Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 1 year ago, 50 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,333,784
@1,333,778 (C)
It's gonna be fucking hilarious when those MAGA geezer idiots start losing their entire income and end up homeless and starving. Fucking hilarious. I hope they get 100% of what they voted for.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 20 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,333,820
@1,333,784 (A) > geezer idiots start losing their entire income and end up homeless and starving. Fucking hilarious.
Was it fucking hilarious when it started under the Biden admin?
Was it fucking hilarious that while under the Biden admin, the illegals were placed in hotels and fed, while our own citizens were homeless and hungry?
Anonymous B replied with this 1 year ago, 1 hour later, 11 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,333,838
@1,333,820 (E)
I don't find it one bit funny that the federal government has been imposing an unconstitutional excise tax on the god given right of individuals to consent to be gainfully employed. An excise tax which is laid out as being for the purpose of running an illegal ponzi scheme! If @OP can point to where that power was granted to the federal government in the U.S. constitution, perhaps I might change my tune.
Anonymous B double-posted this 1 year ago, 7 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,333,839
@1,333,784 (A)
It's "fucking hilarious" to you that people today might suffer because of an unconstitutional power grab by the federal government in the mid 1930s?
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 8 hours later, 5 days after the original post[^][v]#1,334,694
@1,333,838 (B)
The 16th amendment allows income taxes and Article I Section 6 allows it to levy and collect taxes in principle. Not everything you dislike is unconstitutional.
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 19 minutes later, 6 days after the original post[^][v]#1,334,856
@1,334,694 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Taxes disincentivize what they tax, payroll taxes are the very worst way to implement taxes. Keeping taxes the same, but moving it from a payroll tax to literally anything else would be an improvement.
Claiming to care about the working class, and then putting a direct tax on the activity that working class people do to survive is insane.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 1 year ago, 53 minutes later, 6 days after the original post[^][v]#1,334,873
@previous (I)
They're regressive so I don't love them, especially because FICA is capped when you hit the max SS payout income threshold. Other than a VAT I don't see another tax that can raise whatever FICA raises (maybe $1 trillion/yr?) though.
Anonymous I replied with this 1 year ago, 8 minutes later, 6 days after the original post[^][v]#1,334,875
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Unimproved land value taxes would be a good way to make up the bulk. It would encourage developing land, and would fall directly on the wealthier portions of society.
Sales taxes that exempted basic necessities could also make up a lot of it.
It doesn't really matter where it comes from, because any burden it places on society is balanced out by the same $ value burden being lifted from payroll taxes.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 1 year ago, 8 minutes later, 6 days after the original post[^][v]#1,334,880
@previous (I)
Land Value tax would be good! Not sure about an extra sales tax for basic necessities though. That seems really hard to manage because you'd need to have tens of thousands of exemptions for all kinds of products and it would just be clunky to implement imo.
> Not sure about an extra sales tax for basic necessities though.
I said a sales tax that exempts those, so just a tax on luxury goods broadly. > That seems really hard to manage because you'd need to have tens of thousands of exemptions for all kinds of products and it would just be clunky to implement imo.
Some states already do this, and don't apply sales tax to food, clothes, and toiletries.
It isn't hard to implement for those states, because grocers already have to mark items in their inventory to denote whether it applies to food stamps. Most of the work is already done, they would just need to go back into their system to flag non-food necessities.