Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "Joe Rogan on AOC's 70% Tax Plan, "Good Luck"" video.

@workout.matter790 nice way to deflect by stripping the nuance off the argument. If we become dependent on UBI a single point of failure can lead to society's collapse.
3
schmuck Norris I don't think you understand how a block function works.
2
@workout.matter790 reread and reinterpret what I said. I said that if we become dependent on UBI then A SINGLE POINT OF FAILURE would deny us UBI. What happens if the billion dollar corporations supporting such a system collapse, or move to a different jurisdiction? Suddenly we won't have the money propping up society.
2
@workout.matter790 "His argument was that he doesn't trust the government to give money out" - and we shouldn't trust them! You pay taxes to fix the roads, educate children, etc. right? Well tough shit, 4 trillion of that money you paid is now smoldering craters in the Middle East. 6 trillion if we count the money it's going to cost us to look after the veterans in the next few decades. How much of that money bailing out the banks? How much of that money in corporate subsidies?
2
@Diogenes2528 he understands. He understands that instead of making sales that net him 12 million a year, he will scale back and "only" make 10 million a year. He earns less, but gets better return on investment. "realistically who needs more than 10mil per year?" - it's not a matter of "need". If after a certain arbitrary point it costs you more to do business than just not doing it, you'll not do them because of poor return on investment.
2
He probably uses a blocklist and somehow someone put you on the list.
1
Which means there's no reason to ever try and make more money. Yeah, there's homeless people. We dumped a bunch of tax money into that problem already. Didn't work.
1
@apierrakeas9577 adequately funding the government is like continuing to support a company you don't like. If a company fucks you over you stop doing business with them, right? The government can fuck you over and since it can "adequately fund" itself through law, it cannot be influenced by the "customer", the people.
1
@workout.matter790 "They aren't, and they won't" - nice convincing argument you got there. "Not only that the US has more political, economic, and military leverage over every country in the world." - which is meaningless if you don't have enough money to pay for a war. "There are already plenty of countries who support a VAT system." - Yeah and it's absolute bullshit when I look at a receipt and the print out tells me how much cheaper my bill would be without those fucking garbage taxes. Those taxes limit my consumption. If I consume less, the economy slows down.
1
@workout.matter790 "You made the argument that people will leave the country in droves if we implement a VAT" - No, I didn't. You're mixing two separate events in your brain. "Or they'll jump to Europe who WAIT! THEY ALREADY HAVE A VAT! LOLOLOL." - this wasn't about VAT, you introduced VAT as an argument later. They already sell products in Europe where VAT exists. It wouldn't make that much difference to move to Europe as long as there was a host country trying to attract business with low tax rates like Ireland did to recover from the crisis. Sell in Europe with VAT, sell in America with VAT. What matters is escaping the high taxes. "In California, the highest taxed state in the country, do you see any of the tech companies leaving?" - don't they get a shit ton of subsidies, though? "Furthermore how is Amazon going to get a better deal than their existing 0% tax based on $3-billion in profit, and $6 EPS?" - it's not a matter of a better deal, just a "not as bad" deal. "Christ, if you're going to make a claim, prove it." - pretty sure the supertax on the rich in France failed miserably because of all the subterfuges involving withholding income or officially moving to other countries.
1
@workout.matter790 ""'What happens if the billion dollar corporations supporting such a system collapse, or move to a different jurisdiction? Suddenly we won't have the money propping up society." Busted." - that's not related to VAT. You're either confused or outright lying to save face at this point. "Uhhhhhh, this is literally on Andrew Yang's campaign site which I'll cite here: "With a VAT of half the European level, we can pay for Universal Basic Income for all American adults of $1,000 per month.". If you didn't know Yang's policy, why are you even arguing here?" - but that wasn't the original point of the argument. If you want my critique of Yang's magic VAT there's the issue that VAT would increase the cost of goods and thus reduce consumption. Not to mention there's states with sales tax already. "Who doesn't get tons of subsidies in heavily industrialized nations?" - my point is that tech companies would get shafted in low tax states. So it doesn't matter that everyone gets tons of subsidies, my point is that California must be the state where it's more profitable to have a tech business. Or do you think they're staying in California because of sheer goodwill? "and how is Amazon going to get a better deal " - it's not about a better deal. If we give them a bad deal they will seek a less bad one. "You're comparing an outrageous 75% personal income tax to a VAT?" - I am not. And you're being seriously dishonest right now.
1
@ahmed85021 his logic is sound. He would have paid 70% tax on those two extra million dollars so he said fuck that, might as well scale back and "fly under the radar".
1
Shard 308 wealth taxes are bullshit because anyone sensing the incoming taxes could just start buying assets that could be moved to other countries. If I had 100 million dollars I'd buy 90 million dollars worth of yatches and sail them to Russia to sell them to oligarchs or something. Try to get the Russians to freeze my accounts.
1
@mrchrysler9736 very few people paid that high of a tax rate and the 50's was when the US was an industrial powerhouse while the rest of the world was broke and bombed to shit.
1
@cloud218 he's not part of the problem, he is acting rationally. You would do exactly the same if you saw that your extra effort was going to waste.
1
@ahmed85021 murder isn't the same as trying to keep your money. Murder is a crime. Protecting your property from legalized theft is almost a moral imperative.
1
Shard 308 "Theres an actual group called The Patriotic Millionaires who WANT higher taxes on themselves" - take that shit with a grain of salt. There's the CEO of a wholesale chain who is propped up as some kind of hero for wanting a higher minimum wage but as a wholesaler he has less staff on stores and they're typically qualified so they're paid higher than min wage already, what he actually wants is to kill the retailer business and force people to go to his stores. So there's plenty of ulterior motives, especially if they want taxes on income. They might have so much wealth income is irrelevant, but would prevent more people from becoming millionaires and thus threaten their businesses.
1
Your system is a closed system when in reality wealth can be generated. There's 109 dollars. Plus the 10 loaves there's 119 dollars in the economy (let's assume it's an island without trade). However if one of those people goes fish and brings a fish and that fish is worth, say, 5 dollars, now there's 124 dollars in the economy. If three guys get together and decide to go in the woods to kill a hog or something, and the whole hog is worth 30 dollars, now there's 154 dollars in the economy. What if the remaining guys plant wheat so they can make more loaves? The money inside the economy keeps growing.
1