your left, because to your right is a bunch of thieves ripping you off too...

Nobody in Congress thinks like that. It's all reactionary, chicanery behind the scenes (for good intent and bad), corruption, incompetence. No one cares. I know my nihilism/cynicism is not productive, but I don't see a point in not being bluntly honest about it

There should be an interest in preserving the powerful economy and exorbitant wealth at our hands, and I don't think it's some travesty that billionaires exist. The travesty is that too many exist, the wealth is concentrating, and the proper perpetuation of a healthy system needs a better redistribution than it has now. I said this before on 22 elsewhere I think, but it is both good and bad that the rich get richer. The poorest stay at the bottom rung always and the ceiling should rise naturally. But so should the floor. That is a feature not a bug. What is bad is that the floor for the bottom rung has holes in it. A lot of them. And the middle is shrinking when it should be expanding. It is a giant ball of yarn continually wrapping itself...

Even if you concede or disagree on a point like "a billionaire should not exist" or "billionaires are a policy failure", I don't think anyone can tell me with a straight face the incentive/behavior/activity the tax code promotes is or has been properly calibrated. THAT is a perennial policy failure, imo, that contributes to that ever growing ball of yarn

So how much cynicism and blaming it on "corruption". Large word count and zero specifics. This is the US budget:





The largest ticket items, $2.7 trillion, are health care and "income security", which is government redistribution from the hardworking to the poor.

Another $500 billion goes to education and interest payments, which are respectively subsidies for the poor and growing cost of borrowing for prior subsidization of the poor.

Over 75% of the federal budget is already accounted for by redistribution from the hardworking to the poor. This massive corruption you see exists only in your head; it's not based on reality and is at best second or third order in terms of costs. In the states, even more goes to the poor. Then on top of that the rich give another $400 billion to charities, which also mostly goes to the poor. They take in an incredible amount of resources by not being economically productive.

If the problem was simply "corruption" it would have been solved a long time ago. That's just a simpleminded slogan with no basis in reality. The problem is quite simple:

- The poorer and the old are soaking up more and more resources
- The poor spend far too much, well beyond their means, and save far too little.
- There is nothing to reverse this tread.

That's it. That's all there is to it. Every Western government in the world has this problem. The welfare state was created at a time when the population was exploding relative to the old (16 workers to 1 government dependent). Now that number is 3 workers to 1 government dependent and getting worse every year. See the problem? That, and not corruption or anything else, is what's ballooning he debt. You could zero out every single budget element except for giving money to the poor, and you'd only buy maybe 7 years before you're right back where you started.

If you massively upped the taxes of the rich, and, even ignoring the fact that that wouldn't work (see: France's wealth tax) and comically pretending it wouldn't harm growth, you'd be back where you are in about 6 years.

The problem is deep and fundamental and not helped by people yelling nonsense about corruption. The problem is fundamental and lies elsewhere than corruption - it lies in how the poor conduct themselves and how the government incentivizes negative economic behavior in the poor through the welfare state.

Which bills hasn't America paid?

Please list some bills that America is not paying.

Anyone that think the rich should pay more taxes should read Warren Buffett(democrat) books railing against corporate welfare. Anyone that think it a lot more complicated then that read Charlie Mungers(Republican) regarding insurance fraud, Bad incentive structure in society books. It just so happen that both are best friend and obviously super rich.

I find it a very complicated problem. And for those that think rich pay more taxes why is it fair to them. Let me give you an example I play highstake poker obviously I am going to be paying the most absolute rake but relative to my skill level which is going to keep increase due to increase in money-->better software to learn ex. solvers,hire best coach etc--->more free time to read/learn-->Compound wealth the rake is nothing. Now compare that to the micro players that pay the least absolute rake but relative to there stake where are they going to get the money to increase there skill with that rake.

Anyway my point is Warren Buffett and Charlie Mungers is at least x smarter than you guys and they can't change the landscape. Why are you guys wasting so much time on a subject that is super complicated and trying to sound smart.

I think the tax code is doing every thing you mentioned quite well. Productive behavior = deploying capital and creating jobs. There's been job gains almost every single month for nearly a decade now? The economy is also growing at 2%+ per year, so there is capital investment going on. Is there excess capital lying around? Of course, but for a mature economy, there isn't infinite places to invest that capital for acceptable returns.

I have no issue whatsoever with how many billionaires there are. Microsoft / Google / Amazon / Facebook / Apple created a few billionaires. Every single country on Earth would LOVE to have those kinds of companies started in their own country instead of America. If more billionaires can be created from those kinds of companies, it makes you guys all wealthier as a country.

Just go down the list of billionaires and tell me how many of their corporations are to the detriment of their native countries. Nearly none? I could name useless billionaires like Steven A. Cohen and *******s like Edward Lampert but they are the minority not the majority.

Basically, more billionaires creating companies that produce value to every day humans means you need more billionaires, not less.

I bother debating it because the last time the toxic "hate the rich" and "blame the capitalists" ideologies got steam, over 100 million people died and two of the world's largest countries were destroyed for two generations. We're still dealing with the awful aftermath.

Max Cut and TeflonDawg actually believe it's simple to fix these problems (kill the rich and take all their stuff for Max Cut; just clean up corruption for TeflonDawg). As you recognize, it's not. They don't even understand what the problems are.

It's common for the left to frame issues as stupidly simple and create a Satan for what's wrong in the world - and give it a human cause. It's basically religious mob conspiratorial type thinking and they do it across multiple axes. I bolded the anthropocentric scapegoats in each one.

1. The poor aren't doing well because the rich steal from them through corruption and unfairness. We just need to take more from the rich (completely false).

2. Minorities aren't doing well (we'll just ignore Asians and Jews who crush it) because of hidden super secret white racism that's everywhere. Again, completely wrong (internal cultural norms determine outcomes far more than any vestiges of racism)

3. Women don't earn as much as men on average because of rampant sexism (completely wrong again and denies all the data)

4. 40% of trans people kill themselves because of transphobia, and not because the horrible nature of dysmorphia as a crushing mental illness

5. The US is greatly in debt because of corruption (nope, there's some, but there always has been and it's the not the primary driver)

6. The world is heating up because of the evil climate change deniers who stop action being taken (nope, it's a basic property of 7 billion people consuming, renewable technology being a decade from being even close to ready and the rapid rise of China and India into a more industrial way of life, who burn coal because there's no alternative that's cheap and reliable).

All the flaws in the world, all the cruelties of nature itself, are anthropomorphized as having a human cause, an "oppressor". If you just remove the "oppressors" and the heretics who don't share the above worldview, mute them, attack them, smear them, the world gets better. That's the basic thinking and it's as old as mankind. Orwell covered it nicely with 1984 and Emmanel Goldstein and the "two minutes hate"; it's a core part of the left wing psyche to think like this, and people who want power and votes are fantastic at exploiting it.

It's the same instinct that had people chasing devils and witches in past millenia. In the modern age all the ills and "unfairnesses" are seen as caused by action the holders of "privilege" which keeps everyone else down. It's a batshit crazy worldview, as crazy as chasing witches and seeing demons as causing illness, but it's where the mainstream left are now.

And when it's left to fester and run loose it ends in disasters like what the Cultural Revolution and the Bolsheviks did to China and Russia. So it's worth discussing and countering with facts. The only people posting facts in here are people who don't hold that worldview; why do you think that is?