Look no further than Europe to see the same franchises fully staffed, paying better wages and charging marginally different prices. America gonna do the American thing at first. They'll get with the program eventually.
this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2024
-39 points (14.5% liked)
Conservative
383 readers
5 users here now
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
-
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 27 comments
sorted by:
hot
top
controversial
new
old
Look at Europe where the workers from all socioeconomic status pay their fair share of the Taxes.
I agree, the rich should pay their fair share of taxes!
They do. They pay more than their fair share of the taxes. It's not time for everyone else to chip in and pay their fair share.
In Europe, those McDonald's worker would be paying about half their income in taxes. They should do the same here.
Why should the poor pay half their paychecks to taxes while the rich pay less than 40%, if they actually pay any taxes at all rather than utilize tax loopholes to avoid paying.
[removed by mod]
It’s been cited ad nauseam. Only an idiot would think the rich are not paying taxes.
[removed by mod]
For someone ignorant of the topic, you seem to have a strong opinion.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/21/opinions/income-tax-wealthy-hodge/index.html
Surely, the rich pay a larger amount because they earn the most money, right? Not exactly. In 2020, the top 1% of taxpayers earned 22% of all adjusted gross income; their 42.3% share of the income taxes is nearly twice their share of the nation’s income. By contrast, the bottom 90% of taxpayers (about 142 million taxpayers) paid a combined $450 billion in income taxes, or just 26.3% of the total, their lowest percentage of the tax burden in decades. That means the top 1% of taxpayers pay a far greater share of the nation’s tax burden than 142 million of their neighbors combined.
[removed by mod]
They pay double their income, which is over their fair share. At the same time, the bottom 50% pay less than their fair share.
It doesn't matter that they make more; they pay more in taxes and receive less for their taxes.
You must have a strange version of fair share if you think paying double isn't fair.
[removed by mod]
How about staying on topic? Why should I pay significantly more in taxes but receive less from those taxes? The bottom 50% should pick up the slack and pay their way.
I pay my fair share.
[removed by mod]
What is a bad faith argument is claiming that paying more than double isn't their fair share. In Europe, the McDonald's worker would still be paying a large portion of that in taxes. In America, they would pay next to zero. Pro-America means everyone would pay their fair share, and 90% of Americans do not pay their fair share. Conservatives are about paying your fair share and not being a leech on society. Liberals think everyone else should pay their way.
In Monday's White House press briefing, Huckabee Sanders said:
"The numbers are not exact and I’m not encouraging any drinking. That’s mostly for my parents. I think you will enjoy it. Suppose that every day 10 people for our purposes go out for beer. The bill for all 10 comes to $100. If the 10 reporters paid their tab every night the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this. The poorest would pay nothing. The fifth would pay $1. The 6th would pay $3. The seventh would pay $7. The ninth would pay $18, the richest would pay $59. That’s what they decided to do. The 10 reporters drank in the bar every day and seemed happy with the arrangements until one day the bar owner threw them a carve ball.
"Since you are good customers, I will reduce the cost by $20. Drinks would now cost just $80. They wanted to pay the bill the way we pay our taxes. The first four still drink for free. What about the other six? How could they divide the $20 windfall so everyone gets their fair share. These were reports and they are concerned with fairness. They realize that $20 divided by six is $3.33. If they subtracted that from everybody’s share, the fifth and the 6th reporter which would each end up being paid to drink beer. The bar owner suggested raising by a higher percentage. He explained they continue following the principle of the tax system they have been using.
"He proceeded to work out the amounts that each should pay. The fifth reporter like the first four now paid nothing. He got a 100% savings. The 6th now paid $2 instead of $3. The seventh paid $5 instead of $7. The 8th paid $9 instead of $12. The tenth now paid $49 instead of 52. The first four continued to drink for free. Once outside the bar, they began to compare their savings. I only got $1 declared the 6th and she pointed to the tenth reporter. She got ten. ...
"The next night, the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks and the had their beers without him. When it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They no longer had enough money to even cover half of the bill. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how our tax system works. People who pay the highest taxes will benefit from a tax reduction. Taxing them and attack them and they might drink overseas where the atmosphere is friendlier."
[removed by mod]
Says the person who doesn't understand what a fair share is. Read what Sanders says. It may slowly make sense to you.
The bread excemption meant the wage increase was only going to be ineffective or detrimental to workers. Companies that increase wages will cut staff or fold while the companies that made bread will continue to make bread.
The problem is that a wage increase requires a holistic approach that removes the incentive for the highest paid to make more money, caps on COL expenses, increased taxes on higher brackets that goes to 100%, and corporate taxes that can't be loopholed to a fraction of nothing.
Increasing wages without taking actions to support that increase results in the increase of COL and inflation, negating the increase in wages; it is like wiping mid-shit.
California needs to focus on driving down their cost of living. I loved living there but everything was mind numbing expensive.
They won't lower the cost of living because it is a direct result of their chosen economic policies.