this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2024
615 points (97.8% liked)

politics

19096 readers
4809 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] EmpireInDecay@lemmy.ml 81 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

It's hard to tax income if there's no reported income

[–] Plastic_Ramses@lemmy.world 37 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Unrealized gains tax. Lets fucking go.

[–] Tolookah@discuss.tchncs.de 51 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Rewrite the laws that if it's collateral, it's realized.

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 47 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Tax the loans based on collateral as income and you don't even need to figure out the value of the collateral.

[–] undercrust@lemmy.ca 18 points 3 weeks ago

Here we go; this guy gets it.

[–] SaltySalamander@fedia.io 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Then everyone taking out a home equity loan suddenly has to pay the taxes as if they sold their house.

[–] 4am@lemm.ee 11 points 3 weeks ago

Ok so make it that equity in a primary residence is exempt.

[–] metaStatic@kbin.earth 29 points 3 weeks ago

I just get loans on untaxed offshore collateral and write it off as a business expense like everyone else, don't you?

[–] uberdroog@lemmy.world 43 points 3 weeks ago

But that's not what the sign on the side of the road says...skeptical.

[–] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 36 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

But then what will trickle down???

[–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 26 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I'm kinda thinking we maybe try trickle-up for a few years.

[–] fluxion@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

We are the workers and the consumers. We are the ones who trickle down.

[–] Longing@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

I am the one who trickles.

[–] Coreidan@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

We already have that. It’s called political donations.

[–] barnaclebutt@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

Unfortunately, the urine based system where richer people pee wealth on less rich people who then pee on poorer people and so on isn't sound economic theory. Call me surprised, and soaked in freedom pee.

[–] TK420@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Nothing trickles down, we have seen that for decades.

[–] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] TK420@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

That’s reasonable

[–] zephorah@lemm.ee 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The data is in. Trickle down doesn’t work.

[–] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 weeks ago

(I was being facetious)

[–] rickdg@lemmy.ml 27 points 3 weeks ago

Poor people: “Unacceptable!”

[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 20 points 3 weeks ago

But one day I might be in the 1%! And when I am, I'll show people like ME a thing or two.

[–] modifier@lemmy.ca 14 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (3 children)

Problem is a solid 30% of those that vote see themselves potentially attaining that ~~99%~~ 1%, as baffling as that is.

Edit

[–] Mayonnaise@lemm.ee 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] modifier@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 weeks ago

I do, yikes, thank you

[–] Frozengyro@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Strangely enough, most people will be in the top 5% at some point in their life. But just for a year, when they sell their house. So you're getting fucked 75 years of your life for maybe 1 year of benefit?

[–] ApexHunter@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago

More like you busted your ass for 75 years then got fucked when you had to sell your house.

[–] FerNZA@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

I am not from the US so might be wrong, but I think it works the same as in mine. It is because they tax income not wealth (which would be difficult I guess). Elon can probably live on $0 income very comfortably by his standard. More than 1% of income earners will be affected at some point as you age up, inheritance etc. Maybe not 30%

[–] ChowJeeBai@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

Well hell, sign me up!