AMUSING, INTERESTING, OUTRAGEOUS, or PROFOUND

813 readers

599 users here now

This is a page for anything that's amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.

♦ ♦ ♦

RULES

① Each player gets six cards, except the player on the dealer's right, who gets seven.

② Posts, comments, and participants must be amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.

③ This page uses Reverse Lemmy-Points™, or 'bad karma'. Please downvote all posts and comments.

④ Posts, comments, and participants that are not amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound will be removed.

⑤ This is a non-smoking page. If you must smoke, please click away and come back later.

Please also abide by the instance rules.

♦ ♦ ♦

Can't get enough? Visit my blog.

♦ ♦ ♦

Please consider donating to Lemmy and Lemmy.World.

$5 a month is all they ask — an absurdly low price for a Lemmyverse of news, education, entertainment, and silly memes.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

DougHolland

600

Consequences (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 week ago by DougHolland to c/aiop

28 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

https://itep.org/a-distributional-analysis-of-kamala-harris-tax-plan/

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I may just be blind — apologies if that turns out to be the case — but I can't find where your source claims that net tax revenue would be higher under Harris's tax plan.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I looked too; it doesn't have that stated. Looks more like the plan was more of a rework of current taxes than a tax increase. I feel that my point is still made regardless though.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I feel that my point is still made regardless though.

Hm, well, the following point from your comment is currently conjecture, as you've provided no source for it:

Harris’ tax plan cut taxes on every bracket except the richest, and we still ended up with more income than we started.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

My point being that taxes and the system in general are so messed up that we could acheive a lot of our other goals by rearranging the current tax mess into something less awful.

We don't have to start with 'more taxes' in order to accomplish a reasonably run welfare system.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

We don’t have to start with ‘more taxes’ in order to accomplish a reasonably run welfare system.

I'm inclined to agree, though there may certainly be facets that I haven't considered.