I have no problem funding the current military needs of future US states 51 - 60.
piketty’s weak. i just happen to live in a place where it seems like we actually care about one another. i just think we can go further. ever wonder why Scandinavian countries are ranked as the best to live almost perpetually. its because you don’t have to worry about basic needs. how do they fund? by taxing the rich who only get rich from taking advantage of what the country has provided them with.
i’m also influenced by the fact that my wife has had to have over $200k in surguries in her lifetime and universal health care should be just as important universal roads and universal education. she’d probably be dead if these costs weren’t absorbed by the country as a whole. the only reason it doesn’t exist in the states is because of selfish Repubs who don’t want to help poor people not die. they’re only okay with the roads and education because it provides them a benefit. detaching these people from their money and power should be a major priority in any society, as technically, if they don’t want to understand their responsibilities and pay their fair share, can they even be included in what we consider society? technically, we could blockade all the roads and rails and it’d have a pretty meaningful impact on their so-called wealth.
Democratic politicians don’t really want universal healthcare either, they just want democratic voters to think they do. If republican politicians announced today (or whenever they get back from one of their endless vacations) that they have had a change of heart and will fully support a universal healthcare law, dems would shit their pants.
haha. perhaps. but if that’s the case, it’s even worse than i thought.
They are tiny countries with homogenous populations ranging in size from Greater Toronto to NYC along with immense natural resources where the royalties (or all the revenue if they use a national oil company) flow to the federal governments. Both of which I think are of greater impact than taxing the rich.
A much greater amount. Proportional to your benefit in fact. Raise revenue efficiently. For equal revenue,a progressive codes creates all sorts of unintended unfairness, slows growth and just creates an illusion that the rich pay the bill. Everybody pays. Even those with a zero effective rate pay through the cost of goods and services. Doesn’t help anyone. Use all qualifying refundable tax credits to create “fairness” and empower those less fortunate.
Given you now have had some time to think about it or query those in the know, I’m sure you’ve answered your own questions by now.
I’m sure. You don’t have to prove anything to the feds to get benefits. Just claim to meet the criteria. That’s how the health exchanges are working.
Not true. Everything is marginal. I personally know people that retired based on the last round of tax increases. I tried to show them that the hit in their take home pay was only short term and would adjust in the long term. Interesting how that works in a progressive system. But the line had been crossed, and they were done. Couple doctors in fact. That really helps everyone.
Yeah, get over the idea of family and legacy. They play no role in productivity, progress, and stability.
You subsidize all other health care systems as well. You can feel good about yourself.
Contrary to a previous poster, painting almost half the population on the other side of the aisle with a single brush really helps your credibility. Especially, when that group you speak of consistently donates significantly more of their time and money than their counterparts. You seem to have a really good grasp of the beliefs and politics of both political parties here in America.
This is turning into some type of Ayn Rand rant. I consider myself a libertarian because I support the rights of citizens. I just don’t think that accumulating well beyond the point of consumption should be a right. This is not directed at people in double digit millions. It’s to the people who have means well beyond the point of consumption for generations. Accumulating for the sake of accumulation in a system designed to benefit those already at an advantage is not good for society.
Here’s a list of people who seem to agree:
Agree? I didn’t realize they are giving to the general fund. That should please the treasury for sure. But in fact, they are pledging to keep their money out of the general fund. This is what some of the super rich do. They become puppet master. No coersion needed.
The charities they give to will cure societal needs that the government steps in to help with right now. So they’re not directly giving to government, but they’re limiting the governments need to help. I feel that there needs to be some mechanism in place to give back. If people won’t do it voluntarily then it’s the governments job to provide that system.
It’s easy to be philanthropic with other peoples’ money.
Or they’re saying that they know the government will just piss away their money and they believe the charities they’ve chosen will do a far more effective job, which is a pretty damning statement given how inefficient most charities are.
But this pledge masks those funds from much more than the estate tax. The government will not be reducing its expendentures because of the pledge and the pledge will actually reduce revenue perpetually. All charitble deductions do is allow the donor to get a government match on the order of over 60% for a pet project or foundation and increases the government’s need to raise revenue elsewhere . Don’t allow capital to be shielded and the capital will continue to be a revenue source. No need to confiscate wealth based on an individuals life span. And the idea that the rich only get their donations matched is probably not very popular and is in fact regressive.
It’s easy to reduce an argument to a single sentence and dismiss it. Enjoy your eigth post.
You can’t get to post #1,837 without having post #8 first.
Right, but he didn’t contribute anything to the conversation. He just said “nanananana” and ran away. I think that everyone here agrees that the current system is flawed. I just want to a productive conversation about what everyone views as the correct way to fix it.