My particular brand of tax cuts for the rich hasn't been tried yet!

tax is theft

and OP is a fag

>tax cuts for the rich creates jobs!

Taxation is theft

>Cred Forums is one person: the strawman

>Some people are bad with money while others aren't

That's a pretty stupid fucking reason to take more money from someone else.

>Cred Forums likes tax cuts for the rich though

Greece, in particular, also loves them.

spiegel.de/international/europe/wealthy-greeks-still-dodging-taxes-despite-crisis-a-864703.html

Raise taxes on the "rich" all you want, they still won't pay a dime because of the loopholes. All you're doing is screwing over that farmer that has land that is valued in millions but earns slightly more than an average salary per year.

pro tip ctr faggots- more tax is paid when the tax rates are lowered

I don't care. I'm a member of the growing faction that are voting soley for the supreme court appointees. There is no option but trump for those that value a conservative supreme court. There is no argument that will ever sway me, and there are many more that feel exactly the same way I do. I don't give a fuck what you don't like about trump, it is a non issue to me.

Tax cuts don't work unless they do some big expanding and even then smart business' would just hire bare minimum that keep the thing running so it is not the best solution to get more people employed.

Subsidies and funding means all of us pay for it and hope business' do the right thing, which more often than not does not happen.

Taxing them more drives them out of the country and causes outsourcing.

Except it has been tried, you literal fucking imbeciles, except you and the rest of your millennial CTR colleagues weren't born yet.

98% of the wealth in the country goes to an elite class of people
>some people are good with money, some aren't

That same elite class pays 90% of income taxes
>so unfair, you must be in intro to economics, dumbass

>the millionaire class needs my help! God forbid they have to pay a little bit more! Let me, Average Joe, run to their defense!

Lmao

I'll never understand how the rich were able to get the working and middle classes to shill for them

>Trump
>Conservative

Delusional

correlation is causation, thanks shill

>a little more
kek

Pro tip: blatantly false.

a flat rate of 0% yes sir

The millionaire class doesn't pay taxes, you brain-dead communist, no matter how much you raise them. They don't give a fuck if the taxes are 1% or 99%. They. Don't. Pay. Them. Get it now?

I swear to god, you're too stupid to live.

you tell them, comrade
the marxist neet dream lifes on in autistic wellfare quens!!
For Mother Russia!!1

>3 million people
>An "elite class"

You are obviously economically illiterate

>that fucking chart
oh no, it's retarded

It's troubling you, m8?

this is misleading because it only takes into account income taxes. There's a lot more consumption taxes which hurt the poorest the worst because it directly increases the price of goods and services. As well as corporate taxes which just get passed onto the consumer, which is also the poorest. It's particularly true for the USA

2001 had 9/11 which struck economy and then multiple wars where started.

2009 had the financial crisis which forced increased spending.

None of this had anything to do with "taxing the rich". Which, as every economic literate knows doesn't have any significant effect on tax revenue.

>laffer curve

your opinions --> discarded

Don't forget to mention that the Iraq War and the Housing Market Crash 2008 can both be traced back to the Bush administration.

So, what about the Clinton surpluses?

Clinton cut military spending big time. Not everyone was happy with the way he went about creating a 'surplus'

Wars fought on foreign soil are always economically adventageous

If taxing the rich doesn't increase tax revenue then explain the budget surplus following Clinton's tax increases for the rich

>spending doesn't exist
good boy

>Housing Market Crash 2008 can both be traced back to the Bush administration.
clinton was the one who signed the legislation that forced banks to loan to subprime candidates to stop """discrimination""" whilst promising to allow no harm to come to the banks if they fuck up
yeah, bush cucked it up too, but don't be a super cuck

...

Oh look, a chart without integers. How...lafferable.

Revenue was already rising before said tax cuts, according to the chart it didn't have any influence

...

>bush cucked it up

m.youtube.com/watch?v=GkAtUq0OJ68

He indeed did.

Care to look at some race statistics about your country, cuck?

We are further along the path of diversity than you are but don't worry you're fast catching up

>Tax cuts for everyone are bad cause a rich person will have extra money, better increase taxes on the middle class just to be safe.

US-user educate me please, does this policy looks simmilar to Hoover course during the Great Depression?

People here unironically think a poll tax is okay. Don't bother trying to actually discuss policy here.

I'm not saying that tax cuts are a bad thing.

I'm staying that top tax rates in the US have been cut and cut and cut, yet the economy is quite shit.

Pretty much

But people here will unironically argue that the New Deal prolonged the depression

Great point.

Didn't Hoover implement tariffs as well?

awesome shilling bro!

holy fuck you idiot
holding wages and prices fixed DID prolong the depression

No, it isn't that bad. Before the depression, federal spending was around three times as great as our tax revenue. Right now it's only a little bit higher than our revenue (so our budget is still unbalanced, but it's not catastrophic like before).

However, the recent decline of unions and union membership is troubling, because the same thing happened before the Depression.

Also, before the depression, there was a shitton of mergers, lots of small banks and companies failed and by 1929 only 200 companies controlled over half of the US economy. But right now, the number of corporations is growing, not shrinking - you might see some outlets that say it's shrinking, but that's only a certain class of corporations which are being re-classed en masse because a new tax in 1986 made it unprofitable to be taxed as a corporation and more profitable to be taxed at an individual level.

So in short, no not really. Unless things get a lot worse, say through huge spending programs combined with massive tax cuts, then we won't see it happen.

Got anymore Cred Forums fairy tales you'd like to tell?

I'm all ears
You alt-right nutters have me creasing

>Working model
>Laffer's curve

Kek, I can't believe, really.

Tax cuts by Regan, Bush, Thatcher and Howard led to higher overall taxes being paid by the rich. If you're an economic illiterate this will not make sense to you and you should not comment on it!

...

Classic Aussie shitpost

>this will not make sense to you

It doesn't.

>you should not comment on it!

Looks like I still did.

Says the guy who denies that the data shows that the New Deal prolonged the depression. Despite your denial there is a causal connection. Sad!

Which "the data"?

No, it didn't. At least not for Reagan. Reagan did the following when he was in office.

>Removed the Oil Windfall Profits tax, greatly lowering taxes on rich oil magnates
>Increased the payroll tax on Social Security and Medicare hospital insurance, costing the consumer more for their insurance
>Signed the Tax Reform Act of 1986 which cut the tax rate for the top bracket of individuals from 50% to 28%, and raised it from 11% to 15% for the poorest bracket; this act also ended up causing an economic crisis because of how it dealt with tax shelters

In 1984, the top one percent of income earners received 8.4% of national income, while in 1989 it increased to 13.5%.

And after all that? Federal revenue as a share of GDP actually FELL from 1981 to 1989. He raised taxes on the poor, cut them for the rich, and fucking lost money doing it.

Reaganomics was a fucking mistake. Bush should've never brought it back from the grave.

cut the taxes and people spend more

have appropriate nets and you'll catch it back in tax

...

I'd recommend New Deal or Raw Deal? but Rothbard and Mises both have great books on the great depression.

why do Drumpfkins hate the poor and worship the rich?

The fact remains that the rich payed a higher amount of taxes. Can't undo the facts!

>Rothbard and Mises

LMAO

We are in the presence of a bonafide ancap fellas

>Cred Forums
>alt-right
Pick one.
They lied to you again and you accepted it without question, what a shame. Also based on your post you haven't got a argument nor a rebuttal, if you are willing to post then one should be willing to backup ones beliefs wth factual truth. I'd suggest you stop posting and lurk more until you understand the etiquette of this imageboard.

Oh my, I don't see any argument to respond to in this post!

As opposed to your "read this extremely niche literature then get back to me" argument?

You're chatting bollocks m8

>I'd suggest you stop posting and lurk more until you understand the etiquette of this imageboard.

Lmao you need to get out more

Cred Forums dying would defo be good for ya

>posting net figures instead of percent of income
How misleading can you be?

less money stashed away in the government coffers is more money spent creating jobs
nice try retard

>hurr I have no rebuttal so I will tell him his website is dying

reddit is that way, be quick because it is dying.....

Ask NPR that's where I got it from

Which is also funded by your tax dollars lmao

Allahu akbar brother

This same crap is posted every day by some cuck from Germanistan. Pretty much just shit post the cock sucking fag. Nothing to see. The little bitch probably earns shekels for every post.

this is what trumptards actually believe

You realize there's no money "stashed away", right? We're spending more than we're making, there's nothing to stash

Well he's not wrong

Trumped up trickle down will fail

Dude you're that same Turkroach from last night collecting german gibs while calling Trump a welfare queen

>Trumped up trickle down
I'm gonna start using this unironically. It was so cringey seeing HRC say this on stage """off-the-cuff""" when she clearly rehearsed it for days. But now I realize that when saying it ironically it's funny, so when saying it ironically unironically it's a great way to troll.

It didn't work in the past because there was still no reason for them to do business in the country. Trump is forcing people to stay in the country if they want to do business here.

Well, in this case, if what is being analyzed is "tax cuts on the rich will create more jobs", then yes, that's exactly what the graph disproves. If posted without that statement, then you could claim that correlation isn't causation, but with that statement, it is correct.

It's more like tariffing their products to shit if they leave the US and take their business with them.

lol germany
>Mudslims are fucking my sisters right now, so you have to have them fuck your sisters too!

He is a mudslime

Nice argument, retard.

so obviously the solution is to steal more money from the middle class

this is what liberals actually believe

Your people are still being raped and beaten and you're sitting there like a little cuck

Compare crime rates around the world and you'll know that we're in a very good situation here.

>raising taxes on the super-rich is "stealing money from the middle class"

how does someone get this brainwashed?

You can't compare crime rates among different countries with different laws.

Our government is right now working very strongly on making things more shitty though. Imported niggers are committing tremendous amounts of assault and rape.

>higher taxes are good for you taxpayer!

>oh, lost you're job? well at least you're taxes only went up a little bit this year hehehe

Higher taxes on the super-rich that make up .1% of the population to pay for programs that benefit everyone is good, yes. You must be pretty cucked to argue against this, you're literally arguing against your own interests.

>putting taxes on the rich back where they used to be means everyone will lose their job!

Do you have a single fact to back that up?

>Do you have a single fact to back that up?

>V-Venezuela
>1930s Stalinism
>C-China under Mao!

If the rich have less money, there'll be more jobs for everyone!

>raising taxes back to pre-reagan levels = LITERAL GOMMUNISM

Yes, good goy. Tax cuts mean more revenue. We're not oligarchs, we're job creators, you need to protect us, goy!

Du dummer linker hurensohn. Fühlt sich gut an wenn ich mich erinnere wie ich betrunkene linke antifa schlampen in der goa club toilete vergewaltigt habe.

SAD!

Tax revenues as percentage of GDP stayed pretty constant in the US since Reagan.

Achmed bitte.

kike maymay only works on people who create literally nothing of value
ie usurers, rent-seekers, oil barons ect
go back to /leftypol/

Kleiner studenten pisser geh meine mama ficken du linke sau

Würde ja gerne, aber sie fickt nur Schwarze.

progressive taxation is a good thing

prove me wrong

protip: you can't

worked pretty well for socialism, didn't it?

Genau wie dein vater

Jaja, geh wieder saufen, Ronny.

The first decent meme to come out of CTR. Get your screencaps.

You don't have to be from /leftypol/ to realize Reaganomics was a bad idea, and reviving it was an even worse idea.

Reaganomics ballooned the national debt, turning us from the world's largest creditor to the world's largest debtor nation - even Reagan himself said he regrets the creation of all that debt. This happened again when Bush's tax cuts sought to mimic Reagan.
Economic crises followed Reaganomics such as the Savings and Loan crisis. And as we all know, economic crises followed the Bush administration as well.
Economic inequality rose at unprecedented rates as a direct result of Reagan's policies. The same occurred during Bush's term.

And yet for some reason, even though the facts contradict them, every Republican candidate since Bush has advocated for the same fucking policies. McCain did it, Romney did it, now Trump is doing it. Probably because it's an official party line and none of them are economics experts.

The fact is, supply-side economics is a load of horse shit. People act in their own rational self-interest, so if you cut taxes on the rich they're just going to use the cuts to accrue more capital for themselves. It doesn't benefit everyone.

>this fallacy again

Taking $5,000 from someone who makes $15,000 hurts a lot more than taking $1 million from someone who makes $4 million.

>shill
The American dream is the ultimate redpill.

You didn't make that wealth by yourself, our civilised society allowed you to. Cops protected you from thieves kidnappers and what note, laws made sure the contracts you agreed to were executed and education and other workers allowed u to hire people.

You owe to society, that's why you pay taxes nigger. Don't like it?
Move to Uganda and be a badass smart rich guy there.

Some of us were born into impoverished families because either our dad or mom or both died or whatever and we have to start from nothing, it's not that we are "bad" with money is that doesn't matter how good you are 10 dollars won't make u rich, while faggots like you probably inherited most of their fortunes and all I have to do is out ur money in a fund and sit on ur ass while pretending to be good with money

Says who. Work for your own money you socialist cunt

Says common sense.

Here, do you want me to give you $20k but I take 10% or do you want me to give you $20 million and I take half?

You can work this out, just do it slowly.

none. i don't take handouts like a fucking loser

The catch is NOBODY MAKES 4 MILLION BY HIMSELF
You're exploiting other workers.
b-but MUH ideas, we all drink from the same fountain.
You owe to other people too and so on.

>poorest americans no longer pay income tax (10-15%) on every check

trump is so bad, liberals truly are my greatest ally

completely asinine and false
read a fucking book you dumb nigger
>>>/leftypol/

Hes from the pathetic wanna be Cred Forums clone "krautchan". Mostly leftist antifa "comunists" that grew up in a "einfamilienhaus hälfte" (one house split in two shared by two families, never missed a warm meal, never worked a day in his life and studied Germanistik, law or the german gay and light (first term you lern to use ms office, i shit you. not) version of computer science (infomatik)

The poorest Americans never attributed to tax revenue anyways. Only 35% of Americans contribute more in taxes than they cost.

>point
.
.
,
.
,
.
,
.
.
,
.
,
.
,
.
,
.
>trump's balls
>your head

You realize if you make $15,000 you don't pay any income taxes, right?

You don't understand. He is still angry because he's a looser and still wants to TAKE away money from someone that worked HARDER then him to earn it.

It really didn't. The later half of the war for Germany was spent scowering Europe for gold bullion. Socialist Germany worked for those few years before the war because they emptied out the German gold reserves.

>What are sales tax...
>What are tobacco and alcohol taxes
>What are licence fees
>What are property taxes.

Enjoy the last years of comfortable first world quality of life, globalisation and outsourcing will mean that the wages in the first world will stagnate as it is happening already while the developing world will see an increase in wages and manufacturing jobs, which will result in a world wide middle class, we'll see if you advocate for tax breaks for the rich by then.
As commentator Jim Hightower has aptly been noting for years, most of our super rich were born on third base and think they hit a triple.
Most billionaires in the world inherited most of their fortune or started as 1% even those that claim to be self made had a head start, just like trump.
Enjoy being a wagecuck and paying for ur boss second yacht he sure needs that third Lamborghini too just for when he gets tired of his Ferrari, but you know the American Dream is alive an all that.

>Says who.
says logic, you retard

The amount of money needed to achieve your everyday needs per year, even with some luxuries, is far below a million dollars. Talking $1m per year from someone who makes $4m (a 25% rate) is way less harmful because in the end they still made 3 million dollars, more than they could possibly spend on things they need. Meanwhile, someone who makes 15k per year is probably already struggling to make ends meet.

Not to mention it's actually cheaper for the taxpayer, too. Remember, the more you tax poor people, the less money they'll have to survive with, and if they lose enough money they'll have to/be eligible to apply for welfare and other social programs that COST money.

>if someone makes a lot of money they must have worked hard to get it
I don't get why you people always assume this. Most rich people make money off of money that was handed to them, through inheritance. It's just another kind of handout. The rest of them make money off of corporations, which run on the back of thousands of poorer people.

I'm not denying some people have made their fortunes on hard work but let's not kid ourselves and say all rich people are just hard workers and there's no such thing as aristocracy in America.

I can tell you have not a drop of disgusting franco blood in you. Well done sir

>Cops protected you from thieves kidnappers and what note, laws made sure the contracts you agreed to were executed and education and other workers allowed u to hire people.
>You owe to society, that's why you pay taxes nigger.

/thread

I think his point is that even though those taxes do exist, they're pointless because the money the government earns from them is just funneled back into social programs to subsidize the poor people who pay said taxes, and then some, meaning that if the gov't just never levied those taxes in the first place, they could potentially have room to cut spending and it'd actually have a positive effect on the budget.

I'm not so sure that would be true but that's what he meant, I think. Most people especially in lower brackets cost more than they contribute because of social programs. Consider that lots of people who work minimum-wage jobs actually earn so little that they qualify for welfare.

inb4 le ancap man comes to educate us about how public works aren't necessary and all taxation is theft

>poorest american never attributed to income tax

Eh, not even that would be true since medicare, social security, etc.

I can trace my lineage back to a bunch of british slags lookin for a bit of a shag in the rump from Canadian settlers (google King's Daughters)
I am as eternal as it gets.

Do you realize arguing that the lowest earners should pay more and the highest should pay less is asinine, right?

Most Americans receive more back over their lifetime than they contribute.

tax a theft

A poor fuck like you is not really in the possition to judge if or how hard someone that actually IS RICH worked for it. Keep telling your self that they must have gotten it for free because im way smarter and look at me i cant get rich so they must have gotten it in a undeserving way.

Guess what, maybe you just aren't as Smart as you thought. Im think that your bankaccount is a pretty good reflection of your brainpower.

Entitled low iq nohope loser.
Stop working with your back and counting the miles you ran in your hamster wheel and start using your head instead and maybe if you are cut out for it by Genetics (brainpower, workethic, alphaness,stamina,creativity,strategic thinking) you will make some cash.

Until then Own your failure in life and stop begrudging people their hard earned cash.

Or the strict libertarian who believes we don't need regulatory agencies because companies would totally not put lead in children's toys or leak chemical byproducts into the local water supply.

I'd hope so.

Otherwise we'd have a very broken society.

>implying tax cuts for the rich dont/didn't work

Stay brainwashed retard

>buying into their narrative at the get-go
wow you've already lost the argument
Trump's plan is tax cuts for everyone, not just the rich

British political party calls Hillary Clinton ‘Islam’s whore’

investmentwatchblog.com/ouch-british-political-party-calls-hillary-clinton-islams-whore/

Clinton Campaign Cancels Joint Events With Bernie Sanders

breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/10/02/clinton-sanders-split-campaign-trail/

Clinton Campaign Admits Hillary Used Same Tax Avoidance "Scheme" As Trump

zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-02/clinton-campaign-admits-hillary-used-same-tax-avoidance-scheme-trump

>sage

>you aren't rich, so you don't get to have a say in government

Are you literally, unironically, advocating for oligarchy? How old are you? Seriously, have you ever studied history, or economics, or anything at all?

>these are the people advocating supply-side economics

Right now the US government is spending more than it's making. If Trump is suggesting tax cuts all around, how exactly is he going to both 1. Pay for the wall, rounding up and deporting immigrants, bolstering border security, and expanding the military and 2. Balance the budget? You can't lower revenue, spend more, and expect to balance the budget.

Is there some kind of secret source of money he's going to pull dollars from? Is there something he knows that we don't?

...

You do realize that spending cuts are a thing right? Enjoy your welfare check while it lasts, parasite.

Welfare spending on the non-elderly amounts to a whopping 2.5% of the US GDP. It's nothing.

But what exactly is he going to cut, that's what I'm asking. He must be looking to cut something but what is it?

By the way, welfare spending is barely anything in terms of GDP, so if that's his plan for balancing the budget he's sorely mistaken.

not to worry, i'm not a useless, lazy nigger. i made something of my life and work hard - nobody like this will struggle

>1. Pay for the wall
already explained
>rounding up and deporting immigrants,
devolve to states
>bolstering border security,
devolve to states
>expanding the military
cut waste
>2. Balance the budget
cut waste
fund the irs to collect more revenue
tarrifs

>hey wait a minute I didn't use that particular road over there or this particular school here, why do I have to pay taxes at all?!?!
You guys never fail to crack me up

Are you telling me there's no waste in the federal government? He's stated that he's going to audit the Pentagon. But I'm sure there's no money to be found there. Better raise taxes again, that'll fix it.

>thinking they'll pay high taxes as long as loopholes exist.

This is why you aren't working in business

Never mind, I found the answer myself. He wants to trim the fat from the military without reducing its capability, which is good and seems realistic. But he also apparently wants to abolish the entire EPA and Department of Education to save money.

Given that the EPA and DoE make up a really small part of the total amount of gov't spending, and have many tangible benefits for the average person, I don't really see that working out well.

. Pay for the wall
>already explained
Where was this explained? And please don't tell me "Mexico will pay for it", because they're not going to. No, invading Mexico is not an option.

>>rounding up and deporting immigrants,
>devolve to states
>>bolstering border security,
>devolve to states
Okay? Well I'm not sure what you mean by "devolve", but if you're suggesting "just make the states pay for it", that isn't going to work because the states are in the red too and they'll just not follow the directive or do it improperly if it means saving money. It wouldn't be the first time a state disobeyed the federal gov't because the feds were too weak to enforce the law - remember the shelter cities for illegal immigrants, or how pot is illegal on a federal level yet legal in many states?

You can't just pass the buck to the states and make the costs magically disappear, it doesn't work.

>>expanding the military
>cut waste

Okay fair enough.

. Balance the budget
>cut waste
>fund the irs to collect more revenue

There's not enough waste to cut.
Republicans want to abolish the IRS, not expand it.
Tariffs would increase revenue in the short term but tank the economy by stifling trade, so that's not on the table for anyone with a brain.

thanks for correcting the record

corporate tax rate in US is still almost double even socialist countries fuck off and die

Okay, so just close the loopholes and raise taxes back to reasonable levels. The fact is that both candidates advocate "closing loopholes" because it's a policy everyone can agree on. The difference is what will happen to the tax rate.

corporations aren't people so why should we tax them so much and encourage them to leave the country and keep their profits overseas

...

Because we don't need to pander to them in order to get them to "stay here".

The fact of the matter is that the US has all the power here, yet politicians keep saying we have to pander to corporations to keep them from leaving, or to bring them back.

Yet the US has the largest consumer base in the world. It is by far the most lucrative market to be in. There is not a single global corporation that could afford NOT to sell their products here. Their competitor would do so, and eclipse them quickly. That's the point of a free market.

We need to take advantage of that fact, the fact that we're an irresistible market, and tax corporations who want to do business here. Not cut taxes on them and decrease revenues for nothing.

...

>artificial financial equality is desirable

Kys commie

As opposed to the natural financial equality that inevitably arises from letting the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, right? :^)

I know you weren't reading in 1998, but he never said that in Time. If you really think otherwise, link the issue and page.

I'm not seeing anything from after 2015 about abolishing the Department of Education, and his official position is that he's going to expand education spending to allow more school choice.

What's stopping a company from setting up headquarters out of the country, and selling products to us? If taxes are higher than the cost of importing to the US, companies will import, and we'll get no taxes.

I love how your post has no mention of adding jobs to the country, which is what someone needs in order to be a consumer; or you want the rich to pay for welfare so that people can pay for goods, forever enslaving them to the corporations you so despise?

>monopolies and centralized corporate power are good

I'm a millionaire and I pay taxes. But my effective tax rate is like 26%. Probably should be higher if you ask me.

confirmed for being bullied on kc.

Poor get poorer of their own ineptitude and stupidity. People who don't fail at life shouldn't be burdened to support failures

@CTR91436656

>CTR faggots trying to use our memes

Kill yourself faggot

Out of patriotic duty Mr. Cuban?

→

It's almost like the more money you have the bigger the number would be regardless of percentage of tax cuts due to the overwhelming difference between someone who works part time at McDonalds and full time as a CEO for multiple companies.

T. Jean Calvin

>promises to eliminate tax loopholes
>wall street unites against him

gee its almost like lots of people are able to completely avoid a large number of federal taxes and don't want to be forced to pay them or something.

>Poor get poorer of their own ineptitude and stupidity.
This is what trumptards unironically, actually, truly believe. It's impossible to be living paycheck to paycheck unless you're stupid. In fact unless you're dumb, you never lose money at all. And all rich people must be smart, even if they inherited their money, or started with a small loan of one million dollars. They're all just geniuses, it's so obvious.

CTR slide thread sage

Everyone and his mother, including Clinton, promise to close tax loopholes.

Without mentioning which ones and the fact that they don't amount to that much at all.

time spent on Cred Forums is just for hell of it, amiright mckinsey?

>It's impossible to be living paycheck to paycheck unless you're stupid.

This is literally the case, you dumb cunt.

t. Puerto Rican from a peasant family now earning $80k/year

I loathe the fact that a chunk of my paycheck goes to supporting parasites like my aunt who live off of welfare

>Gubmint needs money
>Better take it from the people with no money! That'll show those poor fucks

Taxing people with more disposable income makes more sense. You don't finance the largest army in the world by nickle and dimeing Pedro and Jamal. God knows they won't just make up the cost by robbing good white people.

Do your part to make America great. You'll just spend the money at whole foods and on a 5th iPad for your spoiled whelps anyway.

>HURRR WHAT IS THE FEDERAL RESERVE

Simple minded idiots with simple minded arguments please fucking leave.

>THE ECONOMY WILL ONLY GROW IF WE STEAL ELON MUSK'S MONEY AND SPEND IT ON WELFARE

>I FUCKING HATE TECHNOLOGY

I'll just leave this here.

Why do leftists hate the poor and worship the rich?

So if a married couple has two kids, then they get laid off because of some financial crisis and they have to take minimum wage jobs which can't pay for childcare, rent, food, and heat and they have to choose from two of the above each month, it's their own fault?

Why, for not having psychic abilities that told them they were going to be laid off? Or were they just too stupid to choose to be born in a country with a decent minimum wage? Oh no wait, I know, they just forgot to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, right? I'll wait, this should be interesting.

The fact is there are poor people, and even though you don't have to face these tough decisions every day, some families do. Sure some of these people are just dumb fucks that got themselves into their own mess, but what if they're not? I guess we just let them and their children go hungry so they start looting and creating ghettos, that's fine.

Nimble America has deposited $0.25 into your account.

I like how everyone posting US unemployment statistics totally forgets to mention the massive influx of illegals over the past 20 years.

They shouldn't even be starting a family if they don't have substantial savings to carry them through a crisis until they get another job.

Oh okay, so if a middle class family gets hit by an economic crisis they should just deplete their savings to cover the loss. Yeah that's really healthy for our economy, let's have all our middle class and poor spend all their savings just to survive. Surely nothing will go wrong in the future.

No wonder the amount of Americans with no savings is rising.

You also realize that once that savings runs out they will have no choice but to either stop paying rent/heating bills/food bills, or to go on welfare, right? What you're advocating just leads to more people on welfare.

So you mea stealing my hard earned cash by = "dont get to have a say in government".
Entitled communist cunt.
Its my entrepreneurship, my ideas, my work and im free to make as much as cash as i want trough my own blood, tears and sweat.

Im not using the system, roads, government more then someone that makes 5$ an hour. Infact they use it probably more (foodstamp, government paid childcare, healthcare) and the only reason we cant tax them more is because the gov is paying it anyway.

Im for free mandatory labour for the government if you are getting free shit.

My cash is my cash and you freeloaders have no fuckig right to get it.

Thats the reason im not declaring most of my income, im paying just as much as you fucks but im earing over 400.000 a year. Looking at it i see no reason why i just carry dead wood. Fuck you

There was a massive increase from 1990 to 2008, but after that it fell and since then there's been no statistically significant change, so I'm not sure illegals have anything to do with recent unemployment trends.

>what is fannie mae and freddy mac

>financial crises happen to everyone all the time
>therefore you should be made to foot the bill

They can die of starvation for all I care. The people most affected by lack of welfare are niggers and spics to begin with.

(((pew)))

If you're middle or upper middle class you will be affected, you're being affected right now retard.
You would earn more and have more purchase power if it wasn't for globalisation and job outsourcing.

>>What is only 1 person going to prison throughout the entire thing
>>Mfw spent more money on BENGHAZI research than sending these greedy skypes to ass rape prison.

(((estimated)))

Thanks Obama.

but taxation is theft user

Slow down there, General Ripper. You realize that no one is "taking your money", right? That the MUH FOODSTAMPS MUH ENTITLEMENTS is a small percentage of the federal budget? In the US, for every dollar of tax income, about 65 cents is spent on care for the elderly, the military, and paying interest on debt. The GOMMUNISM HANDOUTS you're raving about make up less than 15%, and lots of those are things people in the working middle class or even YOU qualify for, like the EITC and the Child Tax Credit.

I understand not wanting to pay taxes but the fact is, our massive empire, our huge military, and their huge infrastructure can't survive on a tax rate made for poor people, in order to effectively fund them there has to be a higher tax rate on those who can afford to pay it. That means you. If you don't want to pay taxes and just greedily keep it all for yourself, fine, go ahead, but society will continue to crumble and the country will suffer for it.

>The people most affected by lack of welfare are niggers and spics to begin with.
I hope you know ((they)) just tell you this so you tie your hatred of other races to hatred of poor people.

The fact is that 12 million white people are also on welfare. Yes, niggers and spics are overrepresented of course, but the fact remains that a lot of poor people also happen to be white. To just put them on the same level as niggers in your mind is playing into the divide-and-conquer narrative they're trying to sell you.

I take small government and humble military ambition over the crap we got now.

Nothing greedy about keeping what you worked for. Even Years of guys like you pushing your poverty embracing guild culture wont change it.

People who support massive taxes on businesses hate technological and economic growth.

They want to see society stagnate.

They want your money to be in the hands of corrupt bureaucrats and well connected corporations than people like Elon Musk.

Fuck these wastes of life.
also trickle down economics was never even tried, reagan actually raised taxes and regulations, we've been living in a keynesian nightmare since 1971.

Tickle down economics, what a novel idea!
Sounds perfectly reasonable, I'm sure it will work.
It's not like it has ever been tried before right?

Trickle down economics is a leftist strawman argument.

It was never actually tried.

and leftists for some reason actually think it's STILL going on today.

When we have central banks basically running the economy, they're actually brainwashed to think we have "le trickle down"

fucking kill yourself

>It was never actually tried.
You sound like the commies. Holy shit this is hilarious, maybe you guys should put your heads together and come up with the ultimate economic theory, then "never try" it a few times to see how it works.

Holy fuck, you're only making 80k/year and you still have the balls to call other people welfare parasites TOP KEK

>You sound like the commies.
No I don't.

It was LITERALLY never tried.

mises.org/library/myths-reaganomics
inb4 >mises

You people support central banks printing trillions of dollars and then giving it to banks and corrupt corporations.

Literally fucking murder yourself.

Sure it wasn't.
That's why it is called Reaganomics, because it hasn't been tried under Reagan.

>Reaganomics

Little to none of the policies he advocated were actually applied, so it doesn't matter.

Do you have legitimate down syndrome?
Oh wait you're a leftist, I just answered my own question.

>Murray Rothbard
Ah yes, truly an unbiased and highly reliable source to give a balanced view of the issue, thanks. The guy who says "taxation is theft" surely has no dog in this race and is only presenting the facts.

m8 trickle-down was tried in many countries, it failed, get over it. It doesn't even work in theory, and it failed in practice. You don't have a leg to stand on.

They were applied and later on abandoned. Partially by Reagan himself..

>wealthy people owe more to society

>Little to none of the policies he advocated were actually applied, so it doesn't matter.

What policies of his were not applied?

>>Murray Rothbard
Are you saying he's lying?

>truly an unbiased
Nobody is saying he's unbiased.

Are you claiming he's lying?

Look up the claims he's making about these specific reagan policies. You'll see he's factually correct about them.

Sorry.

>it failed, get over it.
LOL

Why are you butthurt at the facts.

Trickle down isn't even a real thing, it's a liberal strawman argument.
What actually was tried was market liberalization.
Whenever this was tried it resulted in a massive boom for the middle class and poor in many countries worldwide.
Look at this graph. Why are you so butthurt?

>You don't have a leg to stand on.
LOL YOU LITERALLY GET YOUR POLITICAL IDEOLOGY FROM BILL MAHER'S STRAWMAN ARGUMENTS

AHAHAHAHAHAHA

>They were applied and later on abandoned.
No, they were not.
Very little of them were.
They might as well have not even happened.

Good point, OP.

And just so all you faggots know. Those tarriffs Donny wants are just fucking REGRESSIVE TAXES that will hit the poor more than the rich.
And good fucking luck bringing manufacturing jobs back when automation will take those jobs all anyway. And good luck losing the few export manufacturing jobs we have when trade wars happen. Stupid fucking protectionist bullshit will erode all our standard of living without providing any real benefit...

>tax is theft
don't you vote?

>What policies of his were not applied?
Read the article:
mises.org/library/myths-reaganomics

>Trickle down isn't even a real thing
holy shit, now he's not even implying it wasn't tried, but that it doesn't even exist, hahaha holy fuck what a clown

Look up horse and sparrow theory. Or better yet, read about Reaganomics because you clearly don't know about that either. You're just parroting talking Republican points that you heard about. There's no point trying to have a debate if you're totally uninformed.

What is the difference between what trump did and negative gearing?

It's perfectly legal and a perfectly legitimate business strategy

Fucking collectivists cucks lol.

...

Is that tax revenue as percent of GDP?

>holy shit, now he's not even implying it wasn't tried
I already proved it wasn't tried.
Do you have an argument.

>but that it doesn't even exist,
>BAAAAWWWWW WHY WON'T YOU ACCEPT MY STRAWMAN ARGUMENT AS FACT

Hahaha damn kid don't you have school tomorrow?

>You're just parroting talking Republican points that you heard about.
You're literally regurgitating garbage you heard from Bill Maher.

Reaganomics was barely tried and it has a very minimal effect on the economy good or bad.

You're the brainwashed waste of life that supports central banks printing trillions of dollars and giving it to banks and large corporations.

Seriously kill yourself.

>we le had le high taxes in the 1950s/60s meme

factually untrue

Taxes were actually lower than they were today.

It was much easier for the average person to start a businesses and SAVE MONEY.

High savings rate of that time was essential to the post war boom.

If people here can survive and shitpost all day with 9,000 neetbux a month then you can survive on 15,000 a month if you make the right decisions.

Oh okay, so now it was "barely tried". We're getting there, champ! Just move those goalposts a little more and you'll be within the bounds of reality.

The fact that delusional leftists think ANY policy which advocates lowering taxes is "LE TRICKEL DOWN" just shows how simple and brainwashed their minds are.

>Oh okay, so now it was "barely tried".
I already explained it was barely tried.
The net effect the very small amount of policies that were tried was negligible. It was never really tried.

Are you even listening?

Can you even respond to the rest of my post you drooling retarded central bank supporting turd?

lol

You had very few and less wealthy super rich up to the 1980s. Both income and wealth distribution were much more even.

I'd like everyone to keep as much of their money as possible rob and poor alike

>income taxes and how high thy are all the only determinate of job creation.

Stop Germany

>You had very few and less wealthy super rich up to the 1980s.
Actually up to the 70s when we got off the gold standard and started printing trillions of dollars and giving it to bankers, wall street and corporations.

All things delusional leftists like yourself support.

So your own image says that the rich paid an effective rate that was 25% higher in the 60s than they do today. Don't you think that resulted in the rich folks paying more of their fair share than they do today?

Obviously no one pays an effective tax rate of 91% when thats the highest bracket. Just like no one pays 39% today. I am a richfag and just got my tax returns back from my accountant (extensions). My effective rate is 19%. Of course, I will pay no more than I have to, but how is that fair that I pay less percent than an upper middle class guy working his ass off? I mean, I guess I shouldnt complain, but I got to admit, it makes me feel a little bit guilty that I pay less percent tax than folks that make much less than I do.

>Both income and wealth distribution were much more even.
Wrong.

When did I say that? I replied to the Canadian.

What was the benefit of the gold standard?

I dont believe that graph, desu

>So your own image says that the rich paid an effective rate that was 25% higher in the 60s than they do today.
They didn't actually pay that shit and it only applied to what would be adjusted for inflation literal billionaires.

You could be an adjusted for inflation multi-millionaire and pay very low taxes back then.

The adjusted for inflation billionaires that has to pay the higher amount normally used loopholes to get around paying it anyway.

Liberals that want "to go back to 1950s taxes" actually want millionaires to pay little tax and for millionaires to invest their fortunes back into the economy and into industry(which is what happened back then when the economy actually grew).

Where did you find that graph?

>obongo is incompetent look at all of our debt
>check out my new tax plan that would increase the debt by 5 trillion

kek, serious question trumpfags, how do you reconcile this?

The government was restricted in how much money it could steal from it's people.

Much higher savings rates for the middle class. Higher wages, lower prices.

Gold standard or basically some other form of sound money would literally be the answer to fix the economy and stop corruption.
But brainwashed leftists don't want it to happen.

But that's not what happened all. Taxes are at their very lowest today.

>piketty
So you believe some activist leftists over REAL economic data?

Stop spouting buzzwords that mask your incompetence.

What was the benefit of the gold standard?
Do you even know how money is created?

Hey man, I don't know how he got my number but 1917 is on the phone for you

Where did you find this graph?

But his tax cuts are for the poor. The rich are getting "tax cuts" which means a reduced tariff like everyone else. Except they aren't paying taxes right now thanks to 90's Clinton laws, so in reality it's actually a massive tax increase for them.

Your image says they paid effective rate of 31% vs 25% more recently. The rich were paying a very significantly higher share then. Maybe the 91% rate was a bit of a joke that no one paid, but there were other brackets much higher than top rate of 39% today....
I dont advocate for going back to the 50s set up. But Hillary's plan to add another tax bracket on multimillion dollar earnings at less than 45% seems totally reasonable to me. I think anything over $5 million should be taxed at about 50%....and that corporate taxes and middle class taxes should be lowered.

>taxes are at their lowest

Yes for the super rich who use loopholes not to pay taxes.

The average millionaire who owns his own business has to pay like 70% of his money in taxes.

>What was the benefit of the gold standard?
I just told you.
Other things: Price stability, high savings rates, banks can't print money out of thin air etc

>Your image says they paid effective rate of 31% vs 25% more recently.
Yes.
What would amount to BILLIONAIRES today paid that.

Multimillionaires paid a low amount of tax because they didn't fall into those super high brackets.

Also Clinton is an evil sociopath.

>not supporting a fixed tax which is by definition the only fair form of taxation

Again, I dont believe it. whats the source of this data?

>The average millionaire who owns his own business has to pay like 70% of his money in taxes.
So is he paying taxes after all or is he using loopholes?

You're speaking with a millionaire in this thread that pays 19%. No one pays 70%. There isn't a tax bracket of 70%.

>Price stability
Which price stability?
We have the most stable prices in history the last decade.

What would amount to BILLIONAIRES today paid that.
I dont think thats the case, thats the top 1% and there were far fewer super rich in the 60s than we have today
>Also Clinton is an evil sociopath.
And Trump isnt?

>MFW a spike for every government bright idea coming to fruition

>muh shills

No you don't understand, Trump is a billionaire and wants to cut taxes for billionaires as well as eliminate the estate tax, but he's on our side. He's fighting for the working class man. His policies designed to benefit himself and his family are actually meant to benefit everyone, honest.

Don't change the topic to mask your incompetence yet agsin.

You don't know how inflation works.
You don't know how money creation works.

You believed that the gold standard prevented inflation and were proven wrong.

>Nazis
>socialist
wew lad
>inb4 someone points out that it's in their name but ignores that the Nazis were virulently anti-left

Yeah, and they've gone even further too. Look at 19th century America, where all taxes combined were a single digit percentage of gdp, and we had the fastest economic growth in history

They were as Socialist as it gets, freezing prices and guaranteeing employment for everyone.

>muh communism

Reminder not to engage the shills. Why would you even reply to this you retards?

youtube.com/watch?v=RMhI-AQgYPU

>anyone who disagrees must be a shill
Just go back to /r/The_Donald tbqh familia

Fascists evolved from dissident socialists. Look at Mussolini and the origins of the National Socialist German Workers' Party.

Friendly reminder that good presidents don't pay taxes.

No, you can disagree and let's have a discussion, but OP isn't even saying anything. Why would anyone respond to this nonsubstance: the OP?

God damn you guys are all so fucking stupid. So easily baited by shills.

That post gave me cancer.

I'm the OP.

According to Keynesian theory, you stimulated the economy by doing so, since now you'll pay treatment fines.

So the argument is, and I quote

>when you have the tax rate at [a high level], people simply don't pay it. They put their money into tax-exempt securities, and arrange their financial affairs

But what's to prevent the rich from doing that anyway, even if the rate is low? Why would lowering taxes give them incentive to pay? It doesn't. It just means those that do pay taxes on their money, pay less. And they can keep abusing exemptions and loopholes all they want.

He actually equated raising taxes to literal communism. he's too far gone, don't even bother trying to get to him

Hey OP. Learn to make OP's that aren't blatant bait and I'll engage you with a real discussion. Try actually making a point for starters. Maybe bring evidence to back up an assertion you are wanting to put forth and we can discuss our interpretations and opinions instead of posting some shitty picture that instantly gives away that you're merely baiting with a vague sentence that doesn't actually say anything, thus proving you are merely baiting.

Ah who am I kidding, you're being paid to do this. Or just fishing for (You)'s so your thread watcher will light up and fill the empty voids in your life like actual people to converse with.

Nice meme

>Maybe bring evidence to back up an assertion
>Ah who am I kidding, you're being paid to do this

k

>let them die of starvation
edgy
>le nigger spic welfare meme

shut it down

>>le nigger spic welfare meme
Well, it's true that these groups receive welfare disproportionately, or is it?

>NO YOU DONT EARN MONEY IN MY COUNRY THAT MAKES STUPID PEOPLE FEEL BAD YOU NEED TO GIVE YOUR MONEY AWAY DUH FUCKING RACIST YOU RACIST RICH PERSON HOLY SHIT I CANT EVEN.

half of the country doesn't even pay income tax i bet its the same half that complains about muh tax cuts. fucking hypocrites.

You are now aware that a perpetual income tax was only instated 100 years ago, and before that was only instituted during times of war.

>CTR is the new SJW for when youre too dumb to form a real argument
Sad.

That graph does look unfair, but you should compare it to the actual distribution of *wealth* to get an idea of the real impact.

Also, your graph neglects to mention the not-exactly-minor detail that 'income tax' isn't actually the only Federal tax on your income. Social Security and Medicare/Futa tax will typically show up on your 1040, and the employer side SS/medi/dickgirl tax won't even make its way to your own tax return (assuming you're a prole who works for someone else) but is based on your income and is factored into the cost of hiring by employers.

Daily reminder that post-messiah Judaism is (literally) Christianity, meaning the true Israel is the spiritual body of Christendom.

That modern Judaism is properly called Talmudism, which has its origins in Pharisaism and is the ideological opposite of pre-Christian-era Judaism.

That Talmudism/Pharisaism is the richest ideological firmament for Satanism, which found its purest expression in the act of crucifying Christ as urged and committed by the Pharisees of the time.

That modern "Jews" (actually Talmudists - the spiritual successors of the Pharisees - as per the above) generally originated in Khazaria, but have lived internationally, intermarried, and converted (both in and out) for so long as to have no discernible genetic or familial heritage.

That the "13th Tribe" and "Ashkenazim" racial memes are Hasbara psyops designed specifically to justify the current occupation of Palestine known as "Israel," as well as employ a political parry silencing anyone who names the "Jew" or criticizes their activities as being a racist. There is no "Jewish race."

That the extortion at the Temple - whom Jesus drove out and excoriated - was promoted and conducted by the Pharisees of the day; that the modern day extortion employed by the same "Jews" (actually Talmudists - the spiritual successors of the Pharisees - as per the above) via the Federal Reserve and similar monetary and usurious banking rackets are spiritually identical in form, function, and nature of perpetrator.

That the Holocaust (TM) is designed to subvert Christ as the preeminent messianic sacrifice, and in supplanting Christ as messiah replace Him with Talmudic satanism disguised as "Judaism."

That if you don't know the above, and much more, you have a long way to go before you are "red-pilled."

The two-dimensional Laffer Curve is solid science under the following conditions: First, the tax rate must be flat. Variable tax rates require a curve over three dimensions to accurately represent.

Second, only two points on the curve are known for certain: 0% tax = 0% revenue and 100% tax = 0% revenue because nobody bothers doing anything taxable. The shape of the intervening curve is unknown.

Third, the two known points are only accurate in scenarios where no person subject to the tax code feels patriotism, altruism, or coercion such that they would voluntarily contribute or involuntarily work in spite of poor compensation.

In other news, Marxism-Leninism works great in a society of perfectly frictionless spherical humans.

I invite you to look at this graph of marginal tax rates in the US. Is historical economic growth consistent with your model of the curve?

That's because tax cuts for the rich encourage them to work harder and invest the money speculatively - hence a financialized economy and fewer jobs.

If you're being taxed at 90% on income above $200K/year you are not going to put in overtime to get to $250K/year. Your boss still needs $50K/year of extra work, so your boss hires someone else. Economy where one worker makes $200K/year and one makes $50K/year is healthier than economy where one worker makes $250K/year and the other one makes $0/year.

>devolve to states

So I get to leave the California border open and not bother deporting anyone unless they've actually been sentenced for a felony?

Or do I get a Federal tax cut and a giant hike in my state taxes to pay for a bunch of 'devolved' programs that my state doesn't want in the first place?

>cut waste
That's been the default Republican go-to for years. All the easy waste to cut has been cut, along with a lot of stuff that looks like waste but isn't (Did you know the Army has some REALLY EXPENSIVE bolts? They're expensive because they have to be strong enough to hold the rotor on pic related while it's shooting AND being shot at. Did you know on an average day you get only this many arrests? Therefore the drunk tank only needs to be big enough for the average day, not the Saturday night party crowd.)

...

>he thinks politics is binary
You can support socialist policies and framework while still being a rightwing autokraut

I know. That's what I'm referring to.

>effective tax rate
Ah so if you make up a term then it'll work. Excellent.

Formal top tax rates declined even more, from 90% to 39%.

Wat is Regulations

>nimble

CLOSED