Chira numbuh wan!

[shovelquest]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't know about you but I'd take something substantive like health care or hiring advantages over a month of lip service and 'thoughts and prayers'.

We could have that, and all kinds of social programs in this country.

If we didn't invite literally everyone in the world to move over here and start getting them.

You get one or the other. Immigration, or social programs.

You don't get both.

Nowhere have you ever gotten both.

In fact usually where you get it there is a major reduction in total population.

[Botten]

Originally Posted by shovelquest [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

We could have that, and all kinds of social programs in this country.

If we didn't invite literally everyone in the world to move over here and start getting them.

You get one or the other. Immigration, or social programs.

You don't get both.

Nowhere have you ever gotten both.

In fact usually where you get it there is a major reduction in total population.

Such absolute nonsense.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is America the country was built from immigration. This country is a melting pot of different cultures.

We did thrive because of our acceptance. Every country knows of the freedoms and opportunity in America.

America has had immigration and social programs since its conception. We are the richest nation in the world and its people insist on just making the insanely rich that much richer.

The right has it engraved in their heads that if they haven't worked for it then they don't deserve it. That it is socialism if we ever go back to the early 1940s, where the top marginal tax rate for the wealthiest Americans reached as high as 94%.

This nation's nationalism and military/local institutional family structure is sickening at times. Europe and may other countries quickly learned this is just a formula for those that love extremism.

The distain in America seems to be regulated to Latina American countries.
I just see this as no different from the distain for the Irish or Chinese early in America's history.

To much of a culture shock to those who didn't grow up with acceptance.

It is too bad.

[Reiwa]

Originally Posted by Botten [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The right has it engraved in their heads that if they haven't worked for it then they don't deserve it. That it is socialism if we ever go back to the early 1940s, where the top marginal tax rate for the wealthiest Americans reached as high as 94%.

The Good Ol’ Days: When Tax Rates Were 90 Percent

Regardless, one should ask how much the rich were actually paying. It should be noteworthy that back in the 1950s, the government wasn’t actually collecting any more in tax revenue as a percentage of GDP. There’s something called Hauser’s Law, which basically states there is a maximum threshold on how much the government can tax out of its population. I think this “law” is no such thing. If the government really wanted to expropriate more, it could do so. But Hauser’s Law based on the fact that in pretty much every year since 1950, the government has collected between 17 to 20 percent of GDP in taxes. Here are the government tax receipts compared to the top marginal tax rate:

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Botten]

Originally Posted by Reiwa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The Good Ol’ Days: When Tax Rates Were 90 Percent

The article presents a one-sided view without addressing potential counterarguments from those who support high marginal tax rates. Including these counterarguments and then refuting them would make the piece more balanced and persuasive.

Change tax deductions on passive investments losses on real estate then [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.].

But what was probably the biggest lost deduction for wealthy individuals was the elimination of deductions on passive investment losses on real estate. Before 1986, wealthy individuals would often buy real estate with no hopes at all of it cash flowing. That wasn’t the point. The point was that real estate is depreciated every year in the eyes of the IRS. Even though in the long run, properties usually go up in value, the IRS assumes that every twenty-seven-and-a-half years a property’s value will depreciate to zero.

This “loss” can be written off. So, for example, say a man earning $100,000 a year buys a property worth $275,000. He rents out the property and breaks even on it. The tax code allows that person to write off $10,000 as a loss which he can count against his income for that year. So now he only has to pay taxes on $90,000. If he owned ten such properties, his income would be zero, at least according to the IRS.

That deduction is now gone for everyone but “active” real estate investors, or those who invest in real estate as a career.

[Reiwa]

Originally Posted by Botten [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The article presents a one-sided view without addressing potential counterarguments from those who support high marginal tax rates. Including these counterarguments and then refuting them would make the piece more balanced and persuasive.

Did you try asking it to refute the historical facts?

It's ok for a piece of writing to have an opinion.

[Lune]

Got it, so built by indian pioneers who swam over from Russia, got the crops and chihuahas all nice and domesticated, laid out the I-5 corridor, and then the Virginia Company was like "Oh that looks like a nice place to move to".

[shovelquest]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

the I-5 corridor

This is where we just can't ever agree. I see the people that work at the pencil factory as people that work at a pencil factory.,

You see them as writers of classical music, brilliant golden children of light, that all created the pencil out of thin air and they are all equal to the same glowing energy consumed as one sexual orgasmic combination of human will and joy and love.