Opinion of Bernie's Income Tax Plan?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 12:23:02 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Opinion of Bernie's Income Tax Plan?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5
Poll
Question: ?
#1
Freedom Proposal
 
#2
Horrible Proposal
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 88

Author Topic: Opinion of Bernie's Income Tax Plan?  (Read 4369 times)
RR1997
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,997
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: April 02, 2016, 06:40:18 AM »
« edited: April 02, 2016, 06:43:05 AM by RR1997 »



Massive HP (sane)

My parents (who make around $300k a year) would pay a 62% tax rate under this plan (and around 67% if you include state income taxes). 67% tax rate is insane. No one should be paying that much.

This plan would kill jobs and would hurt all classes. Sanders is an insane nut job. He's well-intentioned though.

I like Hillary's plan a lot better.

Hillary's plan isn't insane

I would enthusiastically vote for Trump over Sanders. Trump is so much better than him.
Logged
President Johnson
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,576
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.70


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: April 02, 2016, 06:46:05 AM »

Both. Low and middle incomes need a tax reduction. Wealthy should pay a little more.

But that alone won't solve fiscal problems. In some areas, spending cuts are necessary.
Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,613
Greece


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: April 02, 2016, 06:47:31 AM »

Reason No 1 why Republicans will eviscerate him if he somehow ends as the Democratic candidate.
Logged
RR1997
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,997
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: April 02, 2016, 06:52:06 AM »
« Edited: April 02, 2016, 06:56:23 AM by RR1997 »

Both. Low and middle incomes need a tax reduction. Wealthy should pay a little more.

But that alone won't solve fiscal problems. In some areas, spending cuts are necessary.

I agree with you.

I don't mind slightly raising taxes on the rich (although Bernie's plan increases taxes on the rich way too much IMO), but Bernie's plan proposes huge tax increases on the middle class too. That's a terrible idea. It also won't play well with voters during the GE.

Trump's and Hillary's tax plans are so much better.
Logged
/
darthebearnc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,367
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: April 02, 2016, 06:56:23 AM »

Why does $75,300 pay more than $118,500 in both situations?
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: April 02, 2016, 07:02:01 AM »

Guys, Vox is a lying Hillary hack site. Here's the correct numbers.

http://www.bernietax.com/
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: April 02, 2016, 07:04:09 AM »

Why does $75,300 pay more than $118,500 in both situations?

Vox forgot to make the numbers they pulled out of their ass sound consistent.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: April 02, 2016, 07:09:14 AM »

The light blue line is Bernie's payroll tax?  One of the worst ideas every conceived, is having the payroll tax not subject to a cap. The result, is that earned income is taxed at a much higher rate than unearned income. That's insane. The payroll tax is designed to fund future retirement benefits. Making into functionally into an income tax, has the result I described. The rates are indeed way too high in any event. The black market economy will boom, and many higher income folks will move elsewhere over the decades to other locales in the Anglophone zone.
Logged
Coolface Sock #42069
whitesox130
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,695
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.39, S: 2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: April 02, 2016, 08:00:20 AM »

Absolute and utter garbage. The way Bernie and liberal groups have talked lately would make one think that "the rich" don't pay any taxes at all, when in reality, they pay the overwhelming majority of federal income tax already.

It's all about taking money from people who have earned it and giving it to people who have not.

My wife and I would literally have 27% of our income redistributed away from us, just by the Feds. Add in state income taxes and property taxes and you're looking at almost 40%. This means that all my work from January 1 to almost the end of May would be working to earn money for other people, and that doesn't even factor in payroll taxes. And then, after that's implemented, the left will still think taxes are too low.
Logged
SillyAmerican
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,052
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: April 02, 2016, 08:34:43 AM »

I honestly don't know which is more insane: Bernie's tax plan, or Bernie's spending agenda. Too many people (especially younglings) don't understand that "free" ain't free at all...
Logged
Coolface Sock #42069
whitesox130
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,695
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.39, S: 2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: April 02, 2016, 08:36:32 AM »

I honestly don't know which is more insane: Bernie's tax plan, or Bernie's spending agenda. Too many people (especially younglings) don't understand that "free" ain't free at all...
Nope, free means "paid for by other people at inflated prices".
Logged
Democratic Cynicalism
Rookie
**
Posts: 21
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: April 02, 2016, 08:38:56 AM »

Logged
Averroës Nix
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,289
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: April 02, 2016, 08:44:40 AM »

linusvanpelt, one of our best posters, had a few keen points of criticism with regard to these calculations on AAD. I hope that he doesn't mind my re-posting them here. I do so less to defend the specifics of the Sanders tax plan than to demonstrate that Vox's policy analysis tends to be shallow and overconfident in its (frequently unspecified) assumptions:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
Averroës Nix
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,289
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: April 02, 2016, 08:56:27 AM »

Anyway, I wouldn't go so far as to say that I like the Sanders plan: It's a very rough policy proposal, as all platform statements are.

But is it better than Clinton's absurd, reckless, and infeasible, pledge not to raise taxes on households earning less than a staggering $250,000 per year? Absolutely. Is it a better starting point for tax reform than the flat tax charlatanry that Trump and Cruz are peddling? Of course it is.

Given the level of public services that Americans currently enjoy and claim to prioritize, taxes need to go up on most of us, and some of us - including any family with an income of $300,000 which is above the 98% percentile for income - need to pay much more.

The only people who are currently paying "too much" are people at the lower end of the income distribution, some of whom are literally being taxed into poverty, others who face effective tax rates of  - *gasp* - above 50% (!) because they earn just enough to become ineligible for certain kinds of public benefits. (And, taking LvP's points into account, this mark against the Sanders plan is much less severe than Vox's calculations would make it seem.)
Logged
Derpist
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 997
Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -2.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: April 02, 2016, 08:59:34 AM »

I like it. Obviously there are weird parts to it (lol that random 75k-100k bump), but people quibble too much over the specifics of tax plans when Congress will do a mix of straightening out problems and adding new problems. I like the general gist.
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: April 02, 2016, 09:04:20 AM »



Massive HP (sane)

My parents (who make around $300k a year) would pay a 62% tax rate under this plan (and around 67% if you include state income taxes). 67% tax rate is insane. No one should be paying that much.

This plan would kill jobs and would hurt all classes. Sanders is an insane nut job. He's well-intentioned though.

I like Hillary's plan a lot better.

Hillary's plan isn't insane

I would enthusiastically vote for Trump over Sanders. Trump is so much better than him.

As much I do oppose this plan or any plan that increase taxes, I do want to take exception with your personal example.  If I read this chart correctly, the percentage numbers on the chart are marginal tax rates and not total tax rate.  So while your parents whose income is $300K will pay more taxes under Sander's plan than today, it does not mean their total tax rate becomes 62% under Sander's plan, which I of course totally oppose.  
Logged
Averroës Nix
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,289
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: April 02, 2016, 09:05:35 AM »

Absolute and utter garbage. The way Bernie and liberal groups have talked lately would make one think that "the rich" don't pay any taxes at all, when in reality, they pay the overwhelming majority of federal income tax already.

It's all about taking money from people who have earned it and giving it to people who have not.

My wife and I would literally have 27% of our income redistributed away from us, just by the Feds. Add in state income taxes and property taxes and you're looking at almost 40%. This means that all my work from January 1 to almost the end of May would be working to earn money for other people, and that doesn't even factor in payroll taxes. And then, after that's implemented, the left will still think taxes are too low.

Does it get more "entitled" than living in a developed country, benefiting from public services and (relatively) non-corrupt governance, and expecting not to pay for any of this? That is exactly what rhetoric about working until whatever date "to earn money for other people" implies.

It's Randian garbage, and few trends in American politics have been more corrosive to our politics than the emergence of this narrative as a leading concern for middle-class households. Living in this country, working in this country, being a citizen of the United States means accepting the obligations that come with that, including paying taxes on your income. It's a shame that even Democrats are afraid to talk about this in terms of duty.
Logged
Derpist
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 997
Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -2.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: April 02, 2016, 09:08:21 AM »

Absolute and utter garbage. The way Bernie and liberal groups have talked lately would make one think that "the rich" don't pay any taxes at all, when in reality, they pay the overwhelming majority of federal income tax already.

It's all about taking money from people who have earned it and giving it to people who have not.

My wife and I would literally have 27% of our income redistributed away from us, just by the Feds. Add in state income taxes and property taxes and you're looking at almost 40%. This means that all my work from January 1 to almost the end of May would be working to earn money for other people, and that doesn't even factor in payroll taxes. And then, after that's implemented, the left will still think taxes are too low.

Does it get more "entitled" than living in a developed country, benefiting from public services and (relatively) non-corrupt governance, and expecting not to pay for any of this? That is exactly what rhetoric about working until whatever date "to earn money for other people" implies.

It's Randian garbage, and few trends in American politics have been more corrosive to our politics than the emergence of this narrative as a leading concern for middle-class households. Living in this country, working in this country, being a citizen of the United States means accepting the obligations that come with that, including paying taxes on your income. It's a shame that even Democrats are afraid to talk about this in terms of our national duties.

Actually, I would argue that the actual libertarians oppose tax increases because they don't think the programs paid for by those programs should even exist - based on their understanding of economics (that these programs are economically efficient and thus undesirable from a social welfare perspective). That stance I disagree with but can 100% respect.

I am much less sanguine on the upper-middle-class liberal suburbanites who just don't want to pay for the programs they want.
Logged
°Leprechaun
tmcusa2
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,116
Uruguay


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: April 02, 2016, 09:14:09 AM »

Yes, there is NO way that I believe the chart in the opening post. People who accept something like this at face value are very naive. People who believe propaganda about what his proposals are and are at the same time unwilling to actually look at his own site are not interested in finding out the truth in the first place.
Logged
🦀🎂🦀🎂
CrabCake
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,192
Kiribati


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: April 02, 2016, 09:19:06 AM »

A messy plan sure, but a better start than literally any Republican's plan who wound kill the economy and raise the deficit ( sorry 'fiscal Smiley conservatives')
Logged
The Free North
CTRattlesnake
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,567
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: April 02, 2016, 09:47:01 AM »

HP of course.


All private property should be abolished and prices should be set by the state.
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: April 02, 2016, 09:52:52 AM »

Looking at Sander's plan around the 118.5K region indicates to me that his plan does not increase the SS tax cap bit in stead will in crease FICA across the board.  He seems to start taxing SS again at 250K. I find that interesting as if his goal is to increase relative tax burden on those with higher income, increasing such a cap or getting rid of entirely is a easy a d simple way to do it on top what he is doing.
Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,613
Greece


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: April 02, 2016, 10:04:52 AM »

A messy plan sure, but a better start than literally any Republican's plan who wound kill the economy and raise the deficit ( sorry 'fiscal Smiley conservatives')

That's like saying W was bad but at least he was better than James Buchanan.
A ridiculously low bar.
Logged
RR1997
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,997
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: April 02, 2016, 10:39:06 AM »



Massive HP (sane)

My parents (who make around $300k a year) would pay a 62% tax rate under this plan (and around 67% if you include state income taxes). 67% tax rate is insane. No one should be paying that much.

This plan would kill jobs and would hurt all classes. Sanders is an insane nut job. He's well-intentioned though.

I like Hillary's plan a lot better.

Hillary's plan isn't insane

I would enthusiastically vote for Trump over Sanders. Trump is so much better than him.

As much I do oppose this plan or any plan that increase taxes, I do want to take exception with your personal example.  If I read this chart correctly, the percentage numbers on the chart are marginal tax rates and not total tax rate.  So while your parents whose income is $300K will pay more taxes under Sander's plan than today, it does not mean their total tax rate becomes 62% under Sander's plan, which I of course totally oppose. 

The numbers on the chart are marginal tax rates? I never read the article and I just assumed that it wasn't marginal. Thanks!

It's still a terrible idea nevertheless. HILLARY and Trump have better tax plans though.
Logged
Smash255
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,445


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: April 02, 2016, 10:49:41 AM »

The entire VOX chart is completely and utterly bogus.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.055 seconds with 15 queries.