When you prepay millions you too can pay less each year, or even skip a few. Or when you qualify for enough breaks by doing things uncle Sam likes, such as having children, building stuff, employing people, and have accountants to do wholly legal math for you.
I agree with you that people often oversimplify the whole “rich don’t pay taxes” thing. Most people don’t complain to get a child deduction that to them is maybe 5-10% of their income, but get upset when a billionaire is able to do the same with 5-10% of their much larger income. And most “tax breaks,” at least in theory, are designed to reward people for doing things that are believed to be good for society and the economy. Engaging in capitalism and business and generating jobs and gdp. Things like that. The same tax breaks that these “$750” tax millionaires use are the same tax breaks that allow Joe down the street to be able to open his hardware store and keep Ricky and Jane from town employed.
BUT- I also don’t think it’s as clear cut as your statement implies. The truth is that those with money “game the system.”
They take advantage of the rules and manipulate their finances and businesses. Normally I’d say “so what?” Ethics or philosophy asides- if you pump hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars into charity or the local economy but you do it for selfish reasons, does that change the fact that you provided money or services?
The problem however, is that’s generally NOT what happens. The point of taxes is that a citizen benefits from security and commerce and infrastructure provided by the country, and depending on their load to those systems, and how much they benefit from them, they have a duty to pay some of that back for the future function and improvement of that society.
What usually happens, is that decisions aren’t made based on desire to engage in commerce or even improve things, they are made as an equation of profit to the individual, how to specifically spend money on a way to avoid tax costs while keeping the money and its benefits in their “bubble.” Furthering their own interests and not advancing public interest. The whole point of deductions based on the public interest is that the actions are meant to serve the public. Through careful calculation and use of formulas, you can side step the entire purpose of the thing.
Walmart is one example. Walmart as a company has paid very little tax. But they employ millions! They provide jobs and essential goods and services to millions! Yes. But many of their employees are so underpaid they must take government assistance. They even had quite a scandal over their programs to help employees get on government assistance. Their massive trucks move across our roads, causing massive wear and tear that must be repaired and so on and so on.
It’s not hard to argue that in hard numbers, Walmart costs tax paying citizens huge sums of money. It isn’t a crime to operate a for profit business. It isn’t a crime to do it so well that you make a lot of money. But when you’re claiming that deductions are taken for performing acts constructive to societies welfare, and making huge profits doing it, and you’re taking money OUT OF the public pot- you’re siphoning money from tax payers. “Your profits” aren’t actually “your profits.” Some portion of them is essentially public money which you diverted through passing off the supposed “good” you did society and instead, are COSTING society.
So we totally DO need tax breaks. There’s nothing wrong with incentivizing people to do things that help the economy and the nations infrastructure. It’s good to help
People be able to buy homes or compete in businesses or raise children. But the outrage that these people are only paying little to no tax is justified in that the tax code needs to change. The criteria for which we allow a deduction based on public interest needs to change to require some measure of proof that the public interest is being served. And perhaps most of all...
The people who benefit most, and more importantly the people who take the most advantage and use from systems provided by and for the public good- need to pay the most for them on average. The average American will drive 10-20,000 miles a year in a vehicle weighing not more than 4,000 lbs. a single Walmart truck will go 10x that and weigh more than 10x that. How then does it make sense for you, who may make $40,000 or less a year, and those like you, to pay most of the upkeep and administration and improvement for these things?
This has come up on unemployment discussions but: it doesn’t matter how many people you “give jobs to.”
That metric is useless. You won’t find many slaves that are idle, but you also aren’t serving the peoples interests to make them slaves no? A slave is not “unemployed” in that sense. They have a job. But providing jobs implies that you are providing a person a life, they can afford medical care and housing and food, they have the disposable income to feed the economy. If you give a person a job and they still need government assistance to survive, they are creating a deficit not a surplus.
When most of those jobs do not provide the skills or training or education or opportunity to advance beyond that level, you arent helping the public. You are exploiting the public and the public funds to profit yourself. That should not be allowed. The economics are complex, but in the end, while it isn’t “evil” to use legal tax breaks in the spirit of their intended use; it’s common that these breaks are exploited against the spirit of their intent. So we should be upset and we should demand change.
The “manifest destiny” “industrialist” assessment by the middle and lower class that these exploitations are tolerable, even a “good thing” is a boon to the rich and the powerful. While leftists quite often go too far and seek to obliterate personal freedom or remove the ability and incentive for exceptional people to prosper exceptionally, more right leaning thoughts on the matter tend to support the agendas of the exploitation. And exploitation that most often victimizes them. Like dogs being beaten and neglected but obediently licking the hand of the masters and fetching their slippers. Loyal animals standing by the side of those who see them as foolish and self sabotaging beasts. They don’t worry about their dogs biting them even though they could easily tear them apart. They know that the self image of their thrall demand they act to the masters benefit.
It’s a fallacy. The perversion of an idea of independence and self empowerment is used to manipulate those who will hear the tune and join in, dancing and singing along. Conservative values don’t make me sad. They have their place and their benefits. What makes me sad is that the “modern conservative” expounds the free thought and self actualization at the heart of rightist thought, but does so as a parrot, a puppet. Empty words not understood by the speakers, no truly independent thought or action, just towing the line along behind those who sit at bigger tables and hoping that the scraps will fall on them.
I’d like to see that cycle broken. Perhaps I will be lucky enough to see it in my lifetime. The left is no better in that sense, it’s a different master and different words but the tune is the same. “That’s not fair...” “rich people are bad and should be punished...” there will always be rich people most likely. The powerful make the rules and the “masses” can’t agree enough to act as one, so powerful individuals will be in control and stack the deck in their favor. That’s why it’s so important that the right and the left can learn to agree on some fundamental truths- truths like it is wrong to allow people to exploit others and pervert the intent of law even if they follow the letter of it. That everyone needs to pay their taxes, in proportion to what it is they use and get from society. Or the left and the right thinkers can just be good little lap dogs and fight each other for their masters benefits.
“I don’t have a master, I choose...” I’m going to stop that one right there. Sure. Ok. Yes. Anyone may freely come and say how it just so happens that their world views and actions benefit someone richer and more powerful, consistently, keeps them in power, and that these same views don’t somehow earn them an equal seat and standing in things, but they TOTALLY are independent in thought and action. I mean hell- a sleeper agent by definition wouldn’t realize who they served. Their controllers indoctrinated them in such a way that they don’t require them to SAY they are loyal, just to act that way. So if you aren’t pulling strings but you’re working into the cause... what’s that say? “I don’t have strings!” No- you can’t see them. That’s even worse. I’d like if people left and right could realize that the enemy of your enemy isn’t your friend.
Of course, I suppose being able to see when a deal is one sided, self defeating in the long game- those are skills used by powerful and wealthy people in politics and business, and not used by rubes being conned at the country fair. So perhaps I ask too much of too many people. I suppose if more people had these skills they’d already be the ones pulling the strings of rubes and not dancing along side them. I will be waiting, and hoping, that America can prove me wrong and maybe people might start thinking for themselves instead of just claiming it.
Oh no. I’m not anyone’s comrade. I don’t favor systems that exploit and manipulate the general populace to support the interests of whoever is in power. I support systems where people pull their weight. As I bemoan above, sadly it is easier to parrot than to think, so what the left has been told to reject by its masters is usually labeled “fascist” and what the right has been told to reject is usually labeled “communist.” But- for those who might not know this- communism is a specific system of government where the “public” owns all property and labor, usually held in trust by some authority- traditionally government, but no reason it could t be a corporate trust. Some argue that payment of taxes at all is communist, or socialist- but even if that were true- that still wouldn’t really explain why the priority of the average person would be to defend the wealthy would it?
Change your motherfucking rules to ensure people don't get away with paying such low taxes,
and
Don't make tuition free depending on taxes, that must be independent of tax revenue
I agree with you. A major problem however, is that pretty much the only way the government knows what you make is your taxes. In THEORY, every cent you earn, win, or find in the street is supposed to be on your taxes, and otherwise is a crime. Looking at pay stubs doesn’t show you total earnings and it is easy to hide income that way.
They take advantage of the rules and manipulate their finances and businesses. Normally I’d say “so what?” Ethics or philosophy asides- if you pump hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars into charity or the local economy but you do it for selfish reasons, does that change the fact that you provided money or services?
People be able to buy homes or compete in businesses or raise children. But the outrage that these people are only paying little to no tax is justified in that the tax code needs to change. The criteria for which we allow a deduction based on public interest needs to change to require some measure of proof that the public interest is being served. And perhaps most of all...
That metric is useless. You won’t find many slaves that are idle, but you also aren’t serving the peoples interests to make them slaves no? A slave is not “unemployed” in that sense. They have a job. But providing jobs implies that you are providing a person a life, they can afford medical care and housing and food, they have the disposable income to feed the economy. If you give a person a job and they still need government assistance to survive, they are creating a deficit not a surplus.
and
Don't make tuition free depending on taxes, that must be independent of tax revenue