On Tuesday, September 21, 2021 at 4:05:15 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 9/21/2021 5:52 PM, John B. wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 07:32:00 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On 9/20/2021 10:34 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 20 Sep 2021 21:10:49 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> >>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 9/20/2021 7:13 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>>>> On Mon, 20 Sep 2021 10:38:06 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 9/20/2021 9:47 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 9/19/2021 9:44 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 9/19/2021 8:00 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On 9/19/2021 3:31 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On 9/19/2021 1:44 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 9/19/2021 12:27 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/19/2021 11:03 AM, jbeattie wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, September 19, 2021 at 8:07:08 AM UTC-7,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <giant snip>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>  Trade and barter is almost impossible for the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> government to trace, hence the excise taxes that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> supported the US for so long. These were perfectly fine
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> with the common citizen because those paying the excise
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> taxes were "the rich" as they saw them. Jay appears to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> think that large corporations would be the one's
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> involved
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> in trade and barter which is silly. For their own good,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> corporations and large companies must of needs keep
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> careful and accurate records which are entirely open to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the IRS.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> No I don't think corporations and large companies are
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> involved in barter, although they are involved in trade
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> and all sorts of non-cash exchanges.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> My grandfather was the chief engineer running the power
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> plant used in Salinas for what eventually became C & H
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sugar company. They grew and processed sugar cane into
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sugar. It took a very long time for the IRS to grow to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the level a sophistication to be able to keep track of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the millions of small stores buying the sugar.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Therefore, the company paid taxes and few others did.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> And once it left the retail store NO taxes were paid on
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the trade and barter of it.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> WTF? Although the history of sugar taxation is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> complex:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.jstor.org/stable/1882993?seq=9#metadata_info_tab_contents
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- I don't think there has been an excise tax on sugar
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> for over 100 years. The IRS keeps track of the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> of small stores buying the sugar by collecting income
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> tax
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> from those stores, and state regulators collect sales
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> income tax.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> If someone borrows a cup of sugar or trades a cup of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> sugar for a box of Cheerios, there is probably no
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> taxable
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> event, but I don't know what the law is in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> California.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> But yes, transactions between retail purchasers
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> generally
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> escapes taxation -- and so do cash sales. Most
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> garage-sellers aren't collecting or paying sales tax,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> IMO.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The problem with today's tax system is plainly shown in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that dress worn by AOC - "Tax the Rich" as if they
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't carry the brunt of taxation far above their
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> earnings.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> When you "tax the rich" you invariably hurt the working
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> man as jobs disappear. Trump wasn't saving himself any
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> money by reducing the highest rate - he was making jobs
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for everyone and it showed.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You tax everyone according to uniform rules,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> establishing
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> marginal rates in some equitable way. Of course the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> rich are taxed. They always have been taxed. ÂÂ
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> highest marginal rates in the 1950s were staggering, and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> yet manufacturing and employment were at an all-time
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> peak. There is often a low correlation between tax
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> policy and corporate spending on workers or capital
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> expenditures as we learned with the Reagan and Trump
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> trickle-down tax give-aways.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- Jay Beattie.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Sugar duty changed into import quotas as a less visible
> >>>>>>>>>>>> path to price supports for US producers. It's not always
> >>>>>>>>>>>> about direct revenue; governance involves many goals,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> policies, interests, hidden agendae etc.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The 1960s marginal rates were draconian but... The
> >>>>>>>>>>>> average
> >>>>>>>>>>>> rate paid by any given percentile of income is roughly
> >>>>>>>>>>>> similar. I say roughly because the present actual revenue
> >>>>>>>>>>>> is highly progressive, moreso than in the immediate
> >>>>>>>>>>>> postwar era.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/js1287.aspx
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> (first in a web search. I'm sure there's something more
> >>>>>>>>>>>> current but the trend on that chart is clear enough)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> How can that be? The devil's in the all too
> >>>>>>>>>>>> voluminous
> >>>>>>>>>>>> details. Economists have made at least some headway
> >>>>>>>>>>>> toward
> >>>>>>>>>>>> broader flatter rates with fewer carve-outs, exceptions,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> exemptions, incentives and such. This gives a more
> >>>>>>>>>>>> efficient system and generally higher compliance, as
> >>>>>>>>>>>> history shows. Tip of the hat to Art Laffer.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I don't see a flatter tax scheme as better. On a drive we
> >>>>>>>>>>> make weekly, I pass by a brand new mansion. I'm guessing
> >>>>>>>>>>> ~10,000 square feet on ~5 acres, surrounded by brand new
> >>>>>>>>>>> stone fences about six feet high. The carriage house or
> >>>>>>>>>>> servants' quarters or whatever is larger than our house.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> We also drive by plenty of scrappy little houses even more
> >>>>>>>>>>> tiny than ours. It's hard to convince me that the
> >>>>>>>>>>> owners of
> >>>>>>>>>>> each should pay the same percentage of their income in
> >>>>>>>>>>> taxes.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Helpful graphic:
> >>>>>>>>>> https://files.taxfoundation.org/20200225094221/FF697-01.png
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> from
> >>>>>>>>>> https://taxfoundation.org/summary-of-the-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2020-update/
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> with the numerical data summarized.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Here's the very granular actual IRS data for the most
> >>>>>>>>>> recent fully published period (2018).
> >>>>>>>>>> https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/18in35tr.xls
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Zoom down to the bottom rows of columns AP~AR it's not at
> >>>>>>>>>> all what you think it is.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Is the executive summary: "Rich people pay more taxes than
> >>>>>>>>> poor people"? That's not news. You can't get blood out of a
> >>>>>>>>> stone - that is, you can't get much money from people who
> >>>>>>>>> don't have much money.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> It requires a certain amount of money to run a government,
> >>>>>>>>> maintain infrastructure, run a society. It takes a certain
> >>>>>>>>> amount of taxation to provide paved roads, sewage systems,
> >>>>>>>>> law enforcement, fire departments, public schools and all
> >>>>>>>>> the rest.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> To me, it seems much more reasonable to get the next chunk
> >>>>>>>>> of necessary money from the guy spending cash on a second
> >>>>>>>>> yacht, instead of from a woman taking three different buses
> >>>>>>>>> to get to her two jobs.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Were you commenting on some other country or historic era?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> That's precisely the system we have, and radically so. I
> >>>>>>>> have not advocated anything, just noting that the top 1%
> >>>>>>>> of taxpayers earn 21% of income and pay 39$ of income taxes.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The top 50% by income pay 97% of income taxes; The lower
> >>>>>>>> 50$ pay 3%.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Yes, I understand that those with more currently pay more.
> >>>>>>> I'd say the question is, do they pay _enough_ more?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The county engineer needs funds to pave local roads. Much of
> >>>>>>> that money comes from gas tax. So the owner of a $50,000
> >>>>>>> Lincoln hybrid getting 40 mpg pays less per mile than the
> >>>>>>> guy who can afford only a 2000 Ford Taurus getting 18 mpg.
> >>>>>>> That's just one example of how the system benefits the wealthy.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Based on my own experience, if a person is making just
> >>>>>>> enough to get by, it's very hard to take advantage of
> >>>>>>> economic opportunities - even basic ones like buying a more
> >>>>>>> efficient car or insulating one's home - let alone to
> >>>>>>> accumulate wealth.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> But once people get a bit above water, so to speak, the
> >>>>>>> smart ones can do economically productive things with any
> >>>>>>> excess. The more they do that, the faster their wealth
> >>>>>>> grows. But those who start out in a prosperous family get
> >>>>>>> that excess from birth. It is much, much easier for them to
> >>>>>>> climb the economic ladder.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> And wherever the personal wealth excess comes from (smart &
> >>>>>>> hard work, inheritance, dumb luck) once a person has a
> >>>>>>> certain amount, it can accumulate rapidly, as an exponential
> >>>>>>> function. So it's always WAY easier for a wealthy person,
> >>>>>>> compared to a poor person, to afford a $10,000 bill.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Countries with less income and wealth disparity tend to be
> >>>>>>> more stable, have lower crime rates, and have more
> >>>>>>> contented citizenry. The U.S. is not one of them.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The world is chock full of examples of self destruction,
> >>>>>> indolence and worse among the children of the rich.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Moreover the trend of late to accuse our culture of 'income
> >>>>>> disparity' (which I'm not convinced is an actual problem.
> >>>>>> More like a feature. YMMV) skips over county rent, food
> >>>>>> stamps, free medical, many other transfers. Actual net
> >>>>>> income and living standards do not reflect the headlines.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> At least we seem to agree that excessive regulation inhibits
> >>>>>> upward mobility for those of meager means. I've been singing
> >>>>>> that song for 50 years, during which time the regulatory
> >>>>>> deck became more unfairly stacked against people of small
> >>>>>> means who work and save.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The income tax structure is just as you wish- severely
> >>>>>> punitive as income goes up. But the payroll tax, 14.5% on
> >>>>>> the first dollar, is the reverse. Never hear any bleeding
> >>>>>> hearts in favor of changing that, just my voice out here in
> >>>>>> the wilderness.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I've always wondered whether the graduated tax spiraling upward to
> >>>>> penalize individuals that "had made a bit" wasn't due primarily to the
> >>>>> fact that there are far more low paid voters then high paid voters.
> >>>>
> >>>> On the other hand, the highly paid voters and corporations can much more
> >>>> easily afford to buy plenty of politicians.
> >>>>
> >>>> People taking the bus between their two minimum wage jobs don't
> >>>> contribute much to election campaigns.
> >>>
> >>> The point was that poor folks vote and there are just so many more of
> >>> them then the "upper" class. Thus it behoove a politician to cater to
> >>> them. And they do; usually successfully.
> >>>
> >>> But you keep mentioning these po folks and their two minimum salary
> >>> jobs but I know a considerable number of poorly educated blokes who
> >>> through their own efforts found their way into high paying jobs.
> >>>
> >>> One chap, a particular friend, ran away from home when he was about 15
> >>> years old and told me that his first job was a helper with a team that
> >>> erected farm silos. He later worked as a laborer on drilling rigs and
> >>> worked himself up until today he is now a "Drilling Manager" and has a
> >>> standing offer from the national oil companies of both Malaysia and
> >>> Vietnam for a position any time he wants to work. He is, by the way,
> >>> on his third yacht (:-) floating around in the Philippines.
> >>>
> >>> And, he isn't unique, I've probably mentioned a school mate who, while
> >>> most of us untamed heathens were down at the creek swimming was
> >>> industrially mowing lawns. He accumulated sufficient funds that when
> >>> he turned 16 and got his driver's license he bought a (second hand)
> >>> auto.
> >>>
> >>> In fact I seem to remember you mentioning delivering newspapers and
> >>> Jay has mentioned driving an ambulance.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Not unlike my experience (albeit more successful) and I know
> >> a great many men with similar experience. Tropes of 'doomed
> >> lower class peons' are as overrated as English PhDs driving
> >> taxis (of whom I knew two). Humans are a wildly diverse lot,
> >> such that one ought to pause when making broad generalizations.
> >
> > I don't know about the present but when I lived in the States I
> > remember a news report, in California, about the poor, unappreciated
> > U.S.ians who were unemployed and had to live on the government dole,
> > and just couldn't get ahead... while at the same time hordes of
> > Mexican, both those holding valid work permits and illegal workers,
> > were flocking in to harvest the crops.
> >
> During the Rodney King riots in LA, the locals openly
> complained to reporters about the Korean businesses being
> trashed/burned, 'They showed up here with 23c and no speak
> English a few years ago and now they own the whole
> neighborhood.'
>
> Uh, I think that's the whole point isn't it? And good for them.

Sure, as long as they are citizens. And those particular Koreans were.

https://aclj.org/immigration/thousands-of-immigrants-packed-under-tx-bridge-as-bidens-border-crisis-escalates Biden's answer? Ban TV drone flights in the area so that it can't be shown.