Author Topic: Democratic Presidential Candidates 2020  (Read 8508 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Democratic Presidential Candidates 2020
« Reply #60 on: February 13, 2019, 01:57:32 PM »

Offline Erik

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1103
  • Tommy Points: 180
  • The voice of reason
I fully understand what a marginal tax rate is. It will nevertheless destroy the middle class indirectly.

If you tax a marginal rate high enough, wealthy people (i.e. job creators) will either just work enough to get to that marginal rate (not worth their time to make anything additional) or just leave the country (Make Monaco Great Again). Before you say that this will never happen: it always happens. This country's new obsession of riling up the middle class to be against the innovators and entrepreneurs that allow them to have jobs to live and feed their families is extremely dangerous from a historical perspective. Not everyone is a Steve Jobs. Equally, not everyone should be paid as such. Going away from a meritocracy is going to be the downfall of our republic.

Re: Democratic Presidential Candidates 2020
« Reply #61 on: February 13, 2019, 02:52:25 PM »

Offline indeedproceed

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 42200
  • Tommy Points: 2700
  • You ain't the boss of the freakin' bedclothes.
I fully understand what a marginal tax rate is. It will nevertheless destroy the middle class indirectly.

Did not say you didn't, was making a larger point about the meme you posted.

Quote
If you tax a marginal rate high enough, wealthy people (i.e. job creators) will either just work enough to get to that marginal rate (not worth their time to make anything additional) or just leave the country (Make Monaco Great Again). Before you say that this will never happen: it always happens.

See: America. It did not happen. We do however have politicians who can be bought and sold so the tax code changed.

Quote
This country's new obsession of riling up the middle class to be against the innovators and entrepreneurs that allow them to have jobs to live and feed their families is extremely dangerous from a historical perspective.

So is bleeding the working class dry to enrich those so-called innovators and entrepreneurs (or, more often and more accurately, the progeny of the progeny of those innovators and entrepreneurs). Historically, having a growing gap between the rich and the poor leads to...unfavorable outcomes.

Quote
Not everyone is a Steve Jobs.

Too true. Too true. Cannot argue that. Wouldn't actually. Confused why it needs saying.

Quote
Equally, not everyone should be paid as such.

See above.

Quote
Going away from a meritocracy is going to be the downfall of our republic.

I think this kind of true, but I think we should be wary of what we reward in our meritocracy. Should we reward someone more because of something their great-great-grandfather did than we would a guy who started a carpet cleaning business from nothing and has managed to turn it into a 3-4 full time employee business that is looking to expand? Because right now, we are screwing the entrepreneur there and we're rewarding the trust fund kid in a disproportionately advantageous way.

When I vote in the primaries, I'm going to be voting for someone who is putting forward explicit policies to help the middle class directly (not indirectly. They've been 'trickled on' enough indirectly), and someone who is putting forward explicit polices to combat climate change. Those are my biggest areas of concern.

"You've gotta respect a 15-percent 3-point shooter. A guy
like that is always lethal." - Evan 'The God' Turner

Re: Democratic Presidential Candidates 2020
« Reply #62 on: February 13, 2019, 03:50:10 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37312
  • Tommy Points: 6080
Historically, having a growing gap between the rich and the poor leads to...unfavorable outcomes.
It's called a revolution or a dictatorship. Those have been historically the outcomes from when an income gap as large as the one that currently exists happens. Probably not happening anytime real soon, but Trump is using the blueprint of consolidating power like a dictator might try to do if that person wants to be a dictator.

Re: Democratic Presidential Candidates 2020
« Reply #63 on: February 13, 2019, 04:43:22 PM »

Online fairweatherfan

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19777
  • Tommy Points: 2201
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
If you tax a marginal rate high enough, wealthy people (i.e. job creators) will either just work enough to get to that marginal rate (not worth their time to make anything additional) or just leave the country.

This is actually true, and most economists who've studied the question peg that inflection point at a top rate of about 80%, though some believe it's actually north of 90, pointing to our highest post-war rates as examples.

Of course the very wealthiest people tend to have a fraction of their wealth in income, relying more on capital gains, so the rates aren't that relevant to them either.


Quote
Going away from a meritocracy is going to be the downfall of our republic.

I have some good news about the entire rest of American history - we've never been a meritocracy.


Quote
This country's new obsession of riling up the middle class to be against the innovators and entrepreneurs that allow them to have jobs to live and feed their families is extremely dangerous from a historical perspective.

This is a pretty feudalistic mindset. Employment is not a gift bestowed on us by our wealthy betters. Neither is survival.

Re: Democratic Presidential Candidates 2020
« Reply #64 on: February 13, 2019, 05:43:50 PM »

Offline Erik

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1103
  • Tommy Points: 180
  • The voice of reason
About the WW2 tax rates: the effective rate for the wealthiest was not that much higher in that time period than modern tax code. This is mainly due to legal (or perhaps illegal) tax avoidance, which is largely similar to what will happen with this proposal. I suspect that whatever money that she thinks that she will raise to pay for things in reality will be a fraction of it sending us into more debt. People aren't going to pay that money. If they absolutely are forced to (not sure how it's possible to fully enforce it), they will leave the country (along with their businesses) or not work as hard.

Also, let's be careful with the inheritance thing. A family business is perfectly acceptable -- teaching your kid how to run the carpet cleaning business after you get old. Just because it's the size of Walmart, does it make it unfair that he got the opportunity to run it? If he's unqualified, the business will fail or the board will find someone who can actually run it. Still a meritocracy. If you're upset that he inherited a bunch of cash and is sitting on the beach drinking mai tais, well, an income tax isn't going to "get him" either. You'd need to establish a networth tax for that.

"Employment is not a gift bestowed on us by our wealthy betters. Neither is survival."

I invite you to create a list of jobs that would exist without innovation. Farming? Would sure as hell be difficult without all of those tools. If you'd like to be a sovereign citizen, feel free to go live in the woods, kill animals, rub sticks together to make a fire, and crap in a hole. I (a middle classer) am personally happy that there are people much smarter and braver than me that have invented things that created my job so that I can have a peaceful and enjoyable life. I don't give a [dang] what car they drive.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2019, 05:51:03 PM by Erik »

Re: Democratic Presidential Candidates 2020
« Reply #65 on: February 13, 2019, 05:49:12 PM »

Online Celtics4ever

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17590
  • Tommy Points: 1155
Quote
To be fair, just about every losing party has pulled the "he isn't my president", I am going to whine about him, use obstructionism to it's maximum and have lots of oversight investigations.

It's happening with Trump, it happened to Obama and W. Bush and Clinton. Don't remember it so much under Carter(a bad president) or H.W. Bush(a good president). Reagan was just awash in scandal. But dang that guy was loved.

I don't recall people saying it during  Pres. Clinton's era but I was overseas in the service for part of it.   I did a google search and could find not much evidence about the Pres. Clinton Era in regards to it.   But internet was young too.  I think during Pres. Clinton that is when things took a turn for the worse though, wasn't because of him just during his tenure.


I did find this though it is a not a very good reference
Quote
Not My President
This phrase is a notorious slogan found on stickers and T-shirts, used by people who oppose the policies of George W. Bush. The sticker also features a picture of W. The slogan is an anthem of resistance and refusal to accept Bush as America's legitimate President. It became more commonplace after the Iraq war started.
At the parking lot of a Media Play store I saw a purple car with a Not My President sticker on the rear.
#statement#defiance#angry#shame#resist#controversy#dubya#war in iraq
by I Saw U2 Live Twice September 18, 2007

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Not%20My%20President

and this button:

https://www.buttonmuseum.org/buttons/bush-hes-not-my-president

Quote
Twice in the past eight years, many Americans have wondered whether the guy in the Oval Office is the president.  In 2000, it was the unusual circumstances under which George W. Bush was declared the victor.  (Interestingly, some people think we'll soon see the first high profile legal case using Bush v. Gore as its central argument.  The case?  Dueling Minnesota Senator wannabes, Norm Coleman and Al Franken.  Of course.  *sigh*)

What might the spirit of "He's not my President" say about a meaningful life?  We often link our own aspirations to the welfare and policies of the nations in which we live.  At it's worst, this can lead to disappointment and rash promises (did immigration to Canada from the US really spike in 2000, 2004, and 2008?).  At its best, tying our own concerns to those of a larger entity is one of the ways that people add meaning to their lives.  Transcending our individual needs and desires by investing in some larger aim, cause, or group of people can expand our sense of who we are.  Gordon Allport talked about the mature personality as one that constantly grows to embrace more and more people and concerns.  Linking ourselves to something greater can also provide us with a deeper sense of purpose.

Some scholars have argued that connecting ourselves with something greater is a way to achieve symbolic immortality. When they make people think about their own death, people get sensitive and ornery.  However, they feel better if they get to defend their culturally-inspired world view.  So, if I asked you to describe what would happen to your body as you died, you'd feel a little more anxious, and more hostile to people who are different from you...unless I gave you a chance to symbolically wave a flag, chant the name of your country, and punish those who oppose her will.  Doing those things seems to help us feel like we're part of something that will still be here when we're worm food.

Being a part of something greater than ourselves looks like a tried and true way of deepening the meaning in your life.  Volunteering for a community organization, getting involved in politics, attending religious services, and participating in social groups all are associated with greater meaning in life.

Of course, as with anything else we build our lives on, when these extensions of ourselves seem like they're being challenged, changed, or attacked, it can have a deep and penetrating effect.  In a couple of previous columns, I discussed strategies for making meaning when your job - and identity as a worker - are undermined.  I'd suggest something similar to Congresswoman Bachmann and other folks struggling with changes to an important source of meaning.  Key components are accepting the situation, looking for hidden opportunities to work with other people to find common ground, working collaboratively to shape new directions, and putting things in perspective.  Aside from a giant asteroid hurtling toward Earth, very few things are really the end of the world (and even that asteroid will miss us).  Including having a disagreement with a President.

© 2009 Michael F. Steger. All Rights Reserved.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-meaning-in-life/200903/not-my-president?amp#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s

Quote
Almost immediately after Election Day 2016, a movement representing itself with the slogan "Not My President" sprang up and spread cross the county. While it was a subset of the overall "Resistance" efforts against now-President Donald Trump, it based itself on the shocking sentiment that somehow Trump was not, as the phrase so simply puts its, legitimately their president.

The "Not My President" movement has survived and grown since then, holding frequent and regular protests across the country as well as at major events such as the Inauguration, denouncing and emphasizing again how they believe President Trump is somehow different from all the presidents that have gone before. Their influence is already being felt, as a March University of Chicago poll showed 57 percent of young people believe Trump is an illegitimate president.

However, the fact is that President Trump won on November 8 th and is the 45th president of the United States and of all Americans, no matter who we voted for, our approval of him, or our political beliefs. We didn't even have to go through a Supreme Court case or a tense recount, despite Jill Stein's haphazard efforts last year, like we did in 2000.
Women's March becomes a goose step
Watch Full Screen to Skip Ads

The "Not My President" movement nonetheless continues with the outrageous and dangerous notion that President Trump is somehow less than a legitimately-sanctioned president. Not only is this sentiment extraordinarily disrespectful to the leader of our nation, it sets a dangerous political precedent that all Americans should be hesitant to encourage.

Even in the last month of the election Hillary Clinton repeatedly emphasized how we as Americans have to accept the results of the election and respect the peaceful transfer of power, despite what a tense election it had been. Of course at the time this was when multiple outlets were predicting that Clinton had a 95%+ chance of winning.

However, Clinton and many other Democrats, did laudably attempt to bring together this nation after the divisive election. Clinton, President Obama, and many other Democrats attended President Trump's Inauguration and emphasized that, while they were unhappy with the result and would continue to resist the president, they accepted his legitimacy.

Some on the left did not choose a message of unity. Dozens of Democratic Congresspersons boycotted the Inauguration. Some tried to nonsensically delay the Electoral College proceedings or even challenge Congress's vote-certification of the Electoral votes. Many others on the left openly refused to "normalize" and accept Trump.

Since the Inauguration some Democrats have continued to try to delegitimize the president in unusual and disappointing ways. The exact nature of the connections between the president's campaign and Russia continue to remain uncertain. But it is at least well-settled that the election results were accurate and that the American people indeed chose Donald Trump as president under the system we have in place and despite significant knowledge of Russia's interference.

Therefore when Democrats such as Congressman Ted Lieu (D-CA) go out and say, months after the Inauguration, that "[w]e may have an illegitimate President of the United States currently occupying the White House," they show that they are willing to put scoring political points and whipping up voters' feelings above our country's traditions and constitutional structure.

As Trump's presidency moves forward, the "Not My President" movement needs to take a hard look at itself and ask itself if it really believes its efforts will amount to anything positive and, if they think it will, is it worth the damage to our country's historically unique and cherished political norms.

President Trump is undoubtedly controversial. He will likely never win over large blocs of this country. However he is still the president of our entire country. All of us should give him a chance, and even if some on the left can't find it in their hearts to do that, at the very least accept that he is indeed the president – mine, yours, and of all ours.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/stop-saying-not-my-president


It seems to have happened under Pres. Bush  Jr  first and seems to be a talking point when liberals think they should have won an election.   I think it is patently absurd for anyone to do it as I am former military and I respect the office no matter who is in office.   I also try to use Pres. in front of anytime I talk the president.   I know I am in the minority though.

Happened to Pres. Obama too, and here is the evidence.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/column-obama-is-not-my-president/

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/01/12/sean_hannity_obamas_not_my_president.html

Quote
Trump is using the blueprint of consolidating power like a dictator might try to do if that person wants to be a dictator.

Please give direct examples to back this up.    His rise to power is nothing like Hitler, Stalin, or Napoleon perhaps you're aware of one I am not?    I have my doubts about your statement.   Pres. Trump is not as ruthless as the above three, he has not had anyone killed or like which makes your statement too hyperbole for me.

Pres. Trump is also not as smart of Napoleon, who rose to power as a general,  Stalin took over an existing revolution, and Hitler came to power by murdering and beating up his foes.   The direct comparison I could see is Hitler demonizes the Jews and Pres. Trump demonizes immigrants but even still there is a drastic difference.

Re: Democratic Presidential Candidates 2020
« Reply #66 on: February 13, 2019, 07:38:46 PM »

Online Celtics4ever

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17590
  • Tommy Points: 1155
I should note that I don't care for the extremes of either party and that they give normal folks a bad name.   The GOP have had their share of bad things to Obama as noted above.

Re: Democratic Presidential Candidates 2020
« Reply #67 on: February 14, 2019, 06:46:43 AM »

Online Celtics4ever

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17590
  • Tommy Points: 1155
A new tactic  to discredit critics has arose.

Quote
American descendants of slaves identifying themselves with the hashtag #ADOS have been openly critical of 2020 presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Cory Booker over the past weeks.

Some prominent black political commentators are now speculating that these critics are Russian bots.

Angela Rye, a CNN political commentator and board member of the Congressional Black Caucus PAC, has said she believes that some ADOS arguments are not organic, but were “paid for by Russia.” She added that she’s “not saying everyone who uses the hashtag is a Russian bot,” but she does believe “it originated from Russian bots.” Rye went on to argue that the same is true of critiques relating to “some of the stuff around the crime bill” circa 2016 — presumably referring to critics of Hillary Clinton who questioned her support of the bill now widely understood to have caused overwhelming harm to black Americans.

    We stand with #ados #notabot #tonetalks #angelaproject pic.twitter.com/9t1ty9cVeW

    — Amos Jones (@amosnjones) February 5, 2019

On a segment of Joy Reid’s MSNBC show titled “how to spot a bot,” Shireen Mitchell, founder of Stop Online Violence Against Women, argued that the ADOS hashtag is a way to identify foreign influence. “A lot of the ones that are pretending to be black people, black women in particular, who are focusing on black identity, have these sort of aspects in the ways that they’re talking about language,” she said. She went on to say that bots are posing as black Americans using “the vernacular or the language of someone that believes they are a part of our community” to claim authority to represent black Americans.

“This has become a challenge particularly for the Democratic candidates because obviously, in 2016, all this activity was directed to help Donald Trump, or to hurt Hillary Clinton, to do both,” Reid said. “So I’m wondering if this time the party is going to be a bit more prepared. Reid appeared to co-sign Mitchell’s claim, saying, “I did see a huge uptick of bot activity when Kamala Harris announced,” focusing on critics who argue that Harris “is not really black.”

For years, identifying as a black American “descendant” of slaves or ADOS has been a way for black Americans to advocate for the specific needs and interests of those brought to the United States via the transatlantic slave trade hundreds of years ago, as distinct from the interests of more recent African and Caribbean immigrants.

Some critics using the ADOS hashtag have focused on Harris’s race, pointing to Kamala’s Indian and Jamaican heritage as a possible explanation for why, as a prosecutor, she supported policies that disproportionately harmed black Americans. The ADOS movement does have some nativist elements. But it is also true that much of the commentary surrounding Harris appears to relate less to her racial background than her public record. Booker, also a target of ADOS criticism, is an American descendant of slavery himself.

Moore said that accusations like Reid’s are a McCarthyite tactic in the same vein as the attempts to publicly discredit Martin Luther King Jr. “It’s troubling, the lengths that these people will go to undermine authentic Black advocacy in order to prop up the Democratic establishment,” he said in an email. An MSNBC spokesperson declined to comment.

Indeed, people of color who challenge the Democratic Party from the left are often erased or dismissed as somehow not being real. During the 2016 Democratic primary, the hashtag #BernieMadeMeWhite spread as a response to the “Bernie Bro” stereotype, which wrongly claimed that nearly all Bernie Sanders supporters were young white men.

Carnell and Moore cited a truancy program Harris created as San Francisco’s district attorney that threatened parents with prosecution if their children missed school — a policy that progressives argue disproportionately hurts minority and low-income communities — as one of their main criticisms of her. As for Booker, they said they have a problem with his corporate alliances, specifically his ties to the pharmaceutical industry and widely criticized vote against allowing drug reimportation to the United States.
“We have to be very careful and we have to be very intentional about what your specific policies are for the black community and what does that mean for us if and when you get elected,” Carnell said. “We can’t just sit here and do identity politics anymore. We have to do agenda politics and that’s what has really driven it.”

Moore said they will be holding their first American DOS conference in Louisville, Kentucky, on October 4-5, and intend to ask Booker and Harris to attend to “talk to black Americans about what their black agenda is.”

This is not the first time Reid has dabbled in conspiracy theories. Last year, Reid found herself in hot water when decade-old homophobic blog posts resurfaced. Instead of immediately apologizing, Reid told Mediaite — without offering any evidence — that hackers planted the offensive blog posts as “part of an effort to taint my character with false information by distorting a blog that ended a decade ago.”



https://theintercept.com/2019/02/13/ados-kamala-harris-cory-booker-russian-bots/

Re: Democratic Presidential Candidates 2020
« Reply #68 on: February 14, 2019, 09:28:55 AM »

Online Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Tommy Heinsohn
  • *************************
  • Posts: 25142
  • Tommy Points: 1157
  • What a Pub Should Be
The Russian bot thing is wild.  Was reading an article earlier this morning saying that Russian bots may be fueling the Anti-Vax movement which hasn't exactly been helping this measles epidemic.


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: Democratic Presidential Candidates 2020
« Reply #69 on: February 14, 2019, 10:10:03 AM »

Offline mef730

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3488
  • Tommy Points: 658
For me, anyone who is reasonably moderate not a liberal loon.

Liberal is not a dirty word. You've been conditioned to think that!

Yep. As a former liberal, I can say that an American liberal is a fairly centrist position. But liberal loons do exist:




I hope it's Biden. I'd probably vote for him, tbh.

AOC is not a liberal loon. I do however think it's pretty funny how my friends (especially my libertarian friends and far-right friends) seem to be having some kind of a moment with AOC embodying...something other than her actual politics or positions.

Honest to goodness exchange I just had with a very intelligent borderline policy wonk friend of mine about AOC:

Him: She's (bleeping) nuts man. How a person who is as smart as you can support her I do not understand.

Me: I don't support everything she said there but she has some good ideas.

Him: Do you know what a 70% tax rate would do to the middle class?

Me; That's not what she's saying. It's a marginal tax rate. It would only affect money made above like $10 million or something.

Him: Still though.


Google 'AOC memes' and see how many of them are about her being a dumb woman or overtly racist. Startling number. See how many positive ones there are. Not very many. She's become this general catch-all for spite directed at millennials and in uglier circles, misogyny and racism.
definitely become a lightening rod for conservative hate and fear mongering.  typical postings against her are the same against most prominent Dems where statements are twisted or just plain made up. 

thankfully no need to do that with Trump because we can just mock him with what comes straight from his mouth or twitter feed.   ;D

You bring up a good point. I simply don't understand how a first-term Congresswoman can generate such hatred.

One of the problems that the Democrats face is that the one thing that they do best is letting Republicans define them. Many of us have seen this tirade from The West Wing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aL8aKMaOewE

If the Democrats let conservatives convince enough people that their party is in favor of socialism, POTUS is looking at another four years.

What else do Democrats do well? They kill their own. I've gotta hand it to the Republicans. They beat the snot out of each other in the primaries and then rally behind their candidate in the general election. Democrats? We're like the kid who won't play kickball because he didn't get picked first.

Mike
Want to learn about frequent flyer miles and flying well for free? Check out my blog here: http://frequentflyermiles101.com/

Actually, check it out even if you don't want to. It'll make me feel good.

Re: Democratic Presidential Candidates 2020
« Reply #70 on: February 14, 2019, 10:19:56 AM »

Online Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Tommy Heinsohn
  • *************************
  • Posts: 25142
  • Tommy Points: 1157
  • What a Pub Should Be

You bring up a good point. I simply don't understand how a first-term Congresswoman can generate such hatred.


You can probably guess 2 reasons....


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: Democratic Presidential Candidates 2020
« Reply #71 on: February 14, 2019, 11:15:32 AM »

Offline mef730

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3488
  • Tommy Points: 658

You bring up a good point. I simply don't understand how a first-term Congresswoman can generate such hatred.


You can probably guess 2 reasons....

Sadly, yes.

Mike
Want to learn about frequent flyer miles and flying well for free? Check out my blog here: http://frequentflyermiles101.com/

Actually, check it out even if you don't want to. It'll make me feel good.

Re: Democratic Presidential Candidates 2020
« Reply #72 on: February 14, 2019, 11:59:07 AM »

Online Moranis

  • Global Moderator
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21786
  • Tommy Points: 1039
I fully understand what a marginal tax rate is. It will nevertheless destroy the middle class indirectly.

If you tax a marginal rate high enough, wealthy people (i.e. job creators) will either just work enough to get to that marginal rate (not worth their time to make anything additional) or just leave the country (Make Monaco Great Again). Before you say that this will never happen: it always happens. This country's new obsession of riling up the middle class to be against the innovators and entrepreneurs that allow them to have jobs to live and feed their families is extremely dangerous from a historical perspective. Not everyone is a Steve Jobs. Equally, not everyone should be paid as such. Going away from a meritocracy is going to be the downfall of our republic.
Very few people make 10 million dollars a year and the vast majority of the ones that do, don't actually have to do anything more than they would be doing to make their 1st dollar.  Athletes for example, have to do exactly the same thing to make 25 million that they do to make 1 million.  Most of the super wealthy people, don't even have income, or have a fairly modest one, they make their money in stocks, dividends, interest, etc. 

Re: Democratic Presidential Candidates 2020
« Reply #73 on: February 14, 2019, 12:02:46 PM »

Online fairweatherfan

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19777
  • Tommy Points: 2201
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
I fully understand what a marginal tax rate is. It will nevertheless destroy the middle class indirectly.

If you tax a marginal rate high enough, wealthy people (i.e. job creators) will either just work enough to get to that marginal rate (not worth their time to make anything additional) or just leave the country (Make Monaco Great Again). Before you say that this will never happen: it always happens. This country's new obsession of riling up the middle class to be against the innovators and entrepreneurs that allow them to have jobs to live and feed their families is extremely dangerous from a historical perspective. Not everyone is a Steve Jobs. Equally, not everyone should be paid as such. Going away from a meritocracy is going to be the downfall of our republic.
Very few people make 10 million dollars a year and the vast majority of the ones that do, don't actually have to do anything more than they would be doing to make their 1st dollar.  Athletes for example, have to do exactly the same thing to make 25 million that they do to make 1 million.  Most of the super wealthy people, don't even have income, or have a fairly modest one, they make their money in stocks, dividends, interest, etc.

On top of that, wealthy people are rarely hiring employees out of their personal income, and employment compensation is tax-deductible, so the whole jobs argument is incoherent to begin with.

Re: Democratic Presidential Candidates 2020
« Reply #74 on: February 14, 2019, 12:50:17 PM »

Online Surferdad

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10459
  • Tommy Points: 691
  • "He fiddles...and diddles..."
I fully understand what a marginal tax rate is. It will nevertheless destroy the middle class indirectly.

If you tax a marginal rate high enough, wealthy people (i.e. job creators) will either just work enough to get to that marginal rate (not worth their time to make anything additional) or just leave the country (Make Monaco Great Again). Before you say that this will never happen: it always happens. This country's new obsession of riling up the middle class to be against the innovators and entrepreneurs that allow them to have jobs to live and feed their families is extremely dangerous from a historical perspective. Not everyone is a Steve Jobs. Equally, not everyone should be paid as such. Going away from a meritocracy is going to be the downfall of our republic.
Very few people make 10 million dollars a year and the vast majority of the ones that do, don't actually have to do anything more than they would be doing to make their 1st dollar.  Athletes for example, have to do exactly the same thing to make 25 million that they do to make 1 million.  Most of the super wealthy people, don't even have income, or have a fairly modest one, they make their money in stocks, dividends, interest, etc.

On top of that, wealthy people are rarely hiring employees out of their personal income, and employment compensation is tax-deductible, so the whole jobs argument is incoherent to begin with.
Agreed.  What's more, there are many job creators who are not wealthy.  They own small businesses, shops, etc.

This is not a job argument.  It's a lie propagated by rich Republican politicians.

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsStrong Forums.

Community

Signup to win FREE tickets

* indicates required