[Truth To Power]

Why do you want to raise taxes on the wealthy?"

Because the two most fundamental and widely accepted principles of sound taxation policy are, "ability to pay" and "beneficiary pay." By both criteria, it is the wealthy who should pay more taxes -- a lot more. The wealthy have overwhelmingly become wealthy, and continue to get rapidly wealthier, through privilege -- i.e., legal entitlements to benefit from the abrogation of others' rights without making just compensation, such as land titles, bank licenses, IP monopolies, etc. -- and not productive contribution.

That is what a pirate does.

No it isn't. A pirate only attacks targets of opportunity. In many cases, rich people can afford to defend themselves, and pirates avoid attacking such.

He only robs people who have lots of money.

That is a bald falsehood. He attacks whoever is handy and vulnerable.

Should they be penalized for being successful?

They should be required to repay the community for what they are taking from the community through their privileges.

[late]

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/584 ... icans-most

Heartland is a Koch propaganda machine.

He's only using percentages, not aggregates.

"For the first time in American history, the 400 wealthiest people paid a lower tax rate than any other group, according to a new study by economists Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman at the University of California, Berkeley.

The startling data was brought to light on Monday in a New York Times column, and is based on an analysis by Saez and Zucman in their new book, The Triumph Of Injustice."

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/oct/09/trump-tax-cuts-helped-billionaires-pay-less

From the commies at Forbes:

"This comes into conflict with the reams of data available to show that the system is, after all, not fair. Income inequality is widening to record levels and there’s no reason to believe the trend will slow down.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 was the largest tax overhaul in over three decades. It was rushed through congress and it’s working exactly as it was intended to do so: to line the pockets of the wealthy at the expense of the working class. Optically, it was championed as a way to boost the economy, but the fact is that unemployment was already low and the cuts came amidst a long bull market.

If nothing else, it’s clear that there’s a taxation problem in America and the current solution is only making it worse."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/camilomaldonado/2019/10/10/trump-tax-cuts-helped-billionaires-pay-less-taxes-than-the-working-class-in-2018/?sh=ab4e1963128f

[Rancid]

"free Market" think tank. There job is convince everybody that making the Rich Richer is somehow a great benefit to everybody,.

They do a great job of it too, unfortunately.

[Steve_American]

Get a more reliable source of information. Really the Heartland institute.

"free Market" think tank. Their job is convince everybody that making the Rich Richer is somehow a great benefit to everybody.

Yeah just because these schills make a claim does not make it true, ...

For what it is worth, it was Adam Smith in Wealth of Nations (1776) who talked about the "free market".
For him this meant "a market free of rentier or monopoly power".

In the 70s and 80s this was changed by modern economists to mean "a market free of Gov. regulations and other interference".

At the same time these modern economists (both Neo-Keynesians and Neo-liberals) stopped teaching the history of economic thinking. Did they do this so their students would not wonder why Adam Smith is still seen as a very important econ. thinker, but has had his most important ideas rejected by their teachers?

Modern economists love the idea that bigger corps are more efficient, and so better for everyone. Never mind that they have monopoly power, which Adam Smith had gone on and on about its evil effect on an economy.

.

[pugsville]

For what it is worth, it was Adam Smith in Wealth of Nations (1776) who talked about the "free market".
For him this meant "a market free of rentier or monopoly power".

In the 70s and 80s this was changed by modern economists to mean "a market free of Gov. regulations and other interference".

At the same time these modern economists (both Neo-Keynesians and Neo-liberals) stopped teaching the history of economic thinking. Did they do this so their students would not wonder why Adam Smith is still seen as a very important econ. thinker, but has had his most important ideas rejected by their teachers?

Modern economists love the idea that bigger corps are more efficient, and so better for everyone. Never mind that they have monopoly power, which Adam Smith had gone on and on about its evil effect on an economy.

.

Well who funds the Modern Economist's think tank? Bigger corps. It's a virtuous circle,

[late]

For what it is worth, it was Adam Smith in Wealth of Nations (1776) who talked about the "free market".
For him this meant "a market free of rentier or monopoly power".

In the 70s and 80s this was changed by modern economists to mean "a market free of Gov. regulations and other interference".

At the same time these modern economists (both Neo-Keynesians and Neo-liberals) stopped teaching the history of economic thinking. Did they do this so their students would not wonder why Adam Smith is still seen as a very important econ. thinker, but has had his most important ideas rejected by their teachers?

Modern economists love the idea that bigger corps are more efficient, and so better for everyone. Never mind that they have monopoly power, which Adam Smith had gone on and on about its evil effect on an economy.

The rich have their pet economists, who bark on command. But they don't speak for the discipline.