patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,192,740 comments by 13,872 users - Al_Sharpton_for_President, RC2006, Robert Sproul online now
invite response« First « Previous Comments 41 - 51 of 51 Search these comments
lostand confused
2017 Jul 7, 10:32am
There you go with the usual right-wing tax propaganda again. The Illinois state tax increase was 1.20% POINTS, from 3.75%, to 4.95%
Of course, the right-wing propagandists will cast this as a "32% increase".
Typical heartless democrats filled with hate and name calling anyone who speaks the truth. Why can't you dems just say it like it is-it is a 32% tax hike-that ain't propaganda. Then you wonder why Trump won.
Why not cut untenable pensions, why not cut-oh well-democrats.
There are people struggling to pay 10-15k a year in proeprty taxes on houses that are worth 250-350K and on top of that this. When is enough enough? When will you cut public benefits and have them live like us taxpayers????
lostand confused
2017 Jul 7, 10:39am
Oh and here I took this from the comemnts sections of an article-so much for propaganda.
"Here is a simple example to show the fallacy of the “only 1.2% increase†nonsense.
($5000 of taxable income) x 0.0375 = $187.50
($5000 of taxable income) x 0.0495 = $247.50
If you paid $187.50 one year in taxes and $247.50 the next, guess what? You’re paying (drum roll please) 32% MORE IN TAXES.
Yes – a 32% increase in the personal income tax. Not “only 1.2%.â€
Go back to 8th grade math.
justme
2017 Jul 7, 11:24am
When the tax rate increases by 1.2% points, from 3.75%, to 4.95%, is it REASONABLE and INFORMATIVE to leave out the actual tax rates from the discussion, and instead to focus on the number 1.32=4.95/3.75(*)?? I think not, and that is why publishing only the 32% number constitutes propaganda.
(*) That is a little shortcut calculation for you. It will save you some time next time you need to do some math. No need for your more complicated numerical example, although your example does illustrate that a monthly income of $5000 would incur an additional tax of $60 per month. Not exactly a great cause for alarm, is it?
Taking a step back, I think the Republican strategy of "pension envy" has been a great success. I agree that police and firefighter pensions are excessive in many places, especially in California, and quite possibly also Illinois. But that would not make me vote Republican.
Goran_K
2017 Jul 7, 11:40am
Taking a step back, I think the Republican strategy of "pension envy" has been a great success.
It's been a success because government pensions are literally bankrupting municipalities. It's simply the truth.
Conversely it's also the reason why 8 months of "Trump-Russia" failed to gain any traction. The truth eventually bubbles up.
lostand confused
2017 Jul 7, 12:18pm
No need for your more complicated numerical example, although your example does illustrate that a monthly income of $5000 would incur an additional tax of $60 per month. Not exactly a great cause for alarm, is it?
32% is a fact. Well for 5k-how about when you make 50k or 100k?? Stop belittling the little people. Why should the average joe pay more taxes when you cna't run the govt ina fiscal manner. That is like me going to my neighbor and syaing hey I am broke-pay me 10 bucks a month. This is not a tax that only affects millionares-but everybody-well except the welfare mooches and illegals. You may want to throw labels like propaganda at someone who speaks the truth-but it ain't working. the democrats are now on trigglypuff level-agree with em or you are some ist. Unless you folks change and deal with common folk-you will be the party of the coastal elites. Trump won by embracing many of the principles that used to be owned by the dems.
IL has the highest property taxes in the nation. Pensions and other benefits are taking priority over roads, maintence etc. So what has this deal bought-except to pay pensions? Reduce that-most ordinary americans working similar jobs receive nothing-so why should these freaks enjoy a life of luxury at taxpayer expense.
Unlike CA, those living in Chicago can commute from indiana or Wi. Which si why moody's is still threatening to downgrade. Why pay high taxes and the highest property taxes in the nation when you can move a few miles away and be in indiana-where propriety taxes are capped at 1% ? WI is not bad-state tax is higher , but progressively higher. property taxes are far more reasonable when compared to IL.
This si where dems lose-they do not say hey we need money because of xyz, here is our plan to fix it-instead they demand money and then anybody who opposes is a propogandist some ist. Well asking for accountability when paying more money is now a bad thing .
meanwhile the dem leaders like Bernie own 3 homes and amke a million bucks a year and Obama makes 400k per speech to walls treet all the while pretending to care about the little guy.
Oh it is not pension envy when your taxes are paying the pension-it is just saying you are a public servant paid for by my dolalrs-I don't think you are worth this much-the market does not support it.
Patrick, I think you would be interested to know that the poor already pay little to no taxes. So when the GOP supported tax cuts, they will not get a large payoff.
So when you have a tax cut, it stands to reason that if you don't pay any or much taxes - you won't get a bigger refund.
Here are stats from IRS.gov
The top 1 percent of tax payers paid, 34.27 percent of federal income tax revenues.
The top 10 percent of tax payers paid 65.84 percent, or 2/3 of all taxes
The top 25 percent pay 83.5% of all taxes
The next 25 percent sahre 12.5% of the total tax burden for a total of 96%
The bottom half of America (the poor and disadvantaged that you refer to Patrick) how much of the tax burden do they share? (they make less then 26,000 a year)
3.5%
This is why context is crucial, always. Some people look at this and think "look! Unfair! The poor don't pay their fair share". Math seems to trick simple people like that.
monthly income of $5000 would incur an additional tax of $60 per month. Not exactly a great cause for alarm, is it
I am not opposed to taxes in principle, but it would be nice if they will be used for something that actually benefits poor people, or general welfare of state/nation. As it stands now, I can predict that (1) tax increase in IL will not bring it back to financial solvency (initial 3% tax was also temporary), (2) they will need another tax increase 1-3 years down the road, and (3) most of the tax increase will be used to pay municipal workers pensions - why should they be more privileged compared to private company employees or self-employed people?. On a federal level, I do not want to be taxed for building another $Trillion nation (after destroying it), an other $Trillion F-666 boondoggle, or another $Trillion subsidy for large agribusiness. Any tax increase will likely flow there.
Goran_K
2017 Jul 7, 2:54pm
I am not opposed to taxes in principle, but it would be nice if they will be used for something that actually benefits poor people, or general welfare of state/nation. As it stands now, I can predict that (1) tax increase in IL will not bring it back to financial solvency (initial 3% tax was also temporary), (2) they will need another tax increase 1-3 years down the road, and (3) most of the tax increase will be used to pay municipal workers pensions - why should they be more privileged compared to private company employees or self-employed people?. On a federal level, I do not want to be taxed for building another $Trillion nation (after destroying it), an other $Trillion F-666 boondoggle, or another $Trillion subsidy for large agribusiness. Any tax increase will likely flow there.
Government in general sucks at everything.
After working as a consultant for many state clients (including now), I can safely say they are some of the most mismanaged entities in the world. Sure you get your idiots in the private sector and I saw many in my career, but at least the realm of the market usually killed them off in good time.
State and Federal entities always have the tax coffers to raid for their incompetency, and it's never ending, until it does (see Rome 476 A.D, British Empire 1946, etc).
I can safely say they are some of the most mismanaged entities in the world. Sure you get your idiots in the private sector and I saw many in my career, but at least the realm of the market usually killed them off in good time.
About government, absolutely agree. About companies, in principle yes, but this applies to small and medium-sized companies. Big and connected corporations buy off government (purchase laws that restrict competition or purchase smaller competitors etc) and screw everyone else over while being inefficient. Power companies are a good example - deregulation made electricity prices higher while service sucks as before.
Goran_K
2017 Jul 7, 3:27pm
About government, absolutely agree. About companies, in principle yes, but this applies to small and medium-sized companies. Big and connected corporations buy off government (purchase laws that restrict competition or purchase smaller competitors etc) and screw everyone else over while being inefficient. Power companies are a good example - deregulation made electricity prices higher while service sucks as before.
Agreed. Competition is the oil that greases a market.
How do you feel about Google?
How do you feel about Google?
Computers is not my field, so I am relatively uninformed. Google at this point is the best search engine - I find more on it than on alternative engines - but somehow I feel that they try to force me into their "infrastructure" - to use their email if I have Android, etc, which is irritating. I have heard that they sometimes sort search results according to whatever commercial or political considerations, which would be even more irritating. But what alternative comparable quality search engine can I use?
« First « Previous Comments 41 - 51 of 51 Search these comments
If you're a rich Republican, and you want to get even richer, you have to play along with a little trick on the workers in the red states.
For decades now, those workers have seen their pay fall at the same time that their CEOs have seen their pay skyrocket. CEO pay is coming straight out of the pockets of the workers. The real insult is that the CEO's tax bill has been cut dramatically by the Republican Party, while the tax rate on the workers has not.
How did Republicans get large numbers of working people to give away even more of their hard-earned money to the rich?
The trick is to get those workers very angry - at someone else. This distracts them from what's really going on. Karl Rove understands this clearly, so he stokes the anger of ordinary workers. He makes them angry about abortion, evolution, flag burning, France, gays, guns, liberals, newspapers, "rich Democrats", school prayer, anything, anything except the one thing that would make their lives better: fair taxes on passive income, income the rich get for doing nothing at all.
The Republican party, sensing an opportunity to steer all debate away from the grossly unfair distribution of wealth, happily encourages the resentment of the working classes against the “liberals†and anyone else who talks about fairness.
Investors pay much lower tax rates on money they get from doing no work at all than workers pay on money they get from real work. Long-term capital gains tax is 15%, but most people pay 28% taxes on money they work for.
The amazing thing is, workers really take to that anger. They like it, and it makes sense to them. But they're not angry at what they think they're angry about. They think they're angry because some faggoty liberal or lesbian is telling them how bad they are, and making them say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas". Sure, that's part of it, but it's the smaller part. Mostly, they're angry because they come to the same crappy jobs every day and see their lives slipping away in meaninglessness, and they know they've lost the American game, but they don't know why. They feel really bad about themselves. They feel like losers. They are losers, because the rich are taking more of the pie and the workers are voting to make it even worse.
The core of this manipulation is to attribute negative feelings to others. Tell the workers that anyone who wants to fairly tax the rich "has contempt for the workers," "is disgusted by you," and the favorite: "they hate you." Attribute negative feelings, over and over. Just ignore reality and claim you know the inner feeling of your enemies. This is also the main psychological mechanism of manipulation in the Koran, by the way. Perhaps Bush learned something from his Saudi friends after all.
Republicans manipulate voter emotions by talking about patriotism, Jesus, and values, but all they ever actually do is start wars and cut taxes on the very rich, making sure the workers have no chance to catch up. Democrats are not so great either since they lost their way and started acting like Republicans, but at least there's hope they will remember they once stood for fairness. There are a lot more poor people than rich people, and the poor could easily vote to make things fair.
About a third of those earning less than $15,000 per year are the angry Republicans. That's enough to swing the election against their own interests. They vote over and over to elect rich Republicans who keep cutting taxes on themselves, while cutting Medicare and Social Security for the workers who elected them. Like Bush said in The Onion, "They help us stay rich, and in return, we help them stay poor."
It would be funny to watch the poor vote for their own poverty, if it were not so sad.
#politics