What a Progressive America would actually mean for We the People

Suppose we could just stay in the right wing dark. Let the corporations run amok. We don't have time for any real individualism. There's always another conspiracy theory about moon landings to keep us occupied.

 

While I uphold your right to express your misinformed opinion, EXCLUDING the spurious ad homs, the fact that you FAILED to provide any credible substantiation for said dubious opinion renders it meaningless in the context of this topic.

 

Only meaningless inside your bubble,

 

Ironic projection duly noted FTR!

 

I don't pretend to have the answer to the world's problems but we've all had enough examples of what not to do to see the farce that is the progressive agenda, it is as evil as all the Marxist movements that have preceded it. As far as the corporations go, they and the progressives are two sides to the same coin. Unfortunately capitalism appears to be a necessary evil but there also seems no viable alternative. As the world grows smaller the consolidation of power is increasing, the struggle is futile and resistance imaginary. All we really have left is these meaningless piddly little pissing contests on this forum. sigh

 

Clever.

 

Whoes going to work in the sewers?

Dreamer idealism doesn't work. Especially as a society because there are things no one wants to do.

Mike Rowe has it right when he says.
"Don't follow your passions, follow opportunities and bring your passion along for the ride"

Ever since i was in High school i wanted to be a fishing guide. However in the pacific northwest where i am from environmental conditions have destroyed most ofvthe fisheries so i can't do the one thing i am passionate about, well i could but I'd essentially be stealing peoples money because the fish are gone.

Point being in this perfect world if everyone did what they were passionate about there would be massive competition for very few jobs and lots of vital jobs no one wanted would go unfilled.

We already have a situation where people can pursue what they are passionate about.

If I were young enough to retrain I'd go into nursing. Loads of opportunities, good pay and benefits.

 

This makes no political economic sense. Progressives will refer to liberal democracy. They will also refer to social democracy. Neither has anything to do with Marxism. Crikey, even socialist schools of thought are often non-Marxist.

You sure you're not suffering from a cultural marxism trope?

Why do you think big business funds American 'libertarian' sites? Why do you think market fundamentalism has delivered even more extreme inequalities? Why do you think right wing politicians make the most money from corporate influence?

 

Which stands up against anything you've ever posted.

 

And fails miserably every time!

 

yes, do you understand that giving everyone adult 12,000 more than makes up for any sales tax.

 

Dodge, deflect, deny.... in other words, no, you don't know. Your projection claims, as always, prove that you really don't understand the basis of markets.

 

Irrelevant conflation duly noted.

 

Just can't stop PROJECTING, huh?

 

IRONIC! but "ignored for derogatory reasons!"

 

Please specify what you believe to be 'projected'. Your response is a deflection, and nothing more.

 

The basis of markets is on their side really. That would explain the lack of economic comment in your replies.

 

How is it irrelevant? If the us implements a 12% vat, it will raise 2.5 trill dollars, The freedom dividend will cost 2.5 trill dollars. if you make 50,000 a year after taxes the government allocates you 12,000 for a total income of 62,000 even if you id not save a dime and you were taxed 12% on the 62,000 you are still up 5000 a year. If you bareely break even and make 25,000 after taxes and spend every dime that is only 4500 in VAT while you get 12000 more.
Now a guy who make 1 mil and spend 750,000 will pay 75,000 more in VAt and only get 12,000 so he is in the hole by 63,000. How is that regressive?

 

Then obviously, you haven't been paying attention.

 

Still no economics! You'd need to play pretend a little better

 

Thank you for establishing that you do not understand the concept of regressive taxation.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/regressivetax.asp

 

And you are ignoring the fact that everyone gets 12,000 a year, and that only people who make more than 300,000 a year will get a tax increase. That is where the progressivity comes in. You make 500,000 a year and now spend that you pay 50,000 a year more in taxes while getting a 12,000 freedom dividend.

It is you that do not understand how Yang's proposal is not regressive.

 

You haven't provided a marginal rate of tax analysis needed to show progressivity/regressivity.