To me, it’s just indicative of a changing world, where people everywhere are asking more and more for some benevolent authority to do things for them that they can’t do for themselves……but they don’t realize a government that big takes more than it gives, and that the people deciding who to take from, and who to give to….are also humans, with human frailties and their own agendas.
It sounds good in theory, but in practice it never works.
Martin Armstrong: “This is the systematic decline and fall of Western Civilization and we
will not be able to reverse this trend. We will simply have to crash and
burn and the fight will be what kind of government we end up with
post-2032.”
Captain Ahab
2 years ago
You want hypocrisy? This year the White House pardoned two WHITE turkeys. No BLACK turkeys. Apparently, black turkey lives do not matter.
It would specifically NOT mean “a national sales tax.” Nor ay more taxes than there already are. Instead, it would mean less of them. Specifically no income taxes.
Also, it would also, just as specifically, mean to NOT be “paying back the deficit (I’m assuming you mean the debt).” As long as government debt gets reliably paid back, government can, hence will, continue to grow. Not get slashed. After all, if people know they’ll be paid back they’ll continue to lend.
What is needed, is for government to get slashed. Debt to be defaulted on. Which will also solve the “deficit problem” the only way it will ever get solved. Not more taxes, especially not activity ones which no legitimate government has any business knowing enough about people to be able to levvy in the first place. And certainly not taxes raised specifically to reward the very clowns who handed government the money it used to grow to such a grotesque size to begin with.
Felix_Mish
2 years ago
Well, “tax cuts for the rich” always sounds bad, but it’s also synonymous with “the rich pay the taxes”, which describes the US. In the US, any tax cut is a “tax cut for the rich”.
“Rich”, of course, being those who have (if we’re old) or who make (if we’re young) more than I do. Or you do, if we’re talking your “rich”.
But, NY/NJ? What about CA? It seems likely that CA would have a representative or two with an incentive to help the “rich” take a bigger state-tax deduction.
And the debasement tax, levied by the Fed, simultaneously makes up the vast majority of effective taxation, and is as regressive as they come. If you ended The Fed, like us literate people have been banging on about since about forever, the “wealth gap” would be cut into a tiny fraction of its current size virtually overnight.
And if you decided to really double down on this literacy thingy; and beat back, in aggregate although unfortunately not in detail, the century of aggressive Fed redistribution from productive working classes to useless banksters which is about the sole and only reason we have much of a “wealth gap” to begin with; by reaffirming the dollar at $20/oz, there pretty much wouldn’t be any wealth gap at all.
But, I’m sure it running around playing nonsense-peddling “activists” babbling endlessly on about government-this-and-corporations-that before joining daddy’s law firm or some lobbyist racket; none of which will ever accomplish anything whatsoever, will continue to remain infinitely more popular among the not so literate usual suspects.
Casual_Observer2020
2 years ago
All states will soon need the SALT cap to go up the way real estate prices are going. The states that have no state income tax won’t be able to hold down spending forever to meet the needs of rampant growth.
The real problem with Democrats like Bernie is they are limousine liberals when it comes down to it. If Bernie believed in higher taxes he would pay more himself and not take any deductions. Bernie is rich by any standard.
Like most things, this is really story of billionaires fighting millionaires with neither having actual regard for anything else.
whirlaway
2 years ago
Wow, you discovered *today* that the DONORcrats are pro-rich, and that the progressives are getting kicked around to end up meekly voting for whatever the DONORcrat establishment wants??!! LOL
Well, you do say that the DONORcrats are socialists etc. I only wish that was true! The party abandoned the working class more than a generation ago. The seminal book that explains this very well is historian Thomas Frank’s “Listen, liberal”. This is not my grandfather’s or even my father’s Democratic Party.
News for you as you spin your lies–all donorcrats are not right-wingers. Do your research and you will be very surprised where the majority of large donor money goes to. While researching, you might also look at the political agenda of the Bilderberg Group.
I regard the left-right spectrum to be entirely on economic issues, and consider the liberal-(social)moderate-authoritarian spectrum to be orthogonal to that. So, a Wall Street bankster who supports gay marriage does not belong to the “left”. He would be a socially liberal right-winger.
ColoradoAccountant
2 years ago
Once Nixon eliminated the Periodic Chart (God made that), as the foundation of money, the baser elements rose to the top.
will not be able to reverse this trend. We will simply have to crash and
burn and the fight will be what kind of government we end up with
post-2032.”