Thieves in the bank offices
Removed by mod
What’s going on is that you have FAFO’d that you should never have compromised with the GOP like we fucking told you
If you told them not to compromise with the GOP and still voted for them anyway, then there’s not much FAFO here. Unless of course, you’re trying to say that the FO part of their FA is a result of your not voting for them in protest- which in this case, you then would have to admit your responsibility in helping to install trump in the white hose.
Oh great, more of the imaginary hostage voting
Predictably, you chose not to admit to either.
Removed by mod
tRuMp iZ biDeNz fAuLt!!!11!!!one!!1
[Then goes on to post a wall of text illustrating their ability to perform precise mental gymnastics and not providing a single shred of evidence to support it- while simultaneously defending accusations that protest voting was part of the reason trump was elected]
(Oh, and let’s not forget the ad hominem attacks. Can’t argue against nuance without angering one’s self into personal insults)
Removed by mod
I’m dizzy with this circular logic here.
Dems need to behave and act like an opposition party. Organize local outreach and fund down ticket candidates. Who any of us voted for no longer matters.
Organize and resist. Moving forward is how you win. Gloating about the worst possible outcome at the end of the world doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.
If we don’t get off our asses there won’t be another chance to vote. It’s not 2000, Trump isn’t Bush. Our systems are being dismantled. If that’s not a call to unifying action I don’t know what is.
No one is getting off of any asses. The bed was made and now we’re sleeping in it.
Honest question, are you ashamed that you don’t feel empowered? Is that why you shit all over anybody’s efforts to organize.
Or are you just so confident you’ll be able to pass the coming Mischling tests?
Why would I be ashamed? I voted to stop this. I canvassed. I did the work. I’m proud of my efforts to stand in the way of a fascist dictator.
And I’m not shitting on anything. I’m just observant. I don’t lie to myself others.
Organizing protests won’t do shit even if you could gather enough people. I’m not happy about this. I don’t want this, but I accept that this is how it is. This is reality. PROTESTS DON’T DO SHIT AGAINST AN ORGANIZATION THAT JUST FIRED THE HEADS OF THE MILITARY.
You have NO FUCKING CLUE what you’re up against.
We had a chance to stop this. We were warned this would happen. We were TOLD this would happen. And yet- NINETY MILLION ELIGIBLE VOTERS STAYED THE FUCK HOME. Most, because of “gEnOciDe!”
But no. I’m not ashamed at all. Not even close to it.
I’m just DEEPLY disappointed and angry that we lost our only chance to avoid this. And on top of that, I’m furious that there’s people that have the audacity to cast aspersions on those that knew there was a way out of this and tried. I’m furious that these people can smugly accuse those that busted their asses to stop this of not trying to help.
The question is:
Are YOU ashamed?
Oh good. At least you finally said it outloud. Stay safe there in your anonymity and the past.
I’m very well aware of what we’re up against. Now that it might threaten you, all of a sudden it’s so scary. You mentioned my post history. I suggest you read it.
I voted for Harris as harm reduction. That failed. Now I have to start organizing.
Be afraid. That’s where they want you.
You people LOVE using the past as a battering ram to break the bullshit of the present.
News flash: IT DOESN’T FUCKING WORK LIKE THAT.
I don’t give a shit about your links to events that happened decades ago. That’s not now, those weren’t the same people, and this is NOT the same situation.
We had the chance to stop this and ninety million people chose to stay home. So go ahead, protest all you want if it makes you feel like you’re doing something. I suppose it’s better than doing nothing- but I hope you suffer no illusion that it’s going to do fuck-all about anything.
We lost that chance in November. No more finger in the leak… the damn is broken.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t believe that the super rich actually have a high conventional income normally. Most of their wealth would be from investments and stock.
A neat trick with that is that they can take out loans against their stock to buy superyachts, governments, and other toys and that’s not only not income, the interest is tax deductible. Plus there are other tricks like S Corps to shield them. So, this isn’t as useful as it would suggest (not that we shouldn’t tax >100m at 99% or something just to make the point.)
You’re not wrong.
But keep cutting their taxes and they can have more conventional income in addition to everything else.
It’s called “Buy, Borrow, Die”, and that’s exactly what they do. They buy or inherit assets, hold them indefinitely, because they have no monetary value until sold, and take out loans using those assets as collateral. Then they just pay the interest on the loans, and then play with the money. Southern slave owners were doing a similar thing before Emancipation. The lax rules of Southern banking even allowed them to take out multiple loans on a single slave.
I think there is a pretty easy hack to making tax cuts unappealing to billionaires: pass a law that says each tax payer receives the exact same amount back.
Pass a 4 trillion dollar tax cut that works out to $4000/tax payer? Congrats, billionaires. Enjoy your 4k.
Every republican voted no. See whats happening here?
UBI with extra steps. I like it
Regressive tax cuts! I love it!
$4000 in the U.S. might be enough for a shitty car
edit, don’t get stuck adjusting the points on that trash carb. just fucking walk.
Curious if they tried blocking taxation on anyone BELOW a certain income level.
TIL the US doesn’t have a tax free threshold?
There is, but you just get everything back as a refund. They still take taxes out of your paycheck.
This seems pretty punitive, considering the poorest in society need the money immediately, not as a lump sum refund once per year.
Here (Australia) the tax free threshold is baked into your tax withholding amount.
It’s really the only way with how the system is set up at the moment. There’s no way to tell if someone is working 3 jobs paying 15k per year each, so each paycheck is taxed and if you claim you only made 15k because it really was one job not 3, you get your money back, otherwise you would have to claim all your income from all the sources and then they keep the taxes.
They could change the system but then if you inadvertantly make more than the minimum and you said you probably wouldn’t you would have to pay that tax at the end of the year rather than get a rebate and they would probably charge interest.
You can claim the tax free threshold for withholding purposes on 1 job in Australia. The others you need to withhold tax on any money earnt.
However, in my opinion technology being what it is now, I don’t see a reason the tax office couldn’t just direct businesses to withhold a certain amount based on overall earnings. May be a touch more complicated, but most businesses sending this information to the ATO throughout the year anyway…
There definitely are ways around this problem.
But not with paper forms, and it seems the US are in the dark ages when it comes to tax administration.
Honestly, I really don’t understand why a populist left party doesn’t pursue this.
No tax on income below $100K and no tax on wealth, property and inheritance below $1M.
Or choose some other figures.
It seems like it would be a slam dunk to get voter support.
There are several very similar issues that are all slam dunks, and the fact that they aren’t pursued by the Democrat party is proof that they are part of the same capitalist gang as the GOP. There is no voter that would be against banning lobbyist bribery from corporations, but that is never a campaign point. The few progressive voices that we have still insist that they have to work from within the Democrat party and there is simply no way that they will ever gain any foothold that way. I insist that right now, when the Democrat party is the most powerless, is the time for progressives to break off into their own party while they are seated in Congress. The Democrat Party can join or die.
This isn’t unheard of, though the income figure is usually lower. In my country it’s some 14k I think? The tax is still quite low for the next income bracket though.
True, but the number of voters in that income bracket is minuscule.
It should be increased enough to cover significant numbers of voters to be politically popular
No tax on income below $100K and no tax on wealth, property and inheritance below $1M.
With UBI, it is possible to have a flat tax where corporate and lowest personal tax rates are the same. Without payroll taxes. That means that employment can be tax free as long as business doesn’t get a tax deduction, though they still can if they lose money in a year.
There can be surtaxes on incomes above $100k, but they would appear to be very small, when personal income taxes are hidden this way.
As much as I am convinced we will need UBI in our automated future, statements like yours are way too optimistic on the financials.
Let’s see if we can get healthcare, education, school meals, food stamps and social security funded first.
After that we can start funding generous unemployment benefits to handle the first waves of unemployment due to automation.
And as the automation keeps gobbling up jobs, we can fund schemes for reschooling, early retirement, increase paid parental leave, increase paid vacation, promote part time work (e.g. working 4 days for 100% pay).
Once the totality of all these schemes costs the same as UBI, we can simplify it all be replacing the schemes with UBI.
was commenting on possible tax reforms.
I strongly prefer UBI to conditional programs that have overhead. I get that politics needs to keep us miserable and promise conditional bandaids to a constituency to maximize their power, and the crab mentality that something is promised “just for them” as politics as its always been, but that doesn’t seem to be winning, and oligarchist policies are much better funded and mediasplained.
I agree, but the best way to achieve that is to remove the conditional aspects IMHO.
Social security is already unconditional, you just have to reach the age, and it is the standard IMHO of what can easily morph into UBI by lowering and eventually abolishing the age threshold.
If everyone can get Medicare for free, then it’s just as universal and the means checks can be scrapped.
Same for education, if it’s free, the means checks can be scrapped. Although, in a globalized world, I think higher ed should be debt based, but the debt just gets cancelled after 10-20 years of remaining in country. Otherwise, you indirectly subsidize other countries.
That’s been my thoughts as well.
Eliminate income tax on anyone making less than, say 500,000 per year. Then aggressively tax wealth and those making more.
Is this a MASSIVE shake up? Absolutely! Would it likely be a bit messy? Definitely!
But we are at a point where such fundamental change is necessary
Damn it’s almost as if they’re debating in bad faith because they get money from their wealthy constituents
Does anyone have a link to the proposed amendment and the vote on it?
I believe this is regarding the proposed budget by the House Budget Committee.
Yeah, I just can’t seem to find their proposed amendments. Maybe because they weren’t considered or something? I’ll have to see if I can find the cspan section. I just want a snippet to show my family where Republicans are voting lockstep to protect wealthy people.
Awesome thank you so much!!
Party of the oligarchy, soon to be the one true party thanks to systemic failure of education in this country.
Answer: class warfare
We’ve been in a class war for the past few decades. But at least one of the classes doesn’t know/care that it’s happening.
That’s right. They’ve been killing us. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tq7SGQzeCEw
-
Xhitter
-
Blue check mark
🤢
-
It’s great that my taxes are going up so they can have even more.
The trick was seeing what was going on before trying to “teach the dems a lesson”. Now all you can do is ride the train and wait for endless lawsuits to playout with disingenuous participants
Nixon was already impeached by now
Now all you can do is ride the train and wait for endless lawsuits to playout with disingenuous participants
There is a lot more you can do. Stop being defeatist. This kind of attitude got us into the train wreck that is 21st. Century US in the first place. And not accepting the oligarchy presenting you two flavors of oligarchy to vote between is part of what needs to be changed.
there’s a lot more you can do
It’s nice that you listed exactly zero things to do. Go tell Musker you don’t accept him running all branches of government and having your info on his private servers, see how that works out for you. I’m not making excuses to do nothing (or being defeatist) or telling people not to participate in politics, but the US has a king atm
https://feddit.org/post/8324898
Consumer boycotts, blocking plants, demonstrations…
Good luck with those. You don’t seem to understand what a king is.
I fucking love the new defeatist approach. What makes you think you can do anything for the next 4 years that isn’t just stopping them?
Ok I stopped being a defeatist, now what?
They probably want to avoid to tax themselves?
According to Wikipedia at least, there are no members of Congress who even have a net worth over $500 million: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_members_of_the_United_States_Congress_by_wealth let alone an annual income that high.
So I think it’s that they’re beholden to their donors, as usual.
It’s not like they want to be taxed in the incoming years anyway, or their families, or their friends and donors. At this point it’s the principle what they defend.
There’s like 10 people in the entire fucking world making more than 500 mil a year.
More like 700 in the US alone.
https://www.forbes.com/advisor/retirement/how-many-billionaires-and-millionaires-live-in-the-u-s/
700 people having a net worth of over a billion and 700 people making half a billion a year are very different.
Dividends for some of those billionaires can pay out over 500mil easily. Hide money however they want, we need a wealth tax no matter how it’s sliced.
I’ve been saying it.
Every year, we should take the wealthiest person and reclaim 50% of their assets. Congrats, you’ve scum sucked enough blood out of people, we’re taking 50% of it back. We’ll build a “This year’s biggest winner” statue in your honor with some of the funds.
I like the cut of your jib.
Make the size of the statue inversely proportional to the number of people employed by those assets.
also prevent people from getting that rich in the first place. new tax brackets: 50% for every dollar over a million. 75% for every dollar over 10 mil. 90% over 50mil. and 100% over 100mil. congrats that’s the high score. maxed out.
also make ALL INCOME to count as income, not just direct payment.
