On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 8:21:01 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
> On 9/21/2021 10:34 PM, John B. wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 19:39:03 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On 9/21/2021 6:19 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 11:09:40 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> >>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 9/21/2021 8:32 AM, AMuzi 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.
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes, and I know a very intelligent PhD biologist who has had to struggle
> >>>> with part time work for years. A young man in our neighborhood - eagle
> >>>> scout, valedictorian, bachelor's & masters degrees - can find work only
> >>>> as a stockboy. But I also have a dropout friend poor enough to ride his
> >>>> bike to soup giveaways. Anecdotes have limited value.
> >>>>
> >>>> Do you really think a voter living in a ghetto has as much influence as
> >>>> a voter living in a mansion? Why do wealthy people organize and attend
> >>>> Fund Raising Dinners? How many Fund Raising Dinners are held in ghettos?
> >>>
> >>> As for the poor, but highly educated, bloke who couldn't find a decent
> >>> job? What actual marketable skills did he have. I ask as over the
> >>> years we employed a very large number of skilled artesian's who had
> >>> little formal schooling and still made "top dollar".
> >>>
> >>> As for living in a ghetto and not having an influence? Frank read the
> >>> News! The Texas voting law changes that are being reported are,
> >>> apparently, aimed at prevent those very same ghetto folks you mention
> >>> as not having any political power, from voting. Now, if they have no
> >>> political power why in the world is Texas so intent on preventing them
> >>> from voting.
> >>>
> >>> Or you might want to read a little history. "Mayor" Curley, of Boston,
> >>> was actually elected twice while serving prison sentences, not by the
> >>> Rich Folk but by the poor Irish multitudes.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I follow Texas politics on WBAP. Would you name one
> >> unreasonably restrictive aspect of the revised Statute
> >> please? If there's some outlandish restriction, I missed it.
> >>
> >> Here's SB1 as signed by the Governor earlier this month:
> >> https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/871/billtext/pdf/SB00001I.pdf
> >>
> >> Since you mentioned Mr Curley, SB1 attempts to limit legal
> >> registered voters to only one ballot each, which IMHO would
> >> be a good thing.
> >
> > Actually I don't know a damned thing about Texas voting laws. Except
> > what I read in the news. And that seems to be that the new laws will,
> > somehow, infringe or limit, the rights of (it seems to be implied) "po
> > folks".
> >
> Despite the actual text of the statute. Much like 'Larry
> Elder is a white supremacist' which was the only story on LA
> news for weeks. pfffft.
> --
> Andrew Muzi
> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971

I'm not sure how Larry Elder could be a white supremacist. I'm pretty sure to be a white supremacist you have to be white. Its right there in the title.