US Politics Megathread

[fightinfrenchman]

Amy Klobuchar 2020

Good. She supports a large increase in minimum wage.

Literally whatever helps a Democrat get elected I will support

[Mr_Bramboy]

Actually, it's good for low-income people to lose hours

Do you think Obamacare is a good policy?

We don’t need illegals freeloading off the government. We have plenty of able-bodied Americans who already fill that role. #buildthatwall

[deleted_user0]

Amy Klobuchar 2020

Good. She supports a large increase in minimum wage.

Literally whatever helps a Democrat get elected I will support

Americans and politics =_= Arendt must be turning around in her grave!

[Horsemen]

Wow, 2020 is a long ways away

Volunteer for the Telethon

I'm already putting together my donation for Telethon 2021!

[fightinfrenchman]

Show hidden quotes

Amy Klobuchar 2020

Good. She supports a large increase in minimum wage.

Literally whatever helps a Democrat get elected I will support

Americans and politics =_= Arendt must be turning around in her grave!

There is no Democrat running or expected to run who could be worse than Trump

[momuuu]

I just wanted to say that $15 minimum wage is really high, even for European standards I think. I don't know if that'd be a good change. It might be better to look at increased taxes first?

[Goodspeed]

Yeah it seems high. Lower taxes on low incomes and higher taxes on higher incomes sounds like a much cleaner solution to me. Small business wouldn't be losing money and people making minimum wage will still see their purchasing power increased.

[Dolan]

A flat tax system is the fairest, imo. Same conditions and requirements for everyone. Clear rules, simple to apply, less costs to apply tax regulations, nondiscrimination and equitability. I don't see why should people who earn more be punished for that. It incentivises them to seek ways to dodge taxes and to hold a grudge to governments and to people who are taxed less.

[Goodspeed]

You can argue that a flat tax system is the only fair one, but the advantages of a progressive tax system (mainly in greatly increasing tax revenue and reducing financial inequality) are too great imo. Easily worth it. The financial system is built on the assumption that money is spent; poor people spend all their money, rich people don't. And one could argue that as the government, it's your responsibility to take care of the little guy even if only to maintain stability in your country.

It directly solves so many problems, it just seems impossible to pass up on to me.

[n0el]

Yeah it seems high. Lower taxes on low incomes and higher taxes on higher incomes sounds like a much cleaner solution to me. Small business wouldn't be losing money and people making minimum wage will still see their purchasing power increased.

Sure. Good luck trying to get that passed. 15$ min wage is an easy target and one pass bill that updates existing law and has been done many times throughout history. Like I said, 15$ is a starting number, it wouldn't ever pass as such, more like 11-12$ which is probably where it should be looking at inflation and other maths.

[Goodspeed]

Is it really that hard to pass? Your tax system is already progressive, it's just a matter of tweaking the numbers. I'm pretty sure it's extremely popular among the people at least. Seems like something to campaign on for whatever democrat wins the nomination in 2020.
But if it's unrealistic and a minimum wage increase somehow is realistic, they have my blessing.

[n0el]

Sure, its super popular, but the problem is we are nearly an oligarchy and both parties are owned by the oligarchs. AOC floated a 70% top marginal rate, polling shows like 75% support, and the corporate media and even her own party is blasting it.

[Goodspeed]

A minimum wage hike faces the same issue. In fact you just made the point that the 15$ min wage wouldn't pass and the number would need to be negotiated. Why is that not possible for the tax rate? Oligarchs are surely also unhappy with a minimum wage hike.
With a democratic president in 2020 and possibly a dem controlled senate as well, the party would control all 3 branches. Surely if they can find a way to increase minimum wage they can find a way to increase the top tax rate, if not to 70% then something lower. I don't believe the USA is so far gone that it couldn't pass a single piece of legislation that oligarchs aren't completely on board with. Obamacare made it through, no?

[Dolan]

the advantages of a progressive tax system (mainly in greatly increasing tax revenue and reducing financial inequality) are too great imo.

You can get the same amount of revenue with a single, common tax rate for all contributors. And since such a system would be the fairest of all taxation systems, there would be more incentives for not dodging taxes too. If nobody feels they are unfairly taxed, there are fewer reasons to think it's worth trying to dodge taxes. Many tax dodgers usually use this argument that they are compelled to avoid taxes simply because they feel unfairly targeted by governments. And the end result of progressive taxation schemes is that, paradoxically, the rich, who have access to global networks of financial assets transfers and cross-border legal arrangements can employ expensive lawyers who can bring their owed taxes close to zero. So, by having higher rates of taxation for the rich, you aren't really collecting more, but you might be driving some contributors away from paying their dues to the public system.
Who decides how much financial inequality is good enough and how much is detrimental? And based on which criteria?

The financial system is built on the assumption that money is spent; poor people spend all their money, rich people don't.

The financial system is not really built on any assumption, it simply exists as a result of economic exchanges. Whether they're rich, average-income or poor, people can also save money, which removes currency from the economic circuit. It's money that ends up not being spent. Sure, there's gonna be a lot of variability in terms of how much people can afford (or are willing) to save money. But you cannot make any assumptions on how much money they have the right to spend or to save. Someone rich might want to spend, save or invest all of their spare income. Pretty much what Amazon, as a company does: instead of giving out dividends to their shareholders or sitting on a huge pile of cash (both of which are taxable revenue), they'd rather re-invest most of their profit.
I'm sure that if this was an argument in favour of taxing the rich more, many of them would choose (as they already are doing) to keep reinvesting that profit, to make sure they pay as low taxes as possible.

And one could argue that as the government, it's your responsibility to take care of the little guy even if only to maintain stability in your country.

Or you could provide the little guy with the means to take care of himself, instead of trying to babysit your citizens.

It directly solves so many problems, it just seems impossible to pass up on to me.

It doesn't really. If it did, everyone would be using only progressive taxation schemes. But they're not, simply because taxation systems can work in many ways, producing similar results. There's no magic bullet that solves all problems with tax avoidance, humans will be humans and will still try to game the system in any fiscal context, no matter how fair the rules were. But that doesn't mean all solutions are equally bad or effective at keeping tax avoidance levels down.

[Goodspeed]

I'm not interested enough in this discussion to go in depth. The topic has been discussed to death, we both did our research and drew opposite conclusions, so be it.
I think this list speaks for itself though.

[Dolan]

The flat tax is used in some US states too. You forgot to post the next section:



Some of those countries have had some of the highest GDP growth rates during the last few years (Romania 7% in 2017, Turkmenistan 6.5%) or rates of growth above those of more developed states (Estonia 4%, Hungary 3.2%, compared to France 1.6%, Germany 2.1%, UK 2.1%).

What does this prove in itself? Not much really, because there are many factors which can contribute to economic growth and these tax levels only cover one single aspect of taxation: direct taxation of income or profit. But there are other components of taxation, some of which are direct (such as social security contributions) or indirect (consumption taxes, excises and duties). So, again, in and of itself a taxation system is no silver bullet to any particular outcome in terms of economic development. You can use either a progressive or flat tax system and get the same level of public revenue. The question was whether a progressive taxation system is actually fair and I think you'd have a hard time arguing that people who work harder and make more money need to be taxed more. We're not only talking about the super-rich here but also, say, software engineers who make half a million a year thanks only to their hard work and knowledge. A progressive taxation system would take more money from such a high-pay worker who lifted himself/herself up based on his own efforts, in order to reward drunkards and lazy people who don't bother with education much and lack the work ethic to lift themselves up through hard work.

[Goodspeed]

The question was whether a progressive taxation system is actually fair and I think you'd have a hard time arguing that people who work harder and make more money need to be taxed more.

I wouldn't and neither would the thousands of politicians who argued for progressive tax systems - which are used in almost every first-world country - in the past.
I think your view of poor people as lazy, drunken fools is... foolish. Of course they exist, but there's also Trump for example. High pay does not necessarily equal hard work, and the opposite is even further from reality.

[spanky4ever]

I have a hard time to grasp why US ppl seem to think 15 dollar minimum wage is high, in a country that is the wealthiest on earth, both now and probably in all time past Seems to me ppl are totally brainwashed, thinking this level of reducing the gap between rich and poor, are to high. That is pretty mindblowing to me.
Btw, if a business cannot pay their workers a livable wage, then that business should cease to exist, and give room for other businesses that can!

[n0el]

You could make a sound argument that having more money, which means having more property, etc... means needing more government resources and thus you should pay more. You can also make an argument that because of diminishing marginal utility of wealth, that progressive taxation makes sense. In most cases, economists of both conservative and liberal leaning agree progressive taxation makes sense.

[fightinfrenchman]

If nobody feels they are unfairly taxed, there are fewer reasons to think it's worth trying to dodge taxes.

[fightinfrenchman]

I have a hard time to grasp why US ppl seem to think 15 dollar minimum wage is high, in a country that is the wealthiest on earth, both now and probably in all time past Seems to me ppl are totally brainwashed, thinking this level of reducing the gap between rich and poor, are to high. That is pretty mindblowing to me.
Btw, if a business cannot pay their workers a livable wage, then that business should cease to exist, and give room for other businesses that can!

The cost of living varies wildly depending on where you are. By passing this law, you may be putting people in poorer, rural areas out of a job.

[spanky4ever]

I have a hard time to grasp why US ppl seem to think 15 dollar minimum wage is high, in a country that is the wealthiest on earth, both now and probably in all time past Seems to me ppl are totally brainwashed, thinking this level of reducing the gap between rich and poor, are to high. That is pretty mindblowing to me.
Btw, if a business cannot pay their workers a livable wage, then that business should cease to exist, and give room for other businesses that can!

The cost of living varies wildly depending on where you are. By passing this law, you may be putting people in poorer, rural areas out of a job.

could it not also be the opposite of that, - when ppl in rural areas have more money to spend, they are not dependent on Government handouts, and they can afford to buy more stuff - raising the profit for small businesses? Poor ppl spend all their money into the economy, whereas rich ppl hoard the money and stack it away in Tax havens. That does not grow the economy As it is right now, to big part of the economy are passive, and not creating anything, but stagnation.
As far as I am concerned, your talking point is the right wing scary picture, the one they always give when there is talk about raising the minimum wage.

I wish there were no need for minimum wages though. In my country, there is no such thing. As far as I know, this is also the case for all the Nordic countries. Instead, we have workers unions. Much better, you should try it
(ups, you did, back before Reagen raged war on workers unions)

[fightinfrenchman]

I agree that rich people should be taxed more, but that's a totally separate argument. Also I was born in 1994 so don't blame me for things Reagan did

[spanky4ever]

I agree that rich people should be taxed more, but that's a totally separate argument. Also I was born in 1994 so don't blame me for things Reagan did

I just think its part of the problem with wealth inequality. The ppl who actually create wealth for rich ppl. - working their asses off on a wage its impossible to live on, is the other side of the coin imo.
On that slave wage, they are supposed to get childcare, healthcare, expensive medications, and, as I have understood the situation in your country; pay for really expensive housing. So I would also say that a single-payer healthcare system is a must. I am afraid that the candidate you favour for POTUS doesn't think so, and she is running on extending Obamacare. That will not do it, and most Americans realize that by now, thanks to Bernie Sanders who have hammered that message "home".
Most Americans also want to tax the rich, and as Noel mentioned above, about 75% of the ppl agree with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on a 70% tax on the top earnings above 10 million. Fox news is having a fit about it
I would think if you got rid off most of the loopholes in your tax system, the wealthy ppl would pay their fair share.
https://youtu.be/mQiMfPejP8c

[fightinfrenchman]

If these ideas are so popular Bernie would be president