No Numbers

“A progressive tax code means the rich pay their fair share so that others have opportunity.”

I detest this kind of verbiage with a fiery passion. Who are “the rich”? Which income category do they belong to? What does “a fair share” mean? What is the actual, concrete percentage? Who are “others”? What’s their income category?

The lack of specificity is not accidental. It means that people like me and you will be ripped off. If that weren’t the plan, then instead of the bleating about fair shares we’d finally hear actual numbers.

All I want to know from Warren and Bernie is how much my taxes will grow if they are elected. I just want a number. Their refusal to give one makes it clear they are planning to rob me blind. If they had an acceptable number in mind, they’d reveal it.

Advertisements

19 thoughts on “No Numbers”

  1. All I want to know from Warren and Bernie is how much my taxes will grow if they are elected. I just want a number.

    The reason they cannot give a number is that such numbers are always negotiated by Congress. This involves individual members of Congress, as well as Congressional committees. Stating numbers in advance would almost certainly be wrong giving incorrect numbers.

    Like

    1. Electoral platform is not about predicting the future but about sharing your wishlist with the public. Trump promised to build the wall. The Congress didn’t let him do it but during the campaign he made it clear that this was on his wishlist.

      I want to see some clarity on what these candidates want. Obviously, they might not be able to make it happen. But what’s the goal they will be working for?

      Like

    1. I’m not talking about the wealth tax, though. I only want to know how much higher the taxes in my income bracket will be if she or Bernie get elected. Will they be closer to the Canadian rate? Quebecois? Norwegian? French?

      It’s not a complicated question.

      Like

        1. Uh, American politics don’t work that way. Voters need to be reached. Nobody cares about websites. Remember how Hillary lost? She didn’t reach out to people.

          Like

    2. That’s the “wealth tax.” The general concept of progressive tax rates is broader. Making $58K, I pay a higher percentage than people making $15K do. Etc. It does make sense.

      Like

  2. Highly disagree. A candidate shouldn’t get really nitty gritty on policy on the campaign trail. Simple, slogany language is the way to go; people like it and understand it, you lose ’em when you start spouting numbers. Trump never started talking numbers, like how much the wall will cost or something. Warren is already getting too wonky. Our eventual nominee needs to come up with specific plans, put them on their website, and then never talk about them except in broad terms.

    Not that anyone should be saying “A progressive tax code means the rich pay their fair share so that others have opportunity” on the campaign trail. The phrase “progressive tax code” should be avoided entirely, the average voter doesn’t know that term.

    Like

    1. I understand very well that if either Bernie or Warren honestly inform the public of what kind of tax burden they want to impose on regular folks, they won’t get more than 3 votes each. And that’s precisely the issue I’m having with their campaigns. Just like Trump, they want to win on a massive lie. The lie is that taxing the ultra rich to any extent will be more than a drop in the bucket to pay for their promises. They rely on nothing but people being blind to this fact abd Trump not raising the issue at the debates. If they are serious about winning, they need to come out in front of this issue before Trump – or Biden – clobbers them with it.

      How hard would it be to say, “I support absolutely no new taxes on incomes of under $xxxx”? Problem is, Biden can honestly say that while Warren and Bernie can’t.

      Like

      1. Even someone like Biden I think should avoid too many details. I agree that “I support no new taxes on incomes of under $xxxx” is a great idea though, if that’s actually someone’s plan; everyone likes to hear “no new taxes.” Think it should be saved for the general though; many liberals have a knee jerk “pro-tax” stance, and they’re the kinda people who are likely to vote in primaries (example: many politically aware Dems I know supported the Ohio gas tax.)

        Like

  3. If you really wanna see vagueness, check out Beto’s website (scroll down to the part where there’s subheadings for issues.) I can’t even say I’m for or against Beto’s policies and plans because I literally have no idea what they are after reading this (except that he supports a public option.)

    https://betoorourke.com/kickoff-remarks/

    Like

      1. “Federal taxes should be decreased even more for low/middle income households.”

        Yeah, right! The government should lower taxes on 90% of the people in this country, and then somehow come up with 50 trillion dollars to fund massive new government programs like the New Green Deal and repatriations and free college and a guaranteed income for everybody…and…and…

        There aren’t enough billionaires like Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos in the entire “world to steal that much loot from!

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.