| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
techno900
Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 4161
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 8:13 am Post subject: |
 |
|
mac said: | Quote: | | Techno--If you want to post biased articles on taxes, and you come from a state that is a welfare state--that is, it takes far more from the Federal government than it pays in-- you should probably expect some push back. |
In a nut shell:
| Quote: | Joseph Henchman is vice president of legal and state projects at the Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan organization dedicated to tax policy. He explains that there are several factors that affect how much bang each state gets for its tax buck.
"On the revenue side, the biggest driver is the federal income tax, which is a very progressive system," says Henchman, referring to the fact that earners are taxed at higher rates as their income increases. "So in places with higher incomes — California and New York — they're putting a lot more into the system. On the spending side, there are a lot of federal programs to help low-income people. So, if your state has a lot of low-income people, you tend to be a net recipient."
There isn't a formula as to how much federal money each state gets. Henchman points out that more than 75 percent of the federal budget comprises Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, social programs like food stamps and defense spending. Social Security is technically a trust fund and not "aid." The rest of the money allocated to a state depends on the income of the people living there, whether military bases or defense contractors are located there, plus how good its politicians are at bringing home the pork. Eighty percent of federal revenue comes from income tax and payroll taxes.
Henchman is a Californian himself and understands why his Golden State neighbors grumble about subsidizing federal aid programs in other states. For one thing, large amounts of federal spending allow red state governments to keep their taxes artificially low. The highest individual state income tax rate in Mississippi and Alabama in 2016 was 5 percent, while top-earners in California and New York paid 13.3 percent and 8.82 percent respectively.
Part of the problem is a far-off federal government trying to legislate one-size-fits-all solutions in states and localities with different needs. And, some argue, this redistribution helps to level the playing field for all citizens regardless of which state they live in. |
https://people.howstuffworks.com/which-states-give-the-most-the-federal-government-which-get-the-most.htm
So Mac, what's your resolution to your perceived unfairness? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17748
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 10:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Boy, how many times have I seen this movie? “Conservative” posts something from an unreliable or biased source. Someone posts multiple problems with the posting. “Conservative” seizes one element to divert from the rest, which he ignores. The Trump playbook. Substitute outrage for reasoning.
My solution? Keep South Carolinians in South Carolina. Been there, done that, won’t go back. I’m willing to subsidize them staying there and living in a made-up reality. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
techno900
Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 4161
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 10:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
if you had any balls, you would point out what is false in the article that I posted, but you dodge the issue by knocking the, as you state: "unreliable or biased source". Any 10 year old can respond in like, but the so called "critical thinking" that you claim suggests that you would debate the points that you see as biased or false. No way will you open that door, because you are just an egotistical blow hard.
Why no response to my question? "So Mac, what's your resolution to your perceived unfairness?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17748
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Your question is a diversion. I posted a number of fallacies in the article you posted--which you ignored. You'd rather invent positions for people than actually try to understand them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
techno900
Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 4161
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 2:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mac said: | Quote: | | Your question is a diversion. I posted a number of fallacies in the article you posted--which you ignored. You'd rather invent positions for people than actually try to understand them. |
Would you like to point out "a number of fallacies" that you claim is in your post below. To me the number looks to be ZERO.
Mac's reply to my posted article: | Quote: | Boy, how many times have I seen this movie? “Conservative” posts something from an unreliable or biased source. Someone posts multiple problems with the posting. “Conservative” seizes one element to divert from the rest, which he ignores. The Trump playbook. Substitute outrage for reasoning.
My solution? Keep South Carolinians in South Carolina. Been there, done that, won’t go back. I’m willing to subsidize them staying there and living in a made-up reality. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17748
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'll repeat myself for those who don't bother to read or understand.
| Quote: | I’m never really surprised about how folks restrict their consumption of information to sources that will reinforce their biases. Like the tax foundation:
https://www.politifact.com/personalities/tax-foundation/
Indeed, the difference between the highest rates is not minor—when multiplied by the numbers of people in those brackets. There is a huge payment to the very rich—and I don’t expect Techno to calculate it, or even think about it.
The second flaw is that this limited—and biased—commentary ignores the overall fiscal context. The current tax cuts, and the Bush tax cuts, are being funded by very large deficits. Since the federal government is a much better bet to loan money to than you or I or any Trump business, their participation drives many things. It limits other things we can do—infrastructure for one—that might create more wealth and more equtable wealth, and it sets the interest rates n real markets.
More fundamentally, deficit spending fuels inflation, which works in the economic system as an essentially invisible tax. That tax is being paid by today’s consumers—and by tomorrows citizens. Thus the deficits are exacerbating inequality—and stealing from our children. It is a large transfer of wealth to those who already have wealth.
Finally, what this comment and Isobars comment ignore is the implications of difference businesses. While the argument Iso makes that consumers ultimately pay taxes in the price of products is correct, that is not necessarily a bad thing. Take shipping petroleum, through ports or through pipelines on public property. If the tax system does not capture the true costs—including opportunity costs—of those services, the federal government has subsidized those businesses. The lower price that results can skew the market away from products that require less services. Although nominally invisible—especially to those who don’t exercise their critical thinking muscles—the effect is that the government picks winners and losers.
Most of this used to be obvious to conservatives. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17748
Location: Berkeley, California
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
techno900
Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 4161
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 10:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
mac said: | Quote: | | I'll repeat myself for those who don't bother to read or understand. |
Nice dodge, you still haven't identified any element of the story that I posted that you feel is incorrect or biased.
The critical thinker should simply cut and paste the perceived incorrect statement and offer a rebuttal. Too simple? Give it a try. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17748
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 12:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| techno900 wrote: | mac said: | Quote: | | I'll repeat myself for those who don't bother to read or understand. |
Nice dodge, you still haven't identified any element of the story that I posted that you feel is incorrect or biased.
The critical thinker should simply cut and paste the perceived incorrect statement and offer a rebuttal. Too simple? Give it a try. |
Nice dodge. No response, again, to my comments about the flawed argument. Typical. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
techno900
Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 4161
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I like the way you dance when cornered. You can simply do as I suggested and come out a winner. But since you can't, we all know that you are more BS than rational thinking.
If you want me to comment on the "flawed argument", please be precise in your request. Cut and paste the segment of the story you are referring to and then post your counter argument. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
Search
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Register
