Democratic Party 2017 and beyond

[Redbirds Fan]

Taxes are to some degree a necessary evil. The more money I give the government - the more responsibility I expect them to have. Unfortunately it seems governments tend to overspend on just about everything due to the bureaucratizing red tape caused to make everything "fair and equitable", rather than efficient and cost effective. Also, the more money I am required to give them - the less freedom I have to choose how my money gets spent.

While I understand that taxes pay for government programs, I cant stand our current tax system, it is confusing to many and taken advantage of by those that can afford to play the shell game. I am in more in favor of a "flat tax" rate, and believe that 10% or whatever number is 10% - no matter what economic class you are from (yes I know that will not go over well - but math is math and doesnt care about social class).

Honestly, I dont know much about corporate taxes to speak to them.

Two of the reasons we will probably never have a "flat" tax at 10% or any other percent (at least if you are including corporations)...really big business don't pay an effective rate that high now. They aren't going to sit still for an increase. The other side of the coin is that a flat tax is extremely regressive as applied to the poorest in society. After you consider what they pay for food and shelter, 10% takes out relatively much more of their remaining income that it does from high income earners. It is regressive in the same way as a sales tax on food. We have always favored progressive income taxes.

Not saying these are valid objections, just that they are what flat tax advocates will have to deal with.

Curious about your statement about choosing how your tax money is spent. It sounds like you mean something in addition to voting for members of Congress.

[The Feral Slasher]

Two of the reasons we will probably never have a "flat" tax at 10% or any other percent (at least if you are including corporations)...really big business don't pay an effective rate that high now. They aren't going to sit still for an increase.

But they don't have a say in the matter. We have a government that represents the people, not the corporations.

[GwynnInTheHall]

But they don't have a say in the matter. We have a government that represents the people, not the corporations.

Can I have some of what you're smoking?

[Hornsby]

So if Trump is a puppet of the Russians are they re-igniting a nuclear arms race with themselves ? Maybe they are playing 11 dimensional chess.

I know that you were joking, but the real answer is pretty scary in and of itself. Some have speculated that he's intent on eliminating NATO as a threat, so that he can continue to mess with some of the old Soviet block nations. Other have speculated that his long game is a semi-revival of the Soviet Union. To make anything possible, it's a lot better to have the US as a puppet rather than strong opposition.

[Hi.I'm.Mandy]

I know that you were joking, but the real answer is pretty scary in and of itself. Some have speculated that he's intent on eliminating NATO as a threat, so that he can continue to mess with some of the old Soviet block nations. Other have speculated that his long game is a semi-revival of the Soviet Union. To make anything possible, it's a lot better to have the US as a puppet rather than strong opposition.

Fortunately Slasher started a thread to discuss this

[chancellor]

But they don't have a say in the matter. We have a government that represents the people, not the corporations.

Well, since people work for corporations and changing the tax structure in a way that would uniformly assure they pay more would threaten people's employment, they will have a say in the matter. And you probably won't like it.

Any kind of a corporate flat tax is useless without significant reform as to what defines corporate income.

[baldgriff]

Next topic?? Just so you can figure me out.

[The Feral Slasher]

Well, since people work for corporations and changing the tax structure in a way that would uniformly assure they pay more would threaten people's employment, they will have a say in the matter. And you probably won't like it.

Any kind of a corporate flat tax is useless without significant reform as to what defines corporate income.

I think you misunderstood my post. I was not commenting about what is the proper tax structure or rate. I was responding to someone who dismissed my concerns about corporate money influence in politics as "sloganeering" then claiming that:

Two of the reasons we will probably never have a "flat" tax at 10% or any other percent (at least if you are including corporations)...really big business don't pay an effective rate that high now. They aren't going to sit still for an increase.

So apparently really big business somehow is able to influence policy, but perhaps not through lobbying and political donations ??

[revo]

Martin O'Malley + Cory Booker would make a great ticket.

I think Booker will be a top Veep candidate because we just saw what happens when Black Voters aren't motivated.

[DMT]

Martin O'Malley + Cory Booker would make a great ticket.

I think Booker will be a top Veep candidate because we just saw what happens when Black Voters aren't motivated.

I think Booker would be the better choice at the top.

[revo]

I think Booker would be the better choice at the top.

Yeah, could be. Either way, I think he (or another prominent African-American) need to be on the ticket.

[baldgriff]

Why does it have to be an African American? What about someone who is Jewish, Mexican-American, Hmong-American, Japanese-American?

[nots]

Why does it have to be an African American? What about someone who is Jewish, Mexican-American, Hmong-American, Japanese-American?

They wont rally the AA community

[Redbirds Fan]

I think you misunderstood my post. I was not commenting about what is the proper tax structure or rate. I was responding to someone who dismissed my concerns about corporate money influence in politics as "sloganeering" then claiming that:

Two of the reasons we will probably never have a "flat" tax at 10% or any other percent (at least if you are including corporations)...really big business don't pay an effective rate that high now. They aren't going to sit still for an increase.

So apparently really big business somehow is able to influence policy, but perhaps not through lobbying and political donations ??

What I said was that if a flat tax is to be applied to individuals and businesses it would never happen. It is regressive for individuals and would constitute a substantial increase for really big businesses. Yes, I think really big businesses have a lot of drag in the House (which is where tax legislation is required to originate) and the Senate, too. This comes both from lobbying and campaign contributions. I think House members are the most susceptible to this, as their geographical bases are generally much smaller, campaign coffers generally much more easily impacted, and terms much shorter. Plus, I think they tend to be even bigger goobers than out Senators are. For the most part, a bunch of corrupt a**holes. But then, I live in the state which sends Louis Gohmert to Washington.

And now you are changing your wording to "corporate money influence in politics" rather than what it was..."money in politics". Not exactly moving the goal posts, but at least moving the ball towards the hash marks. I'm a hard no on Citizens United. I agree that corporations have too much influence in our politics. Unless you have some ideas about how to fix it, they are just words. Yes, sloganeering.

I know how to fix Citizens United. Overturn it. End of story. Had Hillary been elected, I believe it would be a dead letter by the end of her first term. Now I believe we will be stuck with it for at least the rest of my life.

[Redbirds Fan]

Why does it have to be an African American? What about someone who is Jewish, Mexican-American, Hmong-American, Japanese-American?

Wiki lists five (5) Hmong-American politicians in the U.S. Four (4) of the were born outside the country, which could possibly eliminate the possibly of them becoming President, depending upon their parentage. It doesn't list place of birth for the fifth. Three of the five are elected officials in Minnesota.

And now you know.