If White People are Economically Privileged, Shouldn't They Have to Pay a White Person Tax? - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political and non-political satire; all those terribly biased analogies live here.
#14781152
anasawad wrote:When the fuck are these SJW idiots realize that "privilege" is between classes not between races and genders when discussing it within a specific nation. :knife:



Agreed, people are so dumb that they cannot see the modus - operandi of the Westminster class system, they 'believe' that the 'system' works for them as a direct result of putting a 'X' on a ballot paper once every 5 years.

As for the E.U, I would lay good money in any high street against the majority of pedestrians even knowing who their M.E.P is, yet alone their local MP's name.

The Tories 'justify' welfare\other cuts because of the 'budget' deficit, which they help to create, they shift the burden onto local councils & cut more services.

The FACT is, they caused the budget deficit & national debt to explode.

They forego £40 BILLION a year, on Additional Pension Contribution Relief to the rich & better off.

That's paid for by the poor alone, an act of war against one section of society, whom they blame for their own circumstances, with no allowances made between the 'deserving' or 'undeserving' amongst them, yet, they keep the floodgates open for migrants to swarm over 'our' country, in order to undermine our living standards, so that the rich get filthy rich & we get poorer.
#14792052
Income tax isn't fodder for lawyers and accountants because of it's graduated system. It fodder for lawyers and accountants because of the various write offs and loopholes. None of which will be going anywhere under a flat tax.

As for sales tax companies still have lawyers and accountants to deal with them.

The flat tax and sales taxes aren't any simpler than our current tax system. They simply burden wealthy people less.
#14792059
mikema63 wrote:Income tax isn't fodder for lawyers and accountants because of it's graduated system. It fodder for lawyers and accountants because of the various write offs and loopholes. None of which will be going anywhere under a flat tax.

As for sales tax companies still have lawyers and accountants to deal with them.

The flat tax and sales taxes aren't any simpler than our current tax system. They simply burden wealthy people less.


Perhaps my understanding is flawed. Which is entirely possible. Does not a flat tax remove said loopholes? If so, how does this increase burden on the poor if it is merely based on a percentage of income?
#14792071
The problem with the loopholes is that they are a combination of popular with donors and also in some cases necessary. For instance child tax benefits, more of your income is going into raising your child so the government tax's you less.

As for the poor being effected it depends on how much you are going to cut government spending. The bulk of the tax money from the income tax comes from the higher tax brackets. So all else being equal a flat tax would have to be higher percentage wise than the lowest tax bracket. So in essence you'd have to raise the income tax on lower income people in order to lower it for higher income people. Or cut services massively, especially considering that about 45% of people don't end up paying any income taxs. Because loopholes and tax benefits.

Consumption taxes hit lower income people more just by virtue of the fact that low income people spend a higher proportion of their income on consumption. You can think of consumption taxes as a tax on the part of your income you spend on consumption. The poor spend all of their income on consumption while the rich invest large portions of their income. So a sale tax basically taxes all of the income of the poor and tax the rich only on the portion of income that they spend on consumption.
#14792072
Extremely informative post and I thank you immensely. As always, in my quest for a simple understanding of matters, the baby often goes out with the bath water.

I think we both agree that some loopholes like "off shore" tax shelters should be addressed.
Last edited by Billy Pilgrim on 31 Mar 2017 16:44, edited 1 time in total.
#14792074
Extremely informative post and I thank you immensely. As always, in my quest for a simple understanding of matters, the baby often goes out with the bath water.

Who knew economics could be so complicated? (*facetious phaser set to kill*)

I think we both agree that loopholes like "off shore" tax shelters should be addressed.
#15136490
Random American wrote:Not really. That is based on wealth not race. A rich black under a progressive tax rate would pay more than a poor white, which actually makes sense. The rich can afford to pay more while the poor need every penny.


I was making a racist joke.....

I think allowing people who work for W2 to write stuff off would help the working class, and perhaps a federal sales tax amendment setting that tax to no more then .5% and lowering overall income tax would do wonders for the economy.
#15137927
I never thought "because he can" was legitimate justification to eat the rich. Truth is that Bill Gates did more for society as a whole than I ever will. He deserves the fruits of those labors, and would never support organized theft of his coffers simply because they're full.

That strikes me as immoral as all hell.
#15137932
Goranhammer wrote:I never thought "because he can" was legitimate justification to eat the rich. Truth is that Bill Gates did more for society as a whole than I ever will. He deserves the fruits of those labors, and would never support organized theft of his coffers simply because they're full.

That strikes me as immoral as all hell.

When wealth is all concentrated at the top, that is a problem. It isn't mere envy, but a problematic situation where the rich are becoming super rich and the poor are just getting poorer, and not all of the ultra-rich are self-made anyway, but many just got their parent's money. I'm advocating progressive taxation here, not communism, nor the abolition of all private property. Even with the reforms I want, Bill Gates would still be wealthy. There's a happy medium between rich-people-can-do-whatever-they-want capitalism and outright socialism.

Saying that poor people are just moochers simply because they need assistance strikes me as immoral, especially when those people are ok with handouts to rich people.
#15137933
Random American wrote:When wealth is all concentrated at the top, that is a problem. It isn't mere envy, but a problematic situation where the rich are becoming super rich and the poor are just getting poorer, and not all of the ultra-rich are self-made anyway, but many just got their parent's money. I'm advocating progressive taxation here, not communism, nor the abolition of all private property. Even with the reforms I want, Bill Gates would still be wealthy. There's a happy medium between rich-people-can-do-whatever-they-want capitalism and outright socialism.

Saying that poor people are just moochers simply because they need assistance strikes me as immoral, especially when those people are ok with handouts to rich people.


I'm okay with progressive taxation (prefer flat tax, but progressive is fine) as long as it actually IS a progressive tax and not redistribution hiding inside a Trojan horse of semantics.
#15137935
Goranhammer wrote:I'm okay with progressive taxation (prefer flat tax, but progressive is fine) as long as it actually IS a progressive tax and not redistribution hiding inside a Trojan horse of semantics.

I believe in a progressive income tax. I don't know what you mean by "actually is" progressive. Anyway, I think there aught to be some redistribution, and even Thomas Jefferson supported a certain amount of it. Of course, I'm not advocating for outright communism or the taking of all wealth or something like that, but I'm for a progressive income tax, closing tax loopholes to stop tax dodging, as well as social programs and worker protections. Contrary to popular belief, that isn't communism lite, and such programs have actually been implemented by right-wing Europeans at some point to make Marxism less appealing interestingly enough. I think unregulated capitalism and outright communism have some of the same problems. They look really good on paper and in theory, but have problems in the real world.
#15137936
I know this falls under satire.
But it's incredible how people misunderstand how dangerous and how much of a slippery slope it is, to make broad accusations based on race, and enact entire policies based on race.

This might seem like a joke to most people now, but as "progressives" get their way, the climate of oppression is going to become real and suffocating.
#15137940
lancer345 wrote:I know this falls under satire.
But it's incredible how people misunderstand how dangerous and how much of a slippery slope it is, to make broad accusations based on race, and enact entire policies based on race.

This might seem like a joke to most people now, but as "progressives" get their way, the climate of oppression is going to become real and suffocating.

Yes, I don't identify with victim narratives, and I strongly oppose any tax imposed on the basis of race, gender, etc. There's a reason why I don't identify as a leftist as I disagree with leftist social policy. I oppose critical race theory and all that crap or going after people who opposed gay marriage, etc.
#15137942
Random American wrote:Yes, I don't identify with victim narratives, and I strongly oppose any tax imposed on the basis of race, gender, etc. There's a reason why I don't identify as a leftist as I disagree with leftist social policy. I oppose critical race theory and all that crap or going after people who opposed gay marriage, etc.


What's ironic is that critical race theory is something that could have come out of a 1930s German ideology, rather than a classical marxist book. It is as much authoritarian right, as it is authoritarian left. If you substitute "White tax" with "Jewish tax", it becomes apparent. The progressive left has a fascination and hate with Nazi Germany, but I wonder if they notice the irony that their theses are very similar, just twisted the opposite way?

But it's clear that we cannot generalise about the "progressive left". What we are talking about here is a very vocal group of radicals among the left. I know many left people that are completely against this critical race theory.
#15137947
lancer345 wrote:I know many left people that are completely against this critical race theory.

Unfortunately those type of leftists never seem to win or take over their respective party. It's always the ones that scream "check your privilege" or that there are 100000000000000000000 genders that run the show. There is this movement within the left that is just disgusting and exists in a strange plane of existence. I think it's post-modernism or something along those lines. Enough with the fat studies, gender studies, etc.
Election 2020

@ingliz I find these clips in black and white of[…]

November 26, Wednesday President Lincoln goes d[…]

I did say that he governed like a 4chan troll once[…]

Usage determines meaning, Webster is always chasin[…]