Is there a single good argument against progressive taxation?

Is there a single good argument against progressive taxation?

Subsidy on being a parasite, tax on being a producer.

when the first post is also the best post

Don't be a fucking commie

Flat tax is progressive. The guy who earns $10 million a year pays way more at 25% than the guy who earns $20k pays at 25%.

...

>let's just put a big tax on people who worked harder, so they can pay for Jamal's nigglets

It was invented by progressives.

Standards of living: Lifts floor, lowers ceiling. Leads to a more healthy society, fewer parasites overall.

Correct.

Equality. /thread

Meanwhile Ben Carson is an extremely successful brain surgeon because of government aid as a kid.

Makes me think of the lost opportunities due to racist thinking being commonplace.

What on earth is this retard shit? Whenever people propose flat taxes they're talking rates like 15%. How would I, as a middle class person, be worse off paying 15% as opposed to the 40% I pay now?

If you own more propriety you benefit more from the security of the state, so you should pay more taxes.

no, people who are able to steal money from you should be in charge of your bank account.

Also, bernies sons mom had nothing to do with that 3 million dollar shut down and discredit

Fuck the floor, I want ground

>flat tax means no government funding
what are you, retarded or something?

Presumably it helps reduce inequality which is important unless you want the plebs starting a revolution

Fpbp

Its fair, something you asshole niggerlovers are supposed to care about.

It does literally none of those things.

What a stupid fucking comment you incredulous moron... have you even thought about how retarded this is?

How does one substantively "benefit more from the security of the state" by virtue of owning property? Do protections allotted to others necessarily decrease when still others have property in the state, which, incidentally, is protected provided that such property is within the ambit/jurisdictional reach of the state? Would others (citizens) be refused such state protection were they to get on the property ladder? I don't think so on either count, retard. Nemo dat quod not habet. What if such concentrate property benefits the economy because A used it more efficiently than B?

I could go on ad nauseum, but you're obviously a stupid fucking commie and I really can't be arsed. Kill yourself.

>implying the wealthy now pay any tax

They already pay more taxes.

muh typos, aids. "non [habet]".

Kill yourself again, commie.

The government turns your tax money into wars, bailouts and a cruelly distorted parody of society.

Join the adults in the deep end, user.

>is there anything wrong with theft?

You already know the answer to that question. Why bother asking?

if jews didnt exist it would work.

thats about it though.

cartoon doesnt understand what a flat tax is and just hopes its audience is retarded.

If the flat tax was 15% the middle class would get a massive tax break, everyone would have skin in the game rather than just the middle class under our progressive tax system that allows the poor to pay nothing and the rich to get out of paying though expensive accountants and lawyers.

Flat tax would mean the more you make the more you pay so it wouldnt be regressive like the retards on the left hope you think.

Fair is fair, everyone pays the same rate. Nothing complex about it other than misinformation like the OP and his cartoon.

And while the 20k guy has to spend 90% on basic needs and rent and slides into debt with the slightest irregular expense, the 10m guy can spend just as much and invest his copious leftover money to get more money.

A flat tax cements social stratification and you'll end up with feudalism by a different name.

It is what we have now. This is always the result of a progressive tax. A flat tax where everyone pays the same percentage is fair. Especially true if you make it where there are no deduction for anyone. But DC wants to exempt the supposed poor, and to leave certain deductions in for home buying as one. Also the flat tax if done right will tax all form of income, so that means money earned on stocks, and profits from selling a house would be income. This is why it is being so demonized. As it stands now only the Middle Class is the most tax from their earnings. The rich have so many write off their per dollar tax is low, and the supposed poor get the Earned Income Tax Credit, and get more than they had deducted.

What's really amazing is that a progressive retard can look at the results of the policies he supported over the course of the 20th century and still make this claim.

Are you actually poor or retarded enough to believe that stocks and capital gains aren't taxed?

The more people keep, the more they can save and spend. This drives investment (capital) and consumption (which drives to increased labor demand). Ergo, more jobs, and better pay at those jobs as labor gets tight. Result: full employment at good wages.

Flat tax is progressive. It refers to a single percentage. By literally mathematical definition.

.25% of $30k is

Its nit meant for critical thinking, jsut say the middle class will be hirt and youve successfully spooked most americans.

So creating a system where government elites suppress everyone through taxes such economic mobility is literally impossible and everyone is forced to be a welfare queen (I.e. suckling from what the government bestows upon you) is some how NOT feudalism? Why because the titles aren't King and Duke?

Because liberals don't understand % and say the rich should pay more
I've had this argument many times
I feel like I'm surrounded by morons
Have you ever heard someone refer to federal taxes as "our money"

They do, and more than everybody else, you're just brainwashed into stupid memes like most college-age basic leftists.

>.25%
I'll pay that rate any day at any income.
>Learn to fucking math.
Buahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

>rent seekers who get wealth from ownership of capital are producers
>people who do work from which the capitalist profits are parasites
This is your brain on capitalist apologetics

Not really. Capitalism tend to lead to wealth accumulation at the top end of of the wealth distribution. Progressive taxation is needed to prevent that from happening. Primary example is US over the past 40 years - taxation has become much less progressive, and wealth has accumulated in the top 1% much more than it was beforehand.

>They do, and more than everybody else, you're just brainwashed into stupid memes like most college-age basic leftists.
If you did your graph as a percentage of income, you would get a very different story. In other words, the top 1% make far more a percentage of total income now than they did in 1980.

>Flat tax is progressive.
Not the way we typically define progressive taxes. Progressive is when higher incomes pay a higher percentage, not same percentage and higher amount.

>the people that own over half the wealth still pay less than half the taxes.

Your graph clearly illustrates they don't pay enough.

But income earned from investing is taxed lower than income earned from working right?

Taxation is theft.

>own and maintain a property through invested capital, creating housing for working class who could not otherwise afford it while creating jobs in maintaining said property
>this somehow makes you a parasite
This is your brain on lefty/pol/

It can result in a convoluted tax code filled with exceptions and loophopes. I'd prefer a simple progressive tax.
>less than 50k a year = 0% tax
>everything after 50k a year = 25% tax

Income tax in general, however, massively bloats up the size of the government and their power to question every single transaction you make.

>This creates incentive to excel
No one is saying well If I make more money that income will have a higher tax rate, and even though I'm still making more money I'm not going to do it because I just won't pay higher taxes on my new higher income.

In my experience, it's not the higher taxes that demotivate me but the convoluted tax code.
It's not just federal tax, sometimes you got to deal with county, state, and federal taxes all at the same time.

So you would refuse a raise if you had to spend extra time filling out your taxes because you earned more money?

Please respond to this poster you stupid wop-dago. Please somehow refute him. I fucking dare you.

The AnCap we needed, but not the AnCap we deserve.

Because they don't work real jobs, so they never see how high the tax rate really is. Yeah, no shit the barista at Starbucks doesn't care how high the tax rate is raised; they're all tax-exempt.

a hardworking white manual laborer deserves an additional $10,000 more than some billionaire deserves another 1,000,000 dollars.

>Taxation is theft.
Yes, 0 taxes is the way to go

>Is there a single good argument against progressive taxation?
Rich don't pay income tax. And more importunately they don't pay second most inporatnt tax. Inflation tax.

>Rich don't pay income tax.
I would clarify this to say that the rich don't pay very much income tax. The question is how to make them pay - I'm hopeful Trump and the Democrats will do this.

If that extra 4k is taxed at 25% instead of 11% yes, fuck making more money.

Refuse a raise, no.

Work more hours fucking yes. I trade my life for that money, if I won't see any of it why the fuck would I give my life for it?

No, I wouldn't refuse a raise.
But I also do contract work, and mine crypto.
It's like you retards think everyone files an 1040ez

>Someone has more money than me BAAAAWWWWW

And what's wrong with that?

One year I got a $1 hr raise, ended up taking home $32 less a month. A $1 raise was a $192 per month windfall for the tax man. Six months later got another $1 and got to keep all of it. That's how tax brackets work.

Social security takes $1 from me today in exchange for $1.30 40 years into the future. Our taxation system is fucking stupid.

the current system kills the middle class

i make 75 and pay 20

if i made 35 id pay almost nothing....

i would be better off working an easier job and giving up 15k

Not really, no. Only people who have a bad understanding of what "private property" is will oppose it.

i believe in flat tax if the big corps and buisiness actually pay thier tax.

Your infographic says that social security is a scam because your progeny cannot inherit it. Do you understand what an annuity is and why they have economic benefits?

shut up loser head X-(

THIS SHOULD BE THE ONLY ANSWER

move to Hartford CT and tell us how it made Hartford better off

>nice place
decades of democrat leadership
>shitty place

(same goes for 90% of cities in the US... baltimore, the entire northeast, cleveland, etc)

>lifts floor
nope, zero is zero
>lowers ceiling
yup
>fewer parasites
not while you incentivize parasitism

Wealth generation is a nonlinear function of present wealth.

That's exactly the problem. You can create your own investment fund that doles out an annuity which then your children can inherit. Or you can pay social security taxes and you're children inherit nothing.

>lowers ceiling
>implying this is a good thing
Literally holding society and people back and you call that progress?

>One year I got a $1 hr raise, ended up taking home $32 less a month. A $1 raise was a $192 per month windfall for the tax man. Six months later got another $1 and got to keep all of it. That's how tax brackets work.
That's not even slightly how they work. You are an idiot and aren't well enough informed or educated to have an opinion on taxes.

>You can create your own investment fund that doles out an annuity which then your children can inherit.
A standard annuity is not inheritable. You can pay extra for one that does (or pay the same and the monthly payout is lower), but then its not really an annuity (the point of an annuity is generally to insure a parent of having a longer than expected life and thus more than expected living expenditures)

Then, why would I'd be rich if being poor means I can leech from the state?

Are you dumb enough to not understand how many loopholes there are in the current tax system so that the top percentage barely pays anything?

The entire system needs to stop. It needs to end. Everything everywhere needs a flat tax, period, with no way out of it. Obongocare exaserbated this problem with the healthcare tax.

>Work more hours fucking yes. I trade my life for that money, if I won't see any of it why the fuck would I give my life for it?
You will see whatever amount is yours after taxes. You will never make less money by earning more money even with a progressive tax.

>Then, why would I'd be rich if being poor means I can leech from the state?
Because 50% of 1mill/year is alot more than 100% of 30K/year?

>Everything everywhere needs a flat tax, period, with no way out of it.
Getting rid of loopholes (obviously a good thing) is a completely different question than instituting a flat tax. There is no reason that you can't get rid of loopholes _and_ have progressive taxation, e.g. 10% on income below 80K, 30% on income below 300K, and 50% on income above 300K.

...

Our current tax system is designed so that loopholes can be instituted whenever they please. The entire system needs to be completely overhauled, I no longer have faith that it can be repaired knowing the things I know.
Also, progressive taxation causes stagnation of wages at certain tiers due to taxes. Re: the 250k range, and the no longer considered working poor range.

Except welfare isn't progressive

I agree. This is one reason why the social security system is progressive, i.e. high income people get less than they paid in (on a yearly basis), while middle/low income people get more than they paid in.

But a progresive tax coud mean that there's a limit to my net worth. Why being more efficient?

>loopholes can be instituted whenever they please
I agree that the whole system needs to be overhauled to eliminate loopholes. But putting a completely flat tax on top of that is just going to make the rich continue to get richer. There is not alot of evidence that rich people stop generating income if they are facing high marginal tax rates (e.g. the 50% for income above 300K in my example). Obviously the 300K threshold should be higher for families.

They pay for better healthcare? Duh.

Wow, it's almost like some people are stupid and make dumb decisions that negatively affect multiple aspects of their lives. Is it possible that morons can't figure out how to make money OR be healthy?

>But a progresive tax coud mean that there's a limit to my net worth.
I'm not sure what you mean.

fpbp

>Except welfare isn't progressive
No doubt those welfare cliffs need to be eliminated. The Clinton/Gingrich workfare reforms removed alot of them, but I think you are correct that in some states they still exist.

there should be a 100% flat tax base amount which requires doing favors for the government to get tax breaks to reduce the 100%

Progresive taxes tend to limit the amount of income one can earn. In that case I'd do a Depardieau and go to a country with the same benefits I enjoy but with less taxes.
Now, transplant this link of thought to corporations

>Is there a single good argument against progressive taxation?
Yes, it's called economics.

Time for some basic math, ass hat

If Bill Gates makes 3,614,025,600 a year
and some cuck like you makes 100,000 a year,
and both of you are taxed the same amount,
There's no way in hell Bill is paying less taxes than you. with a flat tax, it is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE that you are taxed higher than Bill.

The wealthy have access to means of income that hide their income from taxes.

Me go out and buy a dinner, with my income that was taxed.
Business man goes out and has a 'working' dinner and that's untaxed paid by his company and deduced from their profits.