this post was submitted on 25 Dec 2024
1079 points (92.7% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

27214 readers
3583 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
1079
Saint Luigi (i.imgur.com)
submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by [email protected] to c/lemmyshitpost
 

Cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/34117495

[OC]

Original still created by @gedogfx (IG). Title source: "Inkl"

Edit: I'm not on any other social media platforms, so feel free to share this elsewhere if you want

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 days ago (1 children)

No, the sum of all premiums paid by all Americans is way more than is required. You could make it a flat tax and it'd still be cheaper.

The tax increase is more than offset by the cost of premiums.

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

That may be the case, but do you have any evidence or reasoning? There are a certain number of people right now who don't have insurance or who have very bad insurance, and a universal insurance would have to have to make up what's missing for those people.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

There's a variety of ways to implement it, but the vast majority save trillions in the long run. https://www.citizen.org/news/fact-check-medicare-for-all-would-save-the-u-s-trillions-public-option-would-leave-millions-uninsured-not-garner-savings/ has a couple sources listed, even a Koch-funded institute found it would save money.

The reasoning is simple: you cut out the middlemen who demand a portion of the premiums for themselves. Those costs are instantly removed, and there isn't really anything that starts costing more in return.

There's also collective governmental bargaining on procedures and medication which lowers prices.

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

I understand that it saves money overall. I don't understand how it could save money for individual high-income tax payers. At some earning level, your taxes will be raised by more than you would pay for insurance. Even under a flat tax, that has to be the case, right? You would need a regressive tax to actually make it beneficial to every single resident.

[–] orrk 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

ok, why should I care about the well off not getting to be quite the leaches they are now?

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

Under current economic conditions, economic wealth is necessary for the functioning of the economy. Some (including me) would advocate for a redistribution/government seizure of capital, but I don't know of any economist who doesn't see it as a problem if the wealth is lost altogether. If taxes are imposed on a national level, it is less likely that the wealthy will flee to other countries than it is if they are imposed on a state level. Unless the government seizes all capital, or bans capital flight, there will always be a risk of losing that wealth to emigration.

[–] orrk 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Under current economic conditions, economic wealth is necessary for the functioning of the economy

is it required? to an extent, yes. but do we need 60% of everything to be owned by 10% of the population?

As for the Capital flight, that is a myth, even the implementation of straight wealth taxes don't see great multimillionaire migrations, because taxation isn't a very strong factor, in fact a golf course or tow is a stronger pull, example Scotland vs Ireland when the UK was still part of the EU saw more ultra wealthy live in Scotland, a region with a higher tax rate, than Ireland, primarily for golf courses.

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

As for the Capital flight, that is a myth

I'm not sure it's even negligible between countries, but I am specifically talking about capital flight between US states, where there is a very low barrier to exit. Do you have any reason to believe that isn't a phenomenon?

[–] orrk 1 points 13 hours ago

even less so,

"According to Young, though, the ultra-wealthy traditionally haven't migrated in droves following such tax hikes. Only %2.4 of U.S.-based millionaires move across state lines each year, roughly %15 of whom apparently do so for tax reasons. 'So it's like a small l fraction of a small fraction,' Young said.

https://sociology.cornell.edu/news/final-reading-flight-myth

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

Depends exactly on what is taxed. Regardless, the tax increase would be so low that moving is almost certainly not paying for itself. The government could also just increase taxes by a flat amount rather than a flat rate.

Point is, there's plenty of options that give zero reason to assume capital flight will happen.

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

a flat amount rather than a flat rate

So a regressive tax

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

I would prefer a progressive tax which would be easier to do on the national level.