• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

income inequality debate

PhDeac said:
LOL. How many drinks have you had? You don’t understand a pretty simple idea. Either accept the public estimate or provide your own.
Click to expand...

Phdeac - I’ve determined you are a pedophile that has sex with 4 year olds. Prove that you aren’t or you have to pay the US government $50 million.

Any problems with that?
 
Shooshmoo said:
Thank you. Have a good night. Hope you're having a party because I bet you're fun at them.
Click to expand...

You’re literally the Most miserable fuckstick that posts on these here rjkarl boards. You can continue to be a miserable piece of shit, have at it, but don’t try and pull the “oh you must be fun at parties line”
 
Goddamn when ph digs in he really digs in. Forbes magazine = public estimate on which you can be taxed? Just walk away from this argument. The fake obtuseness is a nice touch.

Ph how do you value the wealth of a small business owner who owns 3 dry cleaners. And you can’t just snarkily punt and say that’s for the “bean counters” like Chris to crunch. I’ve posted about this months ago but it’s way more complicated than you or mhd (who knows better) are considering and it’s a huge windfall for “bean counters”. Way more effective to raise rates on measurable current year income. Or just eat the rich
 
Yes, a wealth tax is a horrible idea, just admit having a magazine determine your tax liability is a bad idea and stop being a donk.

A mix of bulking the IRS’s computer abilities and hiring more people to do audits would probably be a good idea. My dad went 20 years without filing a return when his sole source of income was a federal pension. It seems like computers could have easily kept him in line. Fairly sure I didn’t file like 6 years ago either and prolly owe a grand or two. This should all be automated at this point
 
Last edited:
DistrictDeacon said:
Phdeac - I’ve determined you are a pedophile that has sex with 4 year olds. Prove that you aren’t or you have to pay the US government $50 million.

Any problems with that?
Click to expand...

Poor comparison to what I said. Come up with something better.

06deacon said:
Goddamn when ph digs in he really digs in. Forbes magazine = public estimate on which you can be taxed? Just walk away from this argument. The fake obtuseness is a nice touch.

Ph how do you value the wealth of a small business owner who owns 3 dry cleaners. And you can’t just snarkily punt and say that’s for the “bean counters” like Chris to crunch. I’ve posted about this months ago but it’s way more complicated than you or mhd (who knows better) are considering and it’s a huge windfall for “bean counters”. Way more effective to raise rates on measurable current year income. Or just eat the rich
Click to expand...

What have you posted besides "it's too hard" or "OH PH IS SO DUMB?" Please link. I'm open to a reasonable explanation. Just understand that challenging the deconstruction of a complex system by saying the system is complex just doesn't work. It's like defining a word using the word.

All I see is people making these needlessly difficult. You've got people who measure themselves by their wealth. Use their own measures to estimate their burden which would be (wealth-$50M)*2%. If they want to poor mouth it, they risk losing their status. If someone worth $150M claims to be $100M in order to pay $1M instead of $2M in wealth tax, whatever. It's still $1M. If it comes out that they were claiming $150M to a bank or whatever, the IRS should go get that additional $1M.
 
You haven't deconstructed anything. You have come up with a ludicrous determinant of wealth that is arbitrary, totally subject to manipulation and wouldn't stand a chance in hell of being legally enforceable under any reasonable equitable determination of tax liability. Stick to sociology and identity politics.
 
Well I don’t know how to find my old post. Too bad because it walked through the huge additional complexity this would require, as compared to the current system.

So this ph method would apply only to those who ballpark a public number to brag about? And then they’ll gladly pay a tax based off that number...because they’ll lose “status?” And if they lie then whatever at least we got something? Do you really see it going well this way?
 
palmab03 said:
You’re literally the Most miserable fuckstick that posts on these here rjkarl boards. You can continue to be a miserable piece of shit, have at it, but don’t try and pull the “oh you must be fun at parties line”
Click to expand...

Good God, what an amazing lack of self awareness here. The amount of bending over backwards to protect the Uber wealthy's attempts to hide their wealth is impressively Republican. Good job, progressives.
 
Shooshmoo said:
Good God, what an amazing lack of self awareness here. The amount of bending over backwards to protect the Uber wealthy's attempts to hide their wealth is impressively Republican. Good job, progressives.
Click to expand...

Yeah um you should go back and reread the past couple pages with a fresh mind and see if you still think that’s what’s going on here.
 
Shooshmoo said:
Ok. Please tell me what is going on here.
Click to expand...

Well,

-Ph made a terrible argument and continues to double down getting way too far in, knows this, but cannot let himself back down and so we phivot all over the place to the point of him suggesting that zillionaires will voluntarily pay a tax to keep their bragging rights.
-Most folks called this a fantasy
-You were being grouchy
-Mhb hates Chris and was attacking his arguments not because he agreed with ph but because he hates Chris and in general wants to confiscate wealth
 
The first way to attack wealth inequality would be to tax all income at the same rate. There should be no lower rates for dividends, capital gains. Nor should there be ways to lower taxes by deferring income or any other methods. By doing this, taxes on the middle and lower classes could be lowered.
 
06deacon said:
Well,

-Ph made a terrible argument and continues to double down getting way too far in, knows this, but cannot let himself back down and so we phivot all over the place to the point of him suggesting that zillionaires will voluntarily pay a tax to keep their bragging rights.
-Most folks called this a fantasy
-You were being grouchy
-Mhb hates Chris and was attacking his arguments not because he agreed with ph but because he hates Chris and in general wants to confiscate wealth
Click to expand...

Look, pH is not the first one to suggest using Forbes or the Federal Reserve to estimate wealth. What's really going on is people saying something is too hard and complicated when it really isn't. Warren's plan affects only 75,000 people. The IRS audits a million people a year. Like anything else, you create regulations and you would have to beef up the IRS. It's not rocket science. The problem is, you are dealing with people who can afford to pay the best people to cover up and hide their shit. That's not a reason to throw up your hands and say, sorry too tough. Those are the people who don't deserve that type of protection.

But it's not happening anyway, given the attitudes and the likely makeup of congress and the Supreme Court for the foreseeable future. Nothing will happen, which I think suits Chris just fine. And he saw fit to attack me personally first, so gloves are off.
 
Whats really going on is that sig raised good points, ph said something that isn't remotely feasible and shoo went into hyper progressive defense mode.
 
Shooshmoo said:
Look, pH is not the first one to suggest using Forbes or the Federal Reserve to estimate wealth. What's really going on is people saying something is too hard and complicated when it really isn't. Warren's plan affects only 75,000 people. The IRS audits a million people a year. Like anything else, you create regulations and you would have to beef up the IRS. It's not rocket science. The problem is, you are dealing with people who can afford to pay the best people to cover up and hide their shit. That's not a reason to throw up your hands and say, sorry too tough. Those are the people who don't deserve that type of protection.

But it's not happening anyway, given the attitudes and the likely makeup of congress and the Supreme Court for the foreseeable future. Nothing will happen, which I think suits Chris just fine. And he saw fit to attack me personally first, so gloves are off.
Click to expand...

This is not correct.

The things you’re mentioning like rich folks “hiding their shit” or whatever and beefing up the IRS is about hiding and discovering INCOME. No disagreement there.

Valuing WEALTH is entirely different. HNW folks won’t just have like piles of cash somewhere or even piles of stocks which are easy to value. I feel like folks are assuming it’ll just be as easy as ferreting out all these “hidden accounts” of cash to tax it. They will have ownership interests in private businesses or companies. To tax wealth you need to value these. To do this you need, among other things:
1. Timely audited financial statements whose numbers you can trust (which take lots of time and money to prepare). This would require an overnight transformation and beefing up of the public accounting industry.
2. Competently prepared valuations based on those financial statements and tons of unauditable assumptions such as growth projections, real estate valuations, etc. This will require an even larger overhaul of the valuation industry as well as the expertise needed at the IRS to challenge these valuations.

Not to mention all of the other types of assets that folks own. And the debt they hold. All of which need to be compiled into a personal financial statement...prepared by who? Gotta be able to trust the numbers so it can’t be self prepared. So you have another accountant who is like a general contractor to farm out all these valuations and compile a personal financial statement...by when? And as of what date, 12/31? By the time all this work gets done ten months from then you have tons of subsequent events that mhb mocked that are better information on those valuations you prepared that are now obsolete.

The best information on valuing any asset is when it’s transacted. Bought or sold. So jack up the taxes on the income or gain realized on those sales. That erases the need for pretty much all of that complication. And which is coincidentally the system we have now.

If it’s the system you want, you need to design something workable and acknowledge the challenges. You can’t just count your money and lash out when folks question the details and accuse them of being republicans or whatever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top