this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2024
814 points (98.5% liked)

News

23274 readers
3012 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

"Almost nobody says we should have the richest pay the least. And yet when we look around the country, the vast majority of states have tax systems that do just that."

Nearly every state and local tax system in the U.S. is fueling the nation's inequality crisis by forcing lower- and middle-class families to contribute a larger share of their incomes than their rich counterparts, according to a new study published Tuesday.

Titled Who Pays?, the analysis by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) examines in detail the tax systems of all 50 U.S. states, including the rates paid by different income segments.

In 41 states, ITEP found, the richest 1% are taxed at a lower rate than any other income group. Forty-six states tax the top 1% at a lower rate than middle-income families.

Report: https://itep.org/whopays-7th-edition/

top 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 88 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

thanks, conservatives!

and guess what their major party platform will be this year! you got it, tax reform! across the country conservatives are proposing tax cuts even though half their states cant pay for themselves. awesome!

you guys are just doin top notch work. top notch.

[–] danc4498@lemmy.world 24 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The top tax bracket was 70% before Reagan. Now it's 37%. No wonder wealth is consolidating.

[–] Branch_Ranch@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

It was over 90% during WW2!

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 77 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yup and some of it is just absolutely insidious too. Take for example my state's 529 plan, it actively punishes the poor and working class. They charge a 4% fee/tax that decreases as you put more in at one time so a working stiff putting in part of their paycheck every month will get 4% stolen from them while the rich guy that can afford to put in 10K at once pays not a damn thing. To me that's completely and utterly screwed up and punishing those who need help the most.

It's absolutely sick how this "Christian Nation" actively goes and hurts the poor.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 48 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (6 children)

It's because the hyper-Christians in Government think the poor are poor because of their own failings. They are sinful and not favored by God. People who are rich got that way by being in God's favor, so why shouldn't we reward that?

It's called the Prosperity Gospel. It's uniquely American. And it's frightening.

https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/9/1/15951874/prosperity-gospel-explained-why-joel-osteen-believes-prayer-can-make-you-rich-trump

Throughout the twentieth century, proponents of this particularly American blend of theology envisaged God as a kind of banker, dispensing money to the deserving, with Jesus as a model business executive. Both of these characterizations were, at times, literal: In 1936, New Thought mystic and founder of the Unity Church Charles Fillmore rewrote Psalm 23 to read, “The Lord is my banker/my credit is good”; in 1925, advertising executive Bruce Bowler wrote The Man Nobody Knows to argue that Jesus was the first great capitalist. The literal money quote reads, “Some day ... someone will write a book about Jesus. Every businessman will read it and send it to his partners and his salesmen. For it will tell the story of the founder of modern business.”

[–] dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world 14 points 10 months ago

Prosperity gospel is like the most grotesque, final boss form, of The Just World Fallacy. The fact that it doesn't even have a quiet part, and just comes out swinging with full-throated equivocation of money and power to god's love, is disgusting and truly terrifying. It's like peering through a time vortex straight into the worst parts of dark age Europe. Thanks, I hate it.

[–] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 1 points 10 months ago

I'm not even Christian, but I'm pretty sure that's the exact opposite of what Christ was supposed to be teaching.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] dhork@lemmy.world 43 points 10 months ago

For those who are too busy to read the article, it is talking about the overall tax burden, counting all taxes imposed by governments at any level, including income, property, and sales taxes. Sales taxes are, by their nature, regressive. They are only assessed on transactions and the poorest people have to spend a higher percentage of their income just to survive.

Flat tax advocates are willfully ignoring how regressive other taxes are, on purpose. By taking the one tax that is easiest to make progressive and flattening it, you guarantee that the tax burden gets shifted downward.

[–] MonsiuerPatEBrown@reddthat.com 31 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (3 children)

In Washington, home of the Microsoft Millionaire every-fucking-where, oddly enough has no state income tax.

But oddly enough it has a huge problem with unhoused people.

[–] tonyn@lemmy.ml 16 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Out of curiosity, when did "the homeless" become "unhoused people"? I'm just beginning to notice this shift in language. Has the word homeless become derogatory?

[–] agitatedpotato@lemmy.world 20 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

The word home has a lot of subtext attached to it, a lot of it relating to feelings of belonging, so I think the idea is to make a phrase that doesn't have a little bit of subtext implying they don't belong anywhere. Houseless would accomplish a similar thing but unhoused seems to be the result of that line of thought.

[–] tonyn@lemmy.ml 13 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Thanks, that makes sense. I'm often suspicious of new euphemisms that make people feel like a problem is less of a problem than it really is. I'm all for more accurate language.

[–] agitatedpotato@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Anytime, I feel like it's probably one of those things that's going to be most noticed by the people who are called unhoused instead, though I'm certain not everyone will like it the same amount or even at all.

[–] pineapple_pizza@lemmy.dexlit.xyz 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

So does California and many other states with state income tax? Is there evidence of a correlation between state income tax and unhoused people?

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I'm pretty sure that there is no correlation between zero income tax and massive unhouse population and social issues. /s

[–] Daveyborn@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

I'm honestly curious on that, I'm in Florida and tripping over homeless people.

[–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 28 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Since companies and corporations are "people" tax them too? I don't have a large parking lot at my house, that should be taxed. ETC.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

For the parking lot tax, we need to repeal the mandatory minimum parking laws, and then I'm all for it! Get rid of single use zoning while we are at it!

[–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago
[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I mean, they do get taxed. But they don't generally have to pay income tax on anything but profit.

It'd be like you not paying income tax on anything except what you put into savings.

[–] oDDmON@lemmy.world 18 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

For the first time in US history the richest 400 families have the least tax burden on any other class.

Time to tax these fuckers into oblivion.

edit:defined historical period

[–] NovaPrime@lemmy.ml 8 points 10 months ago

I wouldn't say the first time in history. OG feudalism was great for the wealthy land owners and lords too. This is more of a remix, if anything.

[–] Szymon@lemmy.ca 14 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Tax? That's not how you spell EAT

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Well... they'd probably enjoy a friendly nibble. they certainly won't enjoy being taxed.

[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 14 points 10 months ago (1 children)

When I was a kid my parents rented a VHS movie called Kid President or something like that.

It was about a kid who wrote to a sitting president who wasn't doing well in his re-election campaign, and the president started to replace his own policies with what the kid suggested in his letters, these changes were obviously wildly popular with the public.

Anyways, in the movie the kid's tax policy was to reduce your taxes the richer you got, as a reward for doing well, and to motivate the poor people to work harder so they'd have to pay less money in taxes.

Who would have guessed every republican would've also seen this film and taken it to heart?

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

Grover Norquist came up with his tax pledge in like second grade. All of their ideas are elementary school level analysis.

[–] ThrowawayPermanente@sh.itjust.works 13 points 10 months ago

We should shift the tax burden onto land, something everyone needs but rich people own most of.

[–] BlackSkinnedJew@lemmynsfw.com 12 points 10 months ago

Shhhh.. don't say it too loud or the working class could turn off the TV and start organizing to tax the rich.. 🤫🤫

[–] spider@lemmy.nz 9 points 10 months ago

"We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes."

-- Leona Helmsley

[–] skybreaker@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Until we stop hate-voting and actually vote for politicians that will get rid of lobbying, nothing will change.