1. Hi there, Guest

    Only registered users can really experience what DLP has to offer. Many forums are only accessible if you have an account. Why don't you register?
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Q4 2019 Story Competition is kicking off!

    Prompt:
    Foreign Magical Regions (Setting outside of Britain)
    Get writing Folks!
    Dismiss Notice

U.S. 2020 Elections

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Conquistador, Jan 20, 2019.

  1. Arthellion

    Arthellion Lord of the Banned ~ Prestige ~

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2017
    Messages:
    516
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Georgia, USA
    High Score:
    2398
    He’s not getting rid of welfare...
     
  2. Oment

    Oment The Betrayer

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    2,750
    And what is Biden? Far-left like you claimed Bloomberg to be?
     
  3. Sesc

    Sesc Slytherin at Heart Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2007
    Messages:
    5,864
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Blocksberg, Germany
    Wat.

    VAT is one of the easiest taxes to chuck onto the customer. Everyone slaps on their tax, and the last one in the line foots the bill. I.e., you. Not that I disagree that large corps shouldn't be able to subtract random numbers until they are broke on paper, but really dubious that VAT is going to deliver that.

    And that's leaving aside Revan's point, which is that using a VAT to (partially) fund UBI is literal nonsense. The UBI money is supposed to be spend. So people buy stuff with it, pay the VAT, which then gets returned to them as UBI to buy stuff, pay ... what. How does that make sense. It's actually cheaper to have no VAT and decrease the UBI by the amount it would have contributed, because you don't have to have someone moving money in weird circles.


    That aside, I'm a fan of UBI, but let's not pretend this is progressive (in the tax sense). In fact, depending on how it is implemented, it's either a gutting of the welfare state or full-out socialism. What I think of when I hear UBI is cutting all current benefits (sans maybe rent) and replacing it with the UBI -- which would be on social security level. 500/month, maybe. But that is not at all what socialists think of when they hear UBI, which is why lots of people can agree on "UBI", but only because they mean entirely different things.
     
  4. Arthellion

    Arthellion Lord of the Banned ~ Prestige ~

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2017
    Messages:
    516
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Georgia, USA
    High Score:
    2398
    Aren’t there lawsagainst that sort of inflation?
     
  5. Sesc

    Sesc Slytherin at Heart Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2007
    Messages:
    5,864
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Blocksberg, Germany
    How would that work? You would have to tell companies how to set their calculations and margins. If you were going to do that, you wouldn't need taxes anymore, they'd be state-owned :p

    I mean, the general idea of a VAT is clear? Consider any production chain -- say, iron ore to steel to car. What's taxed is the increase in value of the good, as it progressively becomes more refined -- the ore is melted and turned into steel, the steel is formed to sheets, the sheets become a door on the car -- and at every step, the respective company pays the tax, it's on the sale -- or it would, if companies couldn't recover the VAT as long as whatever they bought was used for their business purposes. And because the only one not with a business is the consumer, they're the one who ultimately pay the bill.

    Stage 1
    A mine sells iron ore to a smelter. The sale is worth €1000 and, if the VAT rate is 20%, the mine charges its customers €1200. It should pay €200 to the treasury, but as it has bought €240 worth of tools in the same accounting period, including €40 VAT, it is only required to pay €160 (€200 less €40) to the treasury. The treasury also receives the €40 and now gets €160 making €200 - which is the correct amount of VAT due on the sale of the iron ore.

    • Supply: €1000
    • VAT on supply: €200
    • VAT on purchases: €40
    • Net VAT to be paid: €160
    Stage 2
    The smelter has paid €200 VAT to the mine and, say, another €20 VAT on other purchases, such as furniture, stationery, etc. So when the smelter sells €2000 worth of steel it charges €2400 including €400 VAT. The smelter deducts the €220 already paid on his inputs and pays €180 to the treasury. The treasury receives this €180 from the smelter plus €160 from the mine, plus €40 paid by the supplier of tools to the mine, plus €20 paid by the furniture/stationary supplier to the smelter.

    • Supply: €2000
    • VAT on supply: €400
    • VAT on purchases: €220
    • Net VAT to be paid: €180
    €180 (paid by the smelter) + €160 (paid by the mine) + €40 (paid by the supplier to the mine) + €20 (paid by the supplier to the smelter) = €400 or the correct amount of VAT on a sale worth €2000.

    Sauce: https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/vat/what-is-vat_en

    So in the end, because it is always treated seperately from the good, I, too get a nice receipt telling me I just paid 100 Euros for my purchase, and 20 (actually, 19, here) Euros for my treasury, but that's not helpful, since I actually want to consume it, not sell it on, so I have no way to avoid the tax.

    VAT is actually not too different from an income tax, with the exception that people with a low income spend a large proportion on consumption, and people with a high income don't, so in relative terms the less money you have, the more in VAT you pay. If it wasn't so strange, I'd assume Yang has no idea what a VAT is.
     
  6. DR

    DR Secret Squirrel ~ Prestige ~ DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    1,640
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Connecticut
    High Score:
    2810
    He says. But that's the practical knock-on effect, so he's either wilfully misrepresenting that fact, or not smart enough to see it.
     
  7. Oment

    Oment The Betrayer

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    2,750
  8. Arthellion

    Arthellion Lord of the Banned ~ Prestige ~

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2017
    Messages:
    516
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Georgia, USA
    High Score:
    2398
    I don’t see it really. I think this is a slippery Slope fallacy.

    You’re treating this as a foregone conclusion based on predictions that are based on highly fluctuating variables.
     
  9. Amekonnen

    Amekonnen Fourth Year

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2017
    Messages:
    111
    Gender:
    Male
    High Score:
    0
    @Sesc
    Then how would you try to tax corporations. VAT isn't the best solution or even a good solution, but they seem to have been able to weasel themselves out of a lot of different tax laws. Any change using current tax policy also requires there to be a change in campaign finance so they don't just lobby to get more loopholes in the system.

    Also on ubi the idea can be progressive if implemented right (as kind of an expanded social security that more people has access to, but yeh one of the greatest concerns I have is that it's not progressive but that comes down more on the tax side and how to implement ubi)
    --- Post automerged ---
    The Fed handles that so no. (This is probably right.)
    --- Post automerged ---
    The Fed handles this. Edit: fk autocorrect
    At this point considering his massive lead and how he has blown it so far I dunno if 'old man Joe' is gonna last but yeh him and yang. (Which says something about the country, the poorest people just started really recovering in the last couple months then bam the yield curve inverts)
     
  10. Sesc

    Sesc Slytherin at Heart Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2007
    Messages:
    5,864
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Blocksberg, Germany
    No! It's not a not-best-or-not-good solution, it's no solution, because companies don't pay a penny by definition. Look at the example again. They all had their margins intact, the tax is treated as an addon (and has to, if doesn't work otherwise, you have to track it), and the consumer pays it all. What you want is to get money from the margins of companies, and that exact thing isn't happening. Unless companies voluntarily decrease their margins. But that they could do anytime, without a VAT.

    Like I said, I wonder if Yang is mixing something up here. It's very strange.


    What I would say is two things: One, companies aren't (only) not taxed because lobbyists. It's actually a stupidly complicated issue, because it's very unclear what exactly that "earning money" is, as opposed to someone actually earning money; and it also doesn't help that states end on borders, and companies don't. Two; I don't know enough about the US tax code to suggests improvements, but the figure Yang tossed around for the VAT is not small change. You can't get that sort of money just by taxing the top; you have to get a broad tax base. This directly implies higher taxes or prices for everyone. To compare: It's a very sensible idea to tax capital gains a lot higher than they are currently. But as a ballpark figure, the total capital gains to be taxed might be something like 600 bn, and Yang wanted 800 bn from the VAT. The entire federal tax revenue is 'only' 3.3 trillion. It's a massive increase.
     
  11. DR

    DR Secret Squirrel ~ Prestige ~ DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    1,640
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Connecticut
    High Score:
    2810
    I'm not, I'm literally just following his own logic chain. To wit:

    If:
    A. The program is opt-in.
    B. Program participants forego traditional welfare payments.
    C. The program's funding mechanism assumes a dollar-for-dollar transfer of funding from traditional programs to the new one.

    Then:
    D. Participation necessarily results in a reduction on welfare program funding.

    Which precipitates:
    E. Underfunded welfare programs which progressively get worse, less able to meet needs, and more likely to drive participants away and into the new program.

    Which results in a self-driving cycle of people being forced into the new program whether they like it or not. The end result of which is the elimination of the traditional welfare state in favor of direct cash payments, either because the old programs are starved to death by market forces alone, or because, sensing weakness, opponents use it as an excuse to kill them outright.

    QED.
     
  12. Arthellion

    Arthellion Lord of the Banned ~ Prestige ~

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2017
    Messages:
    516
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Georgia, USA
    High Score:
    2398
  13. Silirt

    Silirt Unspeakable DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2018
    Messages:
    723
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    District of Columbia
    That's what makes this guy the funniest politician who ever lived. At some level, I'm pretty sure Trump at least thinks before speaking, and, worst comes to worst, he doesn't really have a respectable image to ruin.
    http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2013/05/biden-praises-jews-goes-too-far.html
    “I believe what affects the movements in America, what affects our attitudes in America are as much the culture and the arts as anything else,” he said. That’s why he spoke out on gay marriage “apparently a little ahead of time.”
    “It wasn’t anything we legislatively did. It was ‘Will and Grace,’ it was the social media. Literally. That’s what changed peoples’ attitudes. That’s why I was so certain that the vast majority of people would embrace and rapidly embrace” gay marriage, Biden said.
    “Think behind of all that, I bet you 85 percent of those changes, whether it’s in Hollywood or social media are a consequence of Jewish leaders in the industry. The influence is immense, the influence is immense. And, I might add, it is all to the good.”
     
  14. Oment

    Oment The Betrayer

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    2,750
    Not an insignificant amount of blowback is probably tied to the continuous lying of the current occupant of the Oval Office, who averages what... 40 lies, untruths, falsehoods, and alternative facts a week since his inauguration? It's somewhat of an apples and oranges situation, but a pretty understandable reaction.
     
  15. Psychotic Cat

    Psychotic Cat Headmaster

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    1,139
  16. Oment

    Oment The Betrayer

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    2,750
    I'm honestly impressed at how Trump turned that entire kerfuffle (that we would've spent 3-ish pages on had Invictus not been banned) into something centred on him as opposed to the two Congresswomen. Could've used the time to poke at some of the more questionable statements by the two and try to chip at that 70%-ish support of American Jews for the Democrats, but noooooo...

    Trump: he's the winningest.
    --- Post automerged ---
    Details on the third debate. (Which Castro qualified for recently.) Tl;dr: 1 night for 10, 2 nights for 11.

    Go Steyer, get one poll in the last eight days so there's some measure of substance involved? (Or Gabbard and two?)

    Blegh, I need mouthwash.
     
  17. Rhaegar I

    Rhaegar I Death Eater

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    Messages:
    959
    Location:
    Right behind You...
    Inslee just dropped out.

    He never stood a chance, but I did like him. He worked hard on getting climate change more attention, and I hope the DNC does agree to have a debate focused on climate change. I'm happy we're starting to get rid of people who have no real reason to still be running, but I will be a little bit sad to see him go.

    Incidentally, when I googled Inslee to find an article, there was an ad at the very top for Tom Steyer and how he "will declare climate change a national emergency day one of his presidency." Because of course there is.
     
  18. Giovanni

    Giovanni God of Scotch

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Messages:
    8,655
    Location:
    Gilligan's Island
    Strongly disagree with this point. Not that it isn't an important issue, but the candidates mutually agreed to rules at the outset of the election. Changing the rules midway through for the benefit of one candidate - and that is how this began, a very cynical ploy by the Inslee campaign - is the sort of over the top party meddling that should be avoided.
     
  19. Rhaegar I

    Rhaegar I Death Eater

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    Messages:
    959
    Location:
    Right behind You...
  20. Amekonnen

    Amekonnen Fourth Year

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2017
    Messages:
    111
    Gender:
    Male
    High Score:
    0
    I didn't even know who he was until now...... wow. Also this is tangentially related to the US elections, what do you guys think about Mcconnell's calls for not ending the filibuster. I mean him calling for norms is laughable, but there is a point to having the filibuster. (Namely to make sure the majority party doesn't just go crazy, so it comes down to how to have some sort of oh shit button for the minority party that can't be abused).
     
Loading...
Similar Threads
  1. Sesc
    Replies:
    25
    Views:
    1,496
  2. Xiph0
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,495
  3. Dark Belra
    Replies:
    132
    Views:
    19,179
  4. DR
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    2,216
  5. DR
    Replies:
    48
    Views:
    8,424