A quick history lesson. From 1940-1980:
•Wealthiest paid 70-94% marginal tax
•0 of them went broke from taxation
•0 of them left USA
•All remained exceedingly wealthy
•Manufacturing boomed
•The middle class was 62% of US economy (It's now 40% post 'trickle down scamenomics)
•We had the strongest middle class growth in US History

Let's do that again. Stop protecting billionaires. Start taxing them.
#TaxBillionaires

@QasimRashid I mean, It was abusive and unfair, which is enough reason for me to give it a hard no... **no one** should be taked out of 94% of their income, regardless if they can survive it.

That said, I can pretty much garuntee the whole "0 of them left" and "0 of them went broke" is pure nonsense, you have a source for that?

@freemo that’s not how progressive tax systems (including the now-watered-down one in the US) works. No one paid 94% of their entire income in tax, pre-Reagan - that would have been a flat tax system (which the US has never had to my knowledge), and as you so rightly point out is grotesquely unfair (especially to lower income workers) @QasimRashid

@pmonks

Yes I am well aware how income tax works. But yes as you get father above the 200K bracket the closeryoull get to 94%. So yes you have tax rates abusively high for the rich that can approach 94%, if your rich enough you are effecitvely paying 94%.

@QasimRashid

@freemo again, that’s not how progressive tax systems work. Khan Academy has a good explainer that might help explain where you’re going wrong: khanacademy.org/economics-fina @QasimRashid

@pmonks @QasimRashid

Please feel free to explain specifically where you think i went wrong. I deal with these sorts of taxes daily as the EVP of a company.

@freemo @pmonks @QasimRashid
Now Dr. Explain to us how tax credits and tax write offs work to lessen the tax burden for the wealthy. Not to even mention the tax deferrals offered in 401ks and IRAs. So the real question is not what is the tax bracket you're in but what is the effective tax rate you actually pay. That's why Buffet says his secretary pays more in tax than he does.

Follow

@MikeBon @pmonks @QasimRashid

Yes they legally use the writeoffs and other benefits availible to everyone. If there is a specific writeoff you feel is unjust or only applies to the wealthh im open to discuss

@freemo most of these write offs are only obtainable if you’re wealthy though, so no they’re not “available to everyone” in any meaningful way @MikeBon

@freemo for example one can’t claim charitable donation deductions if one is living paycheck-to-paycheck and deciding whether to pay rent or utilities this month - there’s no disposable income available to be making such donations @MikeBon

@pmonks @MikeBon

That is a bit irrelevant since they are spending far more on charities then they save on a deduction.

@freemo not at all. If a wealthy person doesn’t pursue legal loopholes to the tax code (such as charitable dedications), then they would have paid more in taxes. The “charitable” donation has very little to do with philanthropy and everything to do with retaining more personal wealth. @MikeBon

@pmonks @MikeBon

How isnpaying 100k in donations to save 20k in taxes a loophole or even an exploit?

@freemo charitable donations (at least in the US) work by reducing income, which means it can shift someone into a lower tax bracket. That can save substantially more than the amount of the donation. @MikeBon

@freemo regardless, you’re dodging the original point: that these kinds of deductions are not equally available to everyone @MikeBon

@pmonks

No one has presented an example where thry are exclusively or favorable towards the super rich. Everyone has access to them.. if you think there is one only the rich can use im still waiting to hear what one you mean

@MikeBon

@pmonks @MikeBon

No this example was invslidated because the super rich, as we are discussing dont hover tax brackets by definition. And it isnt saving you money overall except in that edge case.

@pmonks @MikeBon

Dont be a passive aggressive ass. If you feel i misinterprited the discussion feel free to speak up. Otherwise lets not go there

@freemo you didn’t read the post I linked, assumed it was a different one, and then addressed the wrong point in. If you wish to police how this discussion is conducted then I encourage you to engage with it in good faith and actually read waa is written than jumping to (wrong) conclusions. @MikeBon

@pmonks @MikeBon

Read it a fourth time now.. nope it says exactly what i thought it said...

@freemo perhaps your client isn’t functioning correctly, so I’ll literally reproduce the text again here:

“for example one can’t claim charitable donation deductions if one is living paycheck-to-paycheck and deciding whether to pay rent or utilities this month - there’s no disposable income available to be making such donations”

This comment isn’t about the wealthy, it’s about the poor. You still haven’t address that point (which was also one of the first one raised in this thread i.e. that these kinds of legal tax loopholes are _not_ available to all).

@MikeBon

@pmonks @MikeBon

So it says exactly what i thought it says.. as isaid before its not a tax advantage for the rich or anyone since you spend more in giving donations than you get in tax cuts. So neither the rich the poor nor anyone can exploit it to save on taxes, it isnt a net savings.

@freemo you’re still missing the point: how can someone living paycheck-to-paycheck make a charitable donation in order to access this tax deduction, without neglecting their other financial obligations? @MikeBon

@pmonks @MikeBon

They cant, nor can the rich because it isnt a tax advantage.. spending 100k on charity to save 10k on taxes isnt an advantage to the rich either nor is it a means to save money.

@freemo so you’re retracting your earlier assertions, made here: qoto.org/@freemo/1102825852234 and here: qoto.org/@freemo/1102825852234 where you claim that everyone has access to these kinds of tax loopholes? @MikeBon

Show newer

@pmonks @MikeBon

We are talking the super rich here, so you are by definition excluding people hovering tax brackets

@freemo the super rich have far more legal tax cheats at their disposal than just charitable donations - mechanisms that (to the original point) are not available to everyone @MikeBon

@pmonks @MikeBon

Simply stating it is so (again) doesnt get us anywhere. Which specific tax loophole do you think is exclusively availible to the rich, happy to discuss

@freemo @pmonks saying exclusively is misleading. They loopholes aren't necessarily exclusive but are designed to benefit the wealthy more so than the non-wealthy. Which ones, you ask? All of them. Again that's why effective tax rates for the wealthy are as low as they are.

@MikeBon

I can think of a ton of cuts and benefits you get on taxes for the poor.. still waiting to hear you mention one and how you think it favors the rich. I suspect they exist i just cant think of one off hand.

@pmonks

@freemo you're being purposely obtuse. Again using exclusivity is irrelevant. The greater the wealth the greater the benefit. Effective tax rate is all that matters.

@MikeBon i specifically didnt use the word exclusively.. give an example of a tax cut that benefits the rich and hownit would need to be changed to benefit everyone. Then we can discuss it.

@freemo most business taxes are not available to those not wealthy enough to own a business. The same with the several tax breaks for owning real estate.

@MikeBon you can file as self employed even if you dont have a business in the typical sense. In fact every person who is washing windows, doing odd jobs, etc are all under business taxes, and these are the kinds of jobs we expect the homeless to do.

The idea that 1099 basdd worked isnt an option for the poorer end of the spectrum is nonsense. In fact quite the opposite, most rich people, even if they own the company, are working for tbeir own company as a w2. There are quite a few barriers that specifically prevent the rich from getting tax breaks forcing thrn onto a w2 for their own business.

@freemo idk who you think you're fooling but it ain't me.

@MikeBon No one is fooling anyone, we are trying to have a discussion. Either engage in that if you wish or feel free to move along.

@MikeBon then move along. Do us both a favor if you feel that way. No need to announce it.

Show newer

@pmonks @MikeBon

Do you have a specific example. I mean im not argui g the tax shstem is perfect so if you want to abolish a specofic writeoff be specific

@freemo @pmonks @QasimRashid sorry I'm a little behind on this thread, right now. It's just the "cry me a river" over how high my tax bracket is, is a bit over done. Here is a question for everyone, what are the purposes for taxes anyway. If you say to pay for federal policies and programs, well, you been duped.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
CleverLibre Social

CleverLibre Social is an inclusive social instance for open discussion, learning, and community.
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.