Replies

Let’s add another wrinkle. When you know tax policy is going to change and its impact to you will depend on when you sell your assets, which class is most able to change when and how it sells.

Al Gore could decide to make less money (or even lose some) on his sale of his TV Network in order to complete the sale before the new tax laws kick in because he has so much money in the first place. People with a lot less money need the full profit from a sale. If that means they have to refuse a deal and conclude the sale after the new tax law kicks in, they’re screwed.

The rich are also more likely to be able to change when they pull money out of their stock funds, etc.

IOW, rich people ALWAYS have more choices when it comes to paying tax than poor do. And they have the smarts to exercise that choice to maximize the money they keep in their pockets.

Due to massive ignorance of economics and the collectivist habits of thought inspired by the Marxist doctrine of class interest,libtards don't realize that tax increases on the rich such as inheritance taxes, progressive personal income taxes,corporate income taxes, and capital gains tax,all operate in essentially the same way: they are all paid with funds that otherwise would have been saved and invested.

Less saving and investing leads to less productive expenditure, which leads to less demand for labor which leads to lower money wage rates for the average wage earner or lower supply of labor employed which leads to a lower standard of living for the average wage earner.

So, here is another example of a libtard perversity of result where trying to punish the rich ends up punishing the wage earners even more in the long run.

A high-income worker is one who by definition is in high demand. The same factors that make him a high-income worker also enable him to demand higher wages in response to tax increases or other factors that diminish his real income...
Likewise, companies with very in-demand products (Apple, Mercedes-Benz) have the most ability to pass costs along to consumers, while equally powerful but price-constricted firms (Walmart) have the most power to pass expenses on to suppliers and other business partners. A tax hike on Walmart is not necessarily a tax hike on Walmart...

Which is to say, it is not clear that you really can raise taxes on the rich, even if you try.

Pretty simple and true.

Few know it.

BLUF - Means testing for social security and medicare - it is nothing more than government approved robbery.

As both programs are currently configured participation is mandatory - you must participate.

So lets look at a high level performers Kevin Williamson mentions in his article. Since the taxes are now progressive - the high end performers pay more dollars than the low end performers. After working and paying taxes into both programs for 50 years, or more, they are told - at or near retirement - that they made too much and/or saved too much and/or worked too hard. Now they have to surrender part, perhaps a significant part, of their involuntary decades long contribution to social security and medicare.

What's the difference between this government decision and a robber sticking a gun into your back?

As for any agreed threshold you must remember two things - no Congress is held to any agreement made by a previous Congress. Finally, the 16th Amendment started with tax rates between 1% and 7 %. Prior to the Kennedy tax cuts the top marginal rate was 95%.

Where am I going? Means testing is a method to stealing more money from the producers and doing so when they have no way to recover. Take your monthly income and means test it then live on what is left. If that happens the resulting storm would remove every politician and political thinker from their positions of power. Do it at the end of a person's work history and the politicians and political thinkers might survive, at your expense, because you would be dead long before the case law was decided by the Supreme Court. Oh, excuse me, we can no longer expect to use the Supreme Court to correct mistakes made by the electorate - thank you loads of ** Chief Justice Roberts.

“Raise taxes on the guy who works on my car!
And on the people who invest in the company I work for!
And on my grocer, employer, landlord and everyone else I depend on... so I’ll have more money!”
Yeah, good article. Don’t approve of means-testing SS though future means-testing may be OK at a very high cut-off.

From the article:
“Tax hikes on the so-called rich may decrease the private sector’s share of income”.
It definately deprives it of money (wealth)- which would be invested and lead to more private-sector income to tax. All taxing of private-sector income is taking the seed for growth.