Kansas Crimson

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 2:09 pm

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 1:59 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 12:22 pm
I am sure that some GOP voter here will inform me what Warren's unforgivable trait is.

You mean other than wanting to create two massive middle-class entitlements, "paid for" by a patently unconstitutional confiscation of wealth?

We need more?

No, it will be something way more important like "she is shrill and evil".

Jesus Christ....what are you talking about? You sound ridiculous right now. You've created a lot of the stuff you're saying in your head.

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 1:59 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 12:22 pm
I am sure that some GOP voter here will inform me what Warren's unforgivable trait is.

You mean other than wanting to create two massive middle-class entitlements, "paid for" by a patently unconstitutional confiscation of wealth?

We need more?

all else aside, it’s kinda mindboggling that doing things for the middle class isn’t more popular with the middle class.

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 1:59 pm You mean other than wanting to create two massive middle-class entitlements, "paid for" by a patently unconstitutional confiscation of wealth?

Seriously curious: what is unconstitutional about the "wealth tax" she is proposing? Don't you think as a law professor she would have figured it out? If nothing, she is extremely competent at what she does - regardless of political leanings.

Maybe it is couched as some surtax or another, but if she can get Congress to go along (a big if, I concede) I think it could be implemented. How would this be different than say the Medicare Surtax? It is already tiered to different kinds of income, earned income, investment income etc. Essentially it would be just a different incarnation of AMT, and that wasn't unconstitutional.

And on a practical level, what’s the issue with a wealth tax?

When the wealthy are wealthier than they’ve ever been, while most of the rest of the people, and the gummint, is broke?

ousdahl wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 2:46 pm And on a practical level, what’s the issue with a wealth tax?

When the wealthy are wealthier than they’ve ever been, while most of the rest of the people, and the gummint, is broke?

Besides it being proposed by a Dem?

Apparently the GOP only likes a redistribution of wealth when the middle has money taken from tomorrow and given to the wealthy today as is currently happening with Trump's tax breaks.

In Pollock v. Farmers Loan and Trust Co. (1895) SCOUTS ruled that the income tax imposed by the Wilson-Gorman Tariff Act was an unconstitutional, unapportioned "direct tax."

That's why the Progressives had to amend the constitution (18 years later) to permit a federal income tax.

A wealth tax (which would also likely be challenged as a bill of attainder) would have no constitutional standing under the 16th Amendment, meaning that SCOTUS would have to decide if the "intent" of the amendment was to permit wealth confiscation as well or if Pollock stands as precedent.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 2:46 pm And on a practical level, what’s the issue with a wealth tax?

It was already taxed, ideally at the top marginal rate, and not indicative of money continuing to come in.

And it costs a fortune to implement it.

Let this thread be a lesson to you all.

Don't be in a hurry to be the first one to respond to a question because you might end up looking really really stupid.

In other words a wealth tax would be unconstitutional the same way the ACA was unconstitutional, until it wasn't.

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 3:02 pm

ousdahl wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 2:46 pm And on a practical level, what’s the issue with a wealth tax?

When the wealthy are wealthier than they’ve ever been, while most of the rest of the people, and the gummint, is broke?

Besides it being proposed by a Dem?

Apparently the GOP only likes a redistribution of wealth when the middle has money taken from tomorrow and given to the wealthy today as is currently happening with Trump's tax breaks.

You know that's not actually what happened right? No middle class people had money TAKEN from them and then GIVEN to wealthy people.

zsn wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 5:30 pm In other words a wealth tax would be unconstitutional the same way the ACA was unconstitutional, until it wasn't.

No.

Not even close.

IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 5:52 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 3:02 pm

ousdahl wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 2:46 pm And on a practical level, what’s the issue with a wealth tax?

When the wealthy are wealthier than they’ve ever been, while most of the rest of the people, and the gummint, is broke?

Besides it being proposed by a Dem?

Apparently the GOP only likes a redistribution of wealth when the middle has money taken from tomorrow and given to the wealthy today as is currently happening with Trump's tax breaks.

You know that's not actually what happened right? No middle class people had money TAKEN from them and then GIVEN to wealthy people.

Not in the tax break itself. But who do you think is going to foot the bill for all that money down the line? Rich people? That's a riot.

zsn wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 5:30 pm In other words a wealth tax would be unconstitutional the same way the ACA was unconstitutional, until it wasn't.

Either way it's a bad idea.

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 4:28 pm Let this thread be a lesson to you all.

Don't be in a hurry to be the first one to respond to a question because you might end up looking really really stupid.

No one is here to learn lessons. Let's be honest.

Mjl wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 6:14 pm

zsn wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 5:30 pm In other words a wealth tax would be unconstitutional the same way the ACA was unconstitutional, until it wasn't.

Either way it's a bad idea.

Agreed.

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 6:13 pm

IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 5:52 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 3:02 pm
Besides it being proposed by a Dem?

Apparently the GOP only likes a redistribution of wealth when the middle has money taken from tomorrow and given to the wealthy today as is currently happening with Trump's tax breaks.

You know that's not actually what happened right? No middle class people had money TAKEN from them and then GIVEN to wealthy people.

Not in the tax break itself. But who do you think is going to foot the bill for all that money down the line? Rich people? That's a riot.

You're a gymnast.

Nobody really foots the bill. We just keep spending.

IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 6:23 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 6:13 pm

IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 5:52 pm

You know that's not actually what happened right? No middle class people had money TAKEN from them and then GIVEN to wealthy people.

Not in the tax break itself. But who do you think is going to foot the bill for all that money down the line? Rich people? That's a riot.

You're a gymnast.

Nobody really foots the bill. We just keep spending.

That's hilarious. We all pay. It's just a matter of whether you realize we're doing it or not.

Money isnt free.

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 6:25 pm

IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 6:23 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 6:13 pm
Not in the tax break itself. But who do you think is going to foot the bill for all that money down the line? Rich people? That's a riot.

You're a gymnast.

Nobody really foots the bill. We just keep spending.

That's hilarious. We all pay. It's just a matter of whether you realize we're doing it or not.

Money isnt free.

Yes. We all pay taxes. Mine haven't gone up under Trump....so if they are taking from the middle class and giving to the wealthy (like you say) they must have skipped my household.

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 6:15 pm

Mjl wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 6:14 pm

zsn wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 5:30 pm In other words a wealth tax would be unconstitutional the same way the ACA was unconstitutional, until it wasn't.

Either way it's a bad idea.

Agreed.

I agree that it may be a bad idea, but I am not convinced that the constitutionality is as unequivocal as DC claims. I'm no constitutional scholar, but if your claim is that Supremes MAY rule it as such it's really not a convincing case.

https://www.thebalance.com/trump-s-tax- ... ou-4113968

Sorry twocoach, don't think the facts support your hypothesis that the middle class are footing the bill for the wealthy.