|
|
|
|
|
|
by bilbo0s
2423 days ago
|
|
|
>The problem isn't that an API doesn't exist to automatically debit 10% from the people you own Something's just really wrong about that statement. It saddens me. Didn't we fight a war to put an end to stuff like this? Also, a president is not going to wave a magic wand and fix this system. If you want to support that candidate, by all means do so, it's one of the habits of healthy hearts and minds in a democracy. Just realize going in what's actually possible and what's political marketing. Fixing this is going to take a lot more work on everyone's part than simply casting a vote. Finally, the wealthy should pay more. No argument from me on that one. Having said that, there is a game theoretical optimum on how much you should tax each person in a society. We don't want to get carried away with taxing anyone for political reasons. Liberals do that with anything that will disproportionately stick it to bankers, and conservatives have done that with anything that will disproportionately stick it to blacks. (The recent Reductio Ad Absurdum of conservatives demanding that college athletes pay taxes on scholarships is an example I'm guessing you might appreciate of how political targeting can get just a bit ridiculous.) |
|
|
You're not wrong, but at the same token why are Presidential candidates always speaking about things like: taxes; immigration; same sex marriage; healthcare?
The President doesn't control any of those things, doesn't have those powers...that's all the legislature.
While it may be just marketing for a candidate to say they will forgive existing students loans and provide for free education paid for by taxing the banks on what are currently tax free transactions...if that candidate wins, the 2 political parties will begin listening to voters and do what it takes to win their votes back.