You’re a free gibber. You are part of the problem. This country has too many free gibbers.
What will they do?
Posts
Total:
89
A top tax rate of 60% on income over 1 million would reduce the deficit and eventually lead to a surplus.
AI debunked this.
It’s highly unlikely that a top tax rate of 60% on income over $1 million alone could possibly generate an extra $2 trillion in revenue. Here’s why:
- Current Revenue from High-Income Tax Brackets: High-income earners already contribute a significant portion of income tax revenue. Even with a 60% rate, the marginally increased revenue generated from the income over $1 million will not be nearly enough to close a $2 trillion deficit. The exact amount of the shortfall depends on the income distribution and the response of high-income earners.
- Diminishing Returns: As tax rates increase, there is a diminishing return on additional revenue. High earners historically have engaged in tax avoidance or evasion, and reduced their income to avoid higher taxes. This could limit the actual revenue generated by a higher tax rate.
- Economic Impact: Higher tax rates will have negative effects on economic growth to some degree, reducing overall tax revenues when high-income earners invest less or work less. This unintended consequence offsets the revenue gains from the higher tax rate.
- Revenue Elasticity: Tax revenues historically are not linearly proportional to tax rates. The response of high-income earners and the economy can cause actual revenue increases to fall way short of projections.
- Devaluation of the dollar: High earners might shift substantial portions of their wealth into cryptocurrency, which could lead to a devaluation of the dollar and undermine efforts to capture that wealth through taxation in American dollars.
In essence, while a higher tax rate on high incomes might increase revenue theoretically, it is unlikely to single-handedly generate an extra $2 trillion. Achieving that level of revenue would require a combination of increased taxes, broadening the tax base, and effective management of tax policy and economic factors. In reality, while increasing the top rate to 60% would likely generate significant additional revenue, it would not come close to covering a $2 trillion deficit. The additional revenue might be in the range of $100 billion to $300 billion, but precise figures would depend on detailed analysis and actual taxpayer responses.
-->
@Greyparrot
As I've stated before.
National debt is a geopolitical farce.
Worldwide, there are only two tiny States that reputedly have no National debt.
That leaves about 190 or so, that are in debt.
So Planet Earth is in debt to what?
-->
@zedvictor4
Entropy and inflation.
-->
@Greyparrot
All a part of the game.
-->
@zedvictor4
All a part of the game.
The game of Life, ---ergo the standard of living--- being played out within economic systems subjected to rise / ( boom } and falls \ { bust } that, are dependant on energy market of water, minerals etc for 8 billion plus humans using operations, that, are systemically non-sustain-able.
>>>>>>> entropy >>>>>
..................* I *...............
<<<<<< syntropy <<<<<<
In essence, while a higher tax rate on high incomes might increase revenue theoretically, it is unlikely to single-handedly generate an extra $2 trillion.
Ya genius, that’s why there are other things listed to raise revenue
Increase the capital gains tax
A wealth tax (for rich people who don’t earn much new income)
A higher inheritance tax, for when rich people die and pass on their wealth to their children
eliminate the carried interest loophole for private equity managers
Bring back the tax on short term stock trades
Return the corporate tax back to 35%
The Republicans 2017 Tax Law cost 2 trillion over 10 years. The above tax law changes would have much more impact to the national budget.
You’re a free gibber. You are part of the problem. This country has too many free gibbers.
What a moron. You make up your own stupid terms.
Gib. What a moron
You have such a tiny income you pay no federal income tax. You are a free rider
-->
@sadolite
The issue is that America's economy is centered and built around debt. It's a massive structural issue. Americans take loans and debt for just about everything, it's a debt based economy and society. Debt, usury, and interest runs America.
The only 2 ways to fix it are severe austerity policies that would severely tank America's living standards and economy beyond repair, or seizing the means of production and ending the globohomo neoliberal capitalist world order that America helps enforce. The first option won't succeed because even if you manage to have a successful and mathematically sound plan for repayment, you're not going to change the habits and culture of America's debt based society. Doing so itself would be expensive. Americans won't ever seize the means of production either, they're brainwashed into corporate bootlicking consumerism.
Since none of those are ever going to happen, America's collapse is imminent.
The issue is that America's economy is centered and built around debt
Any economy that doesn’t leverage debt to grow is doomed to be teeny tiny. What’s critical is to have the appropriate amount of debt.
You probably think you should save all the money to buy a house for cash. That is not realistic. A manageable mortgage is a more reasonable option.
IWRA works for a bank confirmed.
Harris campaign officials said they would point to President Joe Biden’s most recent budget proposal as an indicator of Harris’ future fiscal policy plans. That budget, released in March, calls for about $3 trillion in deficit reduction over the next decade, largely by raising taxes on corporations and high earners.
Its amazing how people still think taxing will address a debt so huge it can never be addressed. It is a proven fact default is a 100% certainty no matter how much you tax those who actually create wealth.
-->
@FLRW
AI debunked this. Stop lying to the AI about taxes and debt.
-->
@FLRW
$3 trillion in deficit reduction over the next decade
What a joke, we run 2 trillion dollar deficits yearly. Under Biden, we would have 17 trillion additional debt instead of 20 trillion...... big whoopsie doodly doo.
3 trillion/10 is 300 billion...nowhere near enough to cover the yearly deficit of 2 trillion.
-->
@Greyparrot
in 2020 Trump had the highest Debt/GDP ratio in the history of the USA.
You went to Trump University, flew on Trump Airlines, drank Trump Vodka, read Trump Magazine, and ate Trump Steaks didn't you before they all went broke?
-->
@FLRW
Stop shaming AI for debunking your "we can tax our way to prosperity" fantasy lore.
3 trillion/10 is 300 billion...nowhere near enough to cover the yearly deficit of 2 trillion.
Marxist Propaganda may work on idiots, but not on math.
-->
@FLRW
17 trillion extra debt over 10 years under Biden and we live like shit
or 24 trillion extra in debt with Trump and we get to party.
I'll go with option B
-->
@Greyparrot
17 trillion extra debt over 10 years under Biden and we live like shitor 24 trillion extra in debt with Trump and we get to party.I'll go with option B
Its better to borrow more money today so you have less later. You can even borrow lots of money, spend it all, then you can buy a gun and kill yourself so you dont have to pay it back. I am not encouraging suicide tho.
-->
@Best.Korea
Exactly. If you know the Titanic is going down, might as well enjoy it.
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Any economy that doesn’t leverage debt to grow is doomed to be teeny tiny. What’s critical is to have the appropriate amount of debt.
You are stupid if you can't tell the difference between strategically using some debt to grow, and having an economy that's completely centered around debt and fractional reserve banking.
-->
@Greyparrot
IWRA works for a bank confirmed.
Liberals love sucking up to massive banks and megacorporations. They are pawns of the elite.
-->
@triangle.128k
Liberals love sucking up to massive banks and megacorporations. They are pawns of the elite.
what's funny is that the corporate oligarchy clearly coopted the skin of Marxism/wokism and somehow pulled it off with the uninformed electorate.
Propaganda machine go brrrrr
ESG was all about jumping that shark for the few left unconvinced.
-->
@Greyparrot
If you know the Titanic is going down, might as well enjoy it.
Omg, we are all on Titanic and we are slowly sinking.
Its like when you realize that your only purpose in life is to die and become food for other species just so that pointless circle of life can continue.
Still, I think I can ask my dad Satan to help us out.
-->
@Greyparrot
Propaganda machine go brrrrr
brrrrr
-->
@triangle.128k
IWRA is an airline captain and makes 30k a month working 6 days a month.
Liberals love sucking up to massive banks and megacorporations.
Nonsense. Democrats were the ones who wanted to regulate banking in the wake of the Financial Crisis of 2008.
Republicans resisted. Republicans are the party of deregulation. Senator Phil Gramm wrote the bill to repeal Glass/Steagall banking regulation from the Great Depression.
The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLBA), (ALL REPUBLICANS) also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, (Pub. L.Tooltip Public Law (United States) 106–102 (text) (PDF), 113 Stat. 1338, enacted November 12, 1999) is an act of the 106th United States Congress (1999–2001). It repealed part of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933, removing barriers in the market among banking companies, securities companies, and insurance companies that prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and an insurance company.
Nobody mentally unstable enough to get banned from a chat site likely has a job with consequence.
They would have gotten banned from that kind of job at the first uncontrolled outburst.
-->
@sadolite
It is a proven fact default is a 100% certainty no matter how much you tax those who actually create wealth.
It’s a proven fact that someday the sun will burn out too.