Get your act straight before you go talking shit about stuff you don’t understand.
this is amazing, are you a real person?
you’re still yet to manage to even disagree with any statement i’ve made and you’re still coming up with gold like this
i’m going to give you a step by step, so that you can actually manage to make an argument (past whining about how being an expert on tax makes you an expert on a discussion you don’t even believe is about tax)
I disagree with every bullet point because this comic isn’t about tax. If you would stop being such a knucklehead and respond to MY bullet points maybe you’d see we actually do have common ground. This isn’t a tax issue. I don’t know how to be more clear than that.
I just don’t understand what your point is besides being a contrarian asshole for its own sake. This comic has nothing to do with tax. It is mistitled. You are complaining about the wrong thing. You keep talking and say nothing. You’re just pissed off at “corporations” in general. I am too. I’m sick of being squeezed for every penny I’ve got. But this comic isn’t a problem or solution involving tax. You’re just completely wrong and misguided. I really wish you could see that but you are intent on arguing for its own sake. It’s so incredibly frustrating. I’ve offered my suggestions for starting to come up with solutions and you won’t even read or respond. You’re just so stubborn it’s impossible to get through. I’m really trying here and you just refuse to budge. It’s actually really impressive.
that propagandizing children is bad? and that “i see no issues with an incentive structure to propagandize children” is orthogonal to that
besides being a contrarian asshole for its own sake
says the person seemingly taking the position “propagandizing children is good, actually”
I’ve offered my suggestions for starting to come up with solutions
solutions to what? this entire conversation is about working out whether or not propagandizing children is a bad thing or not. if it’s not a problem, which somehow seems to be your stance on this, then there’s nothing to come up with a solution to
I’m really trying here
you haven’t answered a single question i’ve asked you, nor have you disagreed with a single thing i’ve said, other than just now when you disagreed that tax cuts incentivize behavior
i don’t think you’ve even stated a position other than “you’re wrong” with no further elaboration
your contributions to this conversation almost entirely consist of trying to change the subject to talk about something else
i’m not sure “I’m really trying here” is a particularly apt description
To begin: American corporate culture is toxic. That awful facade of upbeat ecstatic euphoria we have to put on to keep up the charade that everything is AWESOME is just soul crushing. We are being squeezed dry for every penny we have and we’re being told it’s inflation caused by demand for higher wages so people don’t have to choose between rent, food, and medicine this month. Billionaires fly around on private jets and cruise super yachts while children are denied lunch in school. Half the country is fed a steady diet of disinformation telling them climate change is a lie, while they live in food deserts eating processed microwaved diabetes in a box. Economic mobility is stagnating, all the wealth is flowing uphill, our education system is out of reach for many, and overpriced anyway. Meanwhile, not a single banker, politician , or regulator has gone to jail for their part in the Great Recession which cost the taxpayers dearly, while those responsible largely walked away with millions, secure in the knowledge their banks are Too Big To Fail and will most likely be bailed out again the next time that happens. And don’t even get me started about healthcare.
This comic is about these issues. Tax policy is neither the cause of nor the solution to these problems. As I’ve said a dozen times this comics title is misleading. I’ve already posted my thoughts on possible solutions to these issues twice.
Here it is yet again:
First I would have the FCC reign in Fox News disinformation because we’ll probably never get anywhere when 100 million Americans are being brainwashed daily
Campaign finance reform
Term limits and maybe age limits in public office
Ranked voting to help get rid of the two party system
It would be great to somehow change corporate governance to require them to prioritize all stakeholders and not just shareholders but I don’t know how to do this
Maybe a requirement for publicly traded companies to have one seat on the board of directors be elected by the employees to represent their interests, perhaps a requirement that maybe 10% of shares issued and outstanding be owned by said employees
But we can keep talking about charity deductions for individuals and corps if you want, even though this is the first time I’m hearing someone saying that is controversial.
PS: you want to hear something funny I just thought of? If we ban charity donation deductions for corps it would probably lead to a net DECREASE in tax revenue rather than an increase. My reasoning is that deductions are only worth 21% at the Federal corporate level but up to 37% at the individual level. So we’d probably finagle it so the donations happen anyway, just by the individuals and institutions who own the business instead, who would get a better discount on their contributions. Actions, meet unintended consequences!
…I just don’t get you. You’re easily one of the most frustrating users I’ve ever encountered. I don’t know how to be more clear that we got major issues but it’s NOT because of tax and it’s NOT solvable via tax. I REALLY truly thought my last comment would hit home but you’re just impossible. Thanks for proving my initial point: “i’m sure this thread will be full of rational reasonable discussion by tax experts.” Bookmark my comment and maybe read it again when you turn 20.
no, because it’s not relevant?
this is amazing, are you a real person?
you’re still yet to manage to even disagree with any statement i’ve made and you’re still coming up with gold like this
i’m going to give you a step by step, so that you can actually manage to make an argument (past whining about how being an expert on tax makes you an expert on a discussion you don’t even believe is about tax)
I disagree with every bullet point because this comic isn’t about tax. If you would stop being such a knucklehead and respond to MY bullet points maybe you’d see we actually do have common ground. This isn’t a tax issue. I don’t know how to be more clear than that.
given that one of the bulletpoints is this:
you are either very bad at the thing you claim to be an expert in, or you don’t fully understand the meaning of the word “disagree”
I just don’t understand what your point is besides being a contrarian asshole for its own sake. This comic has nothing to do with tax. It is mistitled. You are complaining about the wrong thing. You keep talking and say nothing. You’re just pissed off at “corporations” in general. I am too. I’m sick of being squeezed for every penny I’ve got. But this comic isn’t a problem or solution involving tax. You’re just completely wrong and misguided. I really wish you could see that but you are intent on arguing for its own sake. It’s so incredibly frustrating. I’ve offered my suggestions for starting to come up with solutions and you won’t even read or respond. You’re just so stubborn it’s impossible to get through. I’m really trying here and you just refuse to budge. It’s actually really impressive.
that propagandizing children is bad? and that “i see no issues with an incentive structure to propagandize children” is orthogonal to that
says the person seemingly taking the position “propagandizing children is good, actually”
solutions to what? this entire conversation is about working out whether or not propagandizing children is a bad thing or not. if it’s not a problem, which somehow seems to be your stance on this, then there’s nothing to come up with a solution to
you haven’t answered a single question i’ve asked you, nor have you disagreed with a single thing i’ve said, other than just now when you disagreed that tax cuts incentivize behavior
i don’t think you’ve even stated a position other than “you’re wrong” with no further elaboration
your contributions to this conversation almost entirely consist of trying to change the subject to talk about something else
i’m not sure “I’m really trying here” is a particularly apt description
To begin: American corporate culture is toxic. That awful facade of upbeat ecstatic euphoria we have to put on to keep up the charade that everything is AWESOME is just soul crushing. We are being squeezed dry for every penny we have and we’re being told it’s inflation caused by demand for higher wages so people don’t have to choose between rent, food, and medicine this month. Billionaires fly around on private jets and cruise super yachts while children are denied lunch in school. Half the country is fed a steady diet of disinformation telling them climate change is a lie, while they live in food deserts eating processed microwaved diabetes in a box. Economic mobility is stagnating, all the wealth is flowing uphill, our education system is out of reach for many, and overpriced anyway. Meanwhile, not a single banker, politician , or regulator has gone to jail for their part in the Great Recession which cost the taxpayers dearly, while those responsible largely walked away with millions, secure in the knowledge their banks are Too Big To Fail and will most likely be bailed out again the next time that happens. And don’t even get me started about healthcare.
This comic is about these issues. Tax policy is neither the cause of nor the solution to these problems. As I’ve said a dozen times this comics title is misleading. I’ve already posted my thoughts on possible solutions to these issues twice.
Here it is yet again:
First I would have the FCC reign in Fox News disinformation because we’ll probably never get anywhere when 100 million Americans are being brainwashed daily
Campaign finance reform
Term limits and maybe age limits in public office
Ranked voting to help get rid of the two party system
It would be great to somehow change corporate governance to require them to prioritize all stakeholders and not just shareholders but I don’t know how to do this
Maybe a requirement for publicly traded companies to have one seat on the board of directors be elected by the employees to represent their interests, perhaps a requirement that maybe 10% of shares issued and outstanding be owned by said employees
But we can keep talking about charity deductions for individuals and corps if you want, even though this is the first time I’m hearing someone saying that is controversial.
PS: you want to hear something funny I just thought of? If we ban charity donation deductions for corps it would probably lead to a net DECREASE in tax revenue rather than an increase. My reasoning is that deductions are only worth 21% at the Federal corporate level but up to 37% at the individual level. So we’d probably finagle it so the donations happen anyway, just by the individuals and institutions who own the business instead, who would get a better discount on their contributions. Actions, meet unintended consequences!
oh no you went off topic again ;(
why don’t we just try asking and answering questions one at a time:
…I just don’t get you. You’re easily one of the most frustrating users I’ve ever encountered. I don’t know how to be more clear that we got major issues but it’s NOT because of tax and it’s NOT solvable via tax. I REALLY truly thought my last comment would hit home but you’re just impossible. Thanks for proving my initial point: “i’m sure this thread will be full of rational reasonable discussion by tax experts.” Bookmark my comment and maybe read it again when you turn 20.
that’s a really weird answer to a fairly simple yes/no question