• nbafantest@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    48
    ·
    10 months ago

    "Meanwhile, overall state revenue collections are falling short of expectations, despite the new money from the millionaire’s tax.

    State finance analysts point to larger macroeconomic trends, like a drop-off in the purchasing of durable goods and a slowdown in hiring."

    Government Intervention 101, unfortunatly. Where’s that econ graph of this exact thing?

      • nbafantest@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        This is a well known econ effect. When you tax something, markets become less efficient

        • GrundlButter@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          10 months ago

          Cool. We would like less millionaires and billionaires hoarding wealth until the minimum standard of living in America isn’t homelessness and food insecurity. So why is it a bad thing to tax the hoarding of wealth?

          This trickle down shit hasn’t worked in 40 years, restore the tax rates to before that started fucking up our country, give them the incentive to pay their employees rather than the government.

            • GrundlButter@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              10 months ago

              The top tax rate bracket in the US was over 90% from 1944-1963. A median single income worker could own a home, have healthcare, food, and afford kids. GDP was doing just fine, I assume that’s what you mean by revenue.

              The top tax rate now is 37%, and a median single income earner can sometimes afford a 1 bedroom without relying on a 2nd set of income. Can’t afford buying a home. Food scarcity is getting worse. Healthcare is fucked beyond belief. And kids are just flat out of the question.

              As a country we aren’t getting our fair share of the value of our labor. Ideally the benevolent job creators would create good paying jobs, and make the middle class stop struggling. When this doesn’t happen, we need to give them an incentive. I’m not saying we should increase taxes, unless there is no other option.

              What ideas besides taxes do you have to make the billionaire class give us a minimum standard of living that isn’t dystopian?

              • nbafantest@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                The price of rent is caused by wildly popular limits on construction of new housing.

                “The top tax rate bracket in the US was over 90% from 1944-1963.”

                Discussing this without mentioning the ridiculous loop holes is either ignorance or bad faith. And I don’t care for either.

                • GrundlButter@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  The loop holes exist today too. But sure, let’s ignore that.

                  What do you have in mind to eliminate the disparity in wealth that plagues us, reducing the American standard of living to subsistence and poverty? I’m sure ya have one, right?

            • Kethal@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              Tax rates that reduce revenue are far, far greater than any current tax rate in the US, not that rates should be set to optimize revenue. People that try to use the Laffer curve as justification for reducing taxes in the US lack both practical and theoretical understanding of taxes.

                • Kethal@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  10 months ago

                  So when you asked “What’s going to happen if tax rate increases keep decreasing revenue?” you were referring to something that doesn’t involve revenue? And that doesn’t have to do with income tax? In a conversation about income tax? That’s even worse.

    • SeaJ@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      10 months ago

      Larger macroeconomic trends means that the trends are countrywide so your point kind of completely fails.