Italy begins stripping lesbian mothers of their parental rights
Italy begins stripping lesbian mothers of their parental rights
One mom said she cried for 10 days after hearing she was being removed from her daughter's birth certificate...
One mom said she cried for 10 days after hearing she was being removed from her daughter's birth certificate.
You're viewing part of a thread.
I believe taxes for the top 3 (if not 4) quintiles in the US should be higher.
So yeah, regular people don't pay enough in taxes
OK. I'm in general against raising taxes, but if yes, then top 4, because market incentives (share of the tax income) work on governments too.
That doesn't really make any sense as a response. My concern with the second quintile is damaging social mobility, which is key to a growing economy
That doesn’t really make any sense as a response.
For you, but I explained why. The same reason as why something controlled by people from the upper quintiles may become "too big to fail".
The more you are taxing people, the more you want their income not to tank. I think this is obvious.
Again this makes no sense
And this is why you are economically illiterate and as a consequence leftist.
You seem to be forgetting that if something doesn't make sense to you, that's most likely your own failure. Fallacies make sense, errors make sense, mistakes make sense in case you are literate in the field you are examining.
I am not leftist, and I know more about economics than you do, clearly.
Well, if you didn't understand the simple thing I wrote, one that I never thought would be a point of contention, then clearly not. Clearly for me, and I don't know who the fsck are you.
I still don't get how you refusing to understand something would hurt my position. Creationists do that all the time.
(Also half of the leftists I've met would say they are not leftist, it makes them feel mainstream, normal and the majority, and everybody else marginal, but that's not the point.)
I didn't say I didn't understand you. I said what you said doesn't make sense. It's a nonsensical argument.
Pigouvian, taxes for example, do not depend on you having any income whatsoever.
Moreover the idea that "too big to fail" has anything to do with taxation is beyond absurd.
If you want to be taken seriously, know what you're talking about, and speak with specificity.
I am a proud neoliberal, and focused on evidenced-based policy, not a leftist.
I said what you said doesn’t make sense. It’s a nonsensical argument.
That's an empty phrase.
Pigouvian, taxes for example, do not depend on you having any income whatsoever.
The collected amount is a function of say, percentages of operations and amount of those operations, so this is obviously false.
Because naturally your income affects market activity.
Moreover the idea that “too big to fail” has anything to do with taxation is beyond absurd.
Well, for me arguing against that being a non-negligible input is beyond absurd.
When are you going to start talking something specific instead of "nonsensical" and "beyond absurd"?
I am a proud neoliberal
That's without any exaggeration the first time I meet somebody calling themselves neoliberal. It's usually used as a slur. So I'd like to know what do you even mean by that word.
Since you don't know what a pigouvian tax is, it's a tax designed to disincentives certain behaviors. "Sin" taxes are pigouvian. They're designed to address externalities not borne by the initial transaction.
I'm not surprised you have little understanding of terms, but perhaps instead of doing this limp-wristed slap fighting you could actually stay on topic and describe what the fuck you meant above.