AOC: A Society With Billionaires Cannot Be Moral

[qui_est_ce]

I’m not sure about complete elimination of those, but both of them are misused. I’d grow weary getting into those details though.

you know this how?

 

[FirstFiveEighth]

All I was saying is that believing the US should not intervene militarily in international crisises or that the US should not have a military presence outside the US is a rational viewpoint, ie not crazy, as long as one also advocates for an international policy where the US is not a key player. It is not a viewpoint I agree with, because like it or not the US is the big man on campus, “leader of the free world”, and we have interests that we can’t just wish away.

 

[OneSheep]

Why tax them at all?

To me, it makes more sense to tax corporate profits to shareholders than incomes. The taxes could be used as part of a plan to balance the budget and eliminate debt. Hey, it’s just a tool in the shed, there is no need for taxing for its own sake!

“But let me offer you my definition of social justice: I keep what I earn and you keep what you earn. Do you disagree? Well then tell me how much of what I earn belongs to you - and why?“

For Thine is the Kingdom, the power, and the glory.
It all belongs to God.

People shop there. Do you think government should punish them for being successful?

For starters, the US government can stop giving them huge advantages, like creating trade deals that make Walmart the biggest retailer in Mexico, at the expense of Mexican retailers.

Corporations are legal fictions, made up of people. Like labor unions, corporations should have the right to participate in our country’s elections.

A corporation is not a person. People die. Corporations can live forever, and hang onto power forever. When foreigners own US corporations, guess what? All that lobby power is now in the hands of non-citizens. The courts’ support of corporations in this matter is extremely unwise. It is not what our founders intended.

We may disagree but you do speak with grace and courage.
Good for you!

Thanks, it is good to have a discussion like this, I am learning a lot by looking up data. And in the long run, you’re not “wrong”. Your opinions follow from your experiences, and they make sense in that light.

 

[OneSheep]

you know this how?

For the mortgage interest deduction, it’s a tax break only available to people who can afford to buy a house. The more expensive your house, the bigger the deduction, so its benefit is weighed more heavily for the wealthy.

For charitable deductions, for example, the IRS has to have these high-paid art appraisers on staff to appraise art that is loaned to museums. If they don’t, people play with selling back and forth to falsely inflate the value and then cheat the government.

There are pros and cons to all of this, no simple answers.

 

[ProVobis]

people play with selling back and forth to falsely inflate the value and then cheat the government.

They call this “flipping” and it’s done with real estate as well. (As well as stocks and commodities such as the Hunt Brothers with silver.) Government isn’t the only one cheated.

 

[JonNC]

To me, it makes more sense to tax corporate profits to shareholders than incomes. The taxes could be used as part of a plan to balance the budget and eliminate debt. Hey, it’s just a tool in the shed, there is no need for taxing for its own sake!

Specifically, how much should anyone be required to pay in taxes? How much then, is too much?

For Thine is the Kingdom, the power, and the glory.
It all belongs to God.

13 And one of the multitude said to him: Master, speak to my brother that he divide the inheritance with me. 14 But he said to him: Man, who hath appointed me judge, or divider, over you? 15 And he said to them: Take heed and beware of all covetousness; for a man’s life doth not consist in the abundance of things which he possesseth.
-Luke 12.

And

Which when Jesus had heard, he said to him: Yet one thing is wanting to thee: sell all whatever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.

• Luke 18

No wehere does it say,
Which when Jesus had heard, he said to him: Yet one thing is wanting to thee: confiscate whatever your neighbors have, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.

A corporation is not a person. People die. Corporations can live forever, and hang onto power forever.

Corporations are a way of people to join together to achieve a goal. There were none before people. The SCOTUS has ruled that corporations, the people there of. May participate in the election process, exercising free speech.
Corporations have no power, at least not governmentally. Although we are seeing huge corporations trying to limit speech and information - Google, Facebook and YouTube come to mind.

 

[qui_est_ce]

qui_est_ce:

you know this how?

For the mortgage interest deduction, it’s a tax break only available to people who can afford to buy a house. The more expensive your house, the bigger the deduction, so its benefit is weighed more heavily for the wealthy.

For charitable deductions, for example, the IRS has to have these high-paid art appraisers on staff to appraise art that is loaned to museums. If they don’t, people play with selling back and forth to falsely inflate the value and then cheat the government.

There are pros and cons to all of this, no simple answers.

There are limits to the mortgage interest deduction, in addition to the Alternative Minimum Tax for upper middle class and the wealthy.

For the record, I do support elimination of the mortgage deduction entirely.

 

[Trader]

There is a very long debate about whether liberty or equality should have priority in society. It has s been complicated by leftists who have changed the definitions of both terms. The American Revolution priority was liberty; the French, Russian, Cuban, and Venezuelan Revolutions claimed to favor equality and delivered neither.

Milton Friedman, who actually knew something about economics, said that the society that values liberty above equality will do well on both. AOC should read his essays about this, or maybe have someone read it to her.

https://douglasportmba.com/2018/05/31/milton-friedman-essay-on-equality-and-liberty/

 

[MonteRCMS]

There are limits to the mortgage interest deduction, in addition to the Alternative Minimum Tax for upper middle class and the wealthy.

The AMT was targeted at 155 specific high wealth individuals but eventually was applied to MILLIONS of middle income taxpayers.

 

[qui_est_ce]

The AMT was targeted at 155 specific high wealth individuals but eventually was applied to MILLIONS of middle income taxpayers.

Obviously a lot of people don’t know much about how the tax system works and who is paying the most taxes.

 

[RCIAGraduate]

No wehere does it say,
Which when Jesus had heard, he said to him: Yet one thing is wanting to thee: confiscate whatever your neighbors have, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.

Perhaps those supportive of such measures see it as the people as a majority agreeing to create a system where there is public aid and support for those in need? Additionally, perhaps they see it as a greater evil to risk others being without support or recourse than it is to levy more taxes upon the wealthier portions of the population. To them, the public safety net like taxation is a necessary evil. I understand that the US does have the 10th Amendment to pursue such things and things might work better if more pressure was pushed on the states rather than the federal government as a whole (in accordance to constitutionalism correct?) but what about issues such as a state having little to no capacity to address their problems (e.g. the Dust Bowl during the Depression) which might warrant national aid or relief?

 

[qui_est_ce]

If you’ll read the thread, you will see the main gist of the opposition of big government giving hand outs is that it doesn’t work. IT DOES NOT HELP PEOPLE!! Our European neighbors are a mess. France has had to raise taxes so high people quit working because it’s cheaper to get retirement. Greece? Spain? It’s not sustainable and it doesn’t work.

Here is what JP II has to say about it Centesimus Annus)

By intervening directly and depriving society of its responsibility, the Social Assistance State leads to a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies, which are dominated more by bureaucratic ways of thinking than by concern for serving their clients, and which are accompanied by an enormous increase in spending.

 

[Trader]

No fair quoting a saint who actually lived under socialism and understood how evil it could be.

Socialists are always progressing to a vision of the future which is not possible because they fail to understand fallen human nature and that our ultimate goal is heaven, not a utopia that denies the Truth. Just look at how the progressives treat the greatest anti-poverty program ever invented: the family headed by two parents joined in a covenant of fidelity, permanence, and openness to new life.

 

[JonNC]

Perhaps those supportive of such measures see it as the people as a majority agreeing to create a system where there is public aid and support for those in need? Additionally, perhaps they see it as a greater evil to risk others being without support or recourse than it is to levy more taxes upon the wealthier portions of the population.

But in neither case is this what I’m arguing against. I’m arguing against taking wealth from individuals for the express purpose of giving it to another person. That is not general welfare. That is wealth redistribution.

To them, the public safety net like taxation is a necessary evil.

Maybe, but the fact that all it has done is maintain poverty should mean it is simply evil. But this should not be unexpected. Charity needs to be from love, not from a sense of “necessary evil”. Since it isn’t from love, there is no inherent compassion involved, and therefore no real caring. This doesn’t mean that individuals who work within the system lack compassion. Many probably do, but the system is not set up as compassion. Those who vote to transfer wealth aren’t acting with compassion. Those who have their wealth taken do not give voluntarily out of love.
It is set up for failure.

I understand that the US does have the 10th Amendment to pursue such things and things might work better if more pressure was pushed on the states rather than the federal government as a whole (in accordance to constitutionalism correct?) but what about issues such as a state having little to no capacity to address their problems (e.g. the Dust Bowl during the Depression) which might warrant national aid or relief?

Then states call out for compassionate contributions from their neighboring states, like Texas did for Louisiana after Katrina.

 

[JonNC]

OneSheep:

Where we are headed is a generally poorer society, and the most vulnerable are hurt the most.

Well, this poorer society has more cars, more cell phone, more air conditioning, more running water than any other society in the history of man.

:wave:t3::wave:t3::wave:t3:
Do we have poverty? Yes. But our poverty is mitigated by the great wealth created by our capitalist system.

 

[OneSheep]

Specifically, how much should anyone be required to pay in taxes? How much then, is too much?

Too much is more than what is needed.

No wehere does it say,
Which when Jesus had heard, he said to him: Yet one thing is wanting to thee: confiscate whatever your neighbors have, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.

Right, but he did say to pay your taxes, and again, that was when taxes went to a much less moral government. Sorry to mention that again.

Corporations have no power, at least not governmentally.

Did you know that corporations write legislation? They also buy influence. That is indeed power. And if those corporations are dominated by foreign interests, then you have that power coming from non-citizens.

The SCOTUS really biffed that one. It’s hard not to believe that they were not bought off just like the politicians.

Do we have poverty? Yes. But our poverty is mitigated by the great wealth created by our capitalist system.

I think Pope Francis was looking from a more global perspective.

And no, our poverty is not mitigated. If it was, we would have none.

What Pope Francis said was that the belief that the very wealthy will support the very poor on their own is naive, that the “trickle down effect” does not happen.

It’s true, it is not happening.

 

[JonNC]

Too much is more than what is needed.

Wow! The man who asked Jesus about getting his brother to give him half the inheritance was wrong. He should have demanded all of it.

Right, but he did say to pay your taxes, and again, that was when taxes went to a much less moral government. Sorry to mention that again.

Yes, and again, paying taxes isn’t the issue. The issue is whether we should force others, at the point of a government gun, to care for the least of His children, even though government does a terrible job of it.

Did you know that corporations write legislation?

You mean the people in a corporation write legislation. They do not pass legislation. I can write legislation and it means nothing. Legislators pass legislation.

They also buy influence.

If a legislator is selling influence, that is against the law. If you have specific knowledge of it, you should call the FBI!

And if those corporations are dominated by foreign interests, then you have that power coming from non-citizens.

Washington runs on foreign influence. That’s nothing new. If we want to reduce that influence, reduce government power.

On the other hand, at least corporations use their own money. This week, Kamala Harris proposed “free” preschool, “debt free” college, and “free” healthcare. Other than the fact that claiming these would be free or debt free is a lie (someone has to pay for them), she is trying to buy influence with other people’s money.

The SCOTUS really biffed that one. It’s hard not to believe that they were not bought off just like the politicians.

That’s a serious charge. Do you have evidence?
Do you think Chief Justice Roberts was bought off when he ruled in favor of ACA? That’s the decision that was “biffed”.

And no, our poverty is not mitigated. If it was, we would have none.

Mitigated doesn’t mean eliminated, unless you think our poor live like Venezuelans do in their socialist paradise.

What Pope Francis said was that the belief that the very wealthy will support the very poor on their own is naive, that the “trickle down effect” does not happen.

And yet Christ never called for coercion.

 

[OneSheep]

Yes, and again, paying taxes isn’t the issue. The issue is whether we should force others, at the point of a government gun, to care for the least of His children, even though government does a terrible job of it.

Yes, Jon, I hear you, you object to this use of your taxes. I find other uses of my taxes even more objectionable.

You mean the people in a corporation write legislation. They do not pass legislation. I can write legislation and it means nothing. Legislators pass legislation.

Do legislators even read the legislation that the lobbyists and corporations write?

Legislators pass legislation that they are paid to pass.

If a legislator is selling influence, that is against the law. If you have specific knowledge of it, you should call the FBI!

I should tell the FBI that special interests are funding campaigns? You must be joking.

OTOH, what an innocent, honest point. We need to tell the FBI about corruption in Washington DC. Wait, when they find it, and they follow the money, they will see that money goes from special interests to political campaigns to the media. Then the media fills the public with propaganda that also supports the special interests. In the mean time, the media would be completely nuts to maintain any story about the need for campaign finance reform, because the money-driven system is its bread and butter.

That is what the FBI will find, and when they present it to the legislators, wait for the laughter.

Did you pull my string again?

Washington runs on foreign influence. That’s nothing new

Foreign influence is now more powerful than ever. In the view of our history, it is now unprecedented.

And yet Christ never called for coercion.

There you go again, Jon. Taxation is coercive, period. Jesus told his people to pay their taxes, even when though they didn’t believe in the government at all, it was a persecuting government, an occupier!

The main thing you are saying is that you object to paying taxes to support the welfare program, and I hear that.

On the other hand, at least corporations use their own money. This week, Kamala Harris proposed “free” preschool, “debt free” college, and “free” healthcare. Other than the fact that claiming these would be free or debt free is a lie (someone has to pay for them), she is trying to buy influence with other people’s money.

If she pays for it by reducing the military budget, why complain? I disagree with anything being completely free. The people who benefit need to have some buy-in, some taxes.

I think Kamala Harris is too chummy with the lobbyists to reduce the military budget, though.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Yes, Jon, I hear you, you object to this use of your taxes. I find other uses of my taxes even more objectionable.

Do legislators even read the legislation that the lobbyists and corporations write?

Legislators pass legislation that they are paid to pass.

I should tell the FBI that special interests are funding campaigns? You must be joking.

OTOH, what an innocent, honest point. We need to tell the FBI about corruption in Washington DC. Wait, when they find it, and they follow the money, they will see that money goes from special interests to political campaigns to the media. Then the media fills the public with propaganda that also supports the special interests. In the mean time, the media would be completely nuts to maintain any story about the need for campaign finance reform, because the money-driven system is its bread and butter.

That is what the FBI will find, and when they present it to the legislators, wait for the laughter.

Foreign influence is now more powerful than ever. In the view of our history, it is now unprecedented.

I think Kamala Harris is too chummy with the lobbyists to reduce the military budget, though.

You just articulated the problem very well. You want to give these people more of YOUR money to gain power and discretion to make worthless and corrupt choices. They all take their cut.

No thank you.

 

[OneSheep]

You just articulated the problem very well. You want to give these people more of YOUR money to gain power and discretion to make worthless and corrupt choices. They all take their cut.

No thank you.

Well, I obviously understand your sentiment, but a lot of our taxes actually do end up doing good.

Education, environmental protection, infrastructure, national security, the government ends up making some things work to some degree in spite of all the corruption.

If they didn’t, it would all truly collapse.