Henry Ford may have been a prick, but even he had the common sense to realize paying your workers enough to buy your products was mutually beneficial. All this wealth hoarding going on serves nobody but the ultra rich that are simply addicted to watching numbers go up.
Which is why I’m hesitant to actually call those greedy fucks “capitalists”, because they’re the very antithesis of capitalism. They literally break the system for their own benefit, and thanks to US politicians to being corrupt enough to allow themselves to be bought out for a few bucks from said greedy fucks, nobody in power is incentivized to actually do something.
Capitalism works with money flowing constantly, and it needs that to work well. When you have some Warren Buffet and Elongated Muskrat kind of people just hoarding wealth… well, you get the shitshow that is the the US today. $300B circulating in the system would be awesome, and I would think that is a good indicator of a healthy economy; but when $300B is pretty much tied to one person, then congrats, we missed the point of capitalism.
The only goal of capitalism is to raise capital. Any method that raises capital is as valid as any other. The working class people are essentially just a bank to draw capital from, nothing more. Not to them anyway.
Anything else they told you about capitalism in school was bullshit. It does one thing. Increase capital through any means.
There is a logical end point where the working class can keep no capital for themselves, and produce it until they die. And what happens when there's no more shareholder value to extract from the working class I wonder?
That's why we call it "late stage" capitalism.
This comment is so good that I want to bottle it, take it home, and bathe in it
No. He did it because turnover was so insane it was cheaper to raise pay.
Wasn't he the one that wanted to do full factory towns, not sure that money was ever going to leave him.
It doesn't, actually. You pay all of your workers more so some of them might buy your product, maybe?
The increase in wages for everyone will help, but then capitalists have no choice to attract labor. See: the wages now adjusted vs. the inflation
This chart shows the median wage has gone up since the pandemic, even if using 2023 dollars
So the wages in the US are better than they have ever been, even inflation adjusted. You can go back as long as you want, they were not higher in the 50s, contrary to popular belief
So the wages in the US are better than they have ever been, even inflation adjusted. You can go back as long as you want, they were not higher in the 50s, contrary to popular belief
That's just obviously false. Are you saying people who could pay for college by working summer jobs, and who could buy a car and house and raise a family on a single income were making less than people today who spend decades paying off student loans, and who can barely afford rent on a one-bedroom apartment?
home ownership and car ownership is up since the 1950s
how come more people have those things that are hard to afford than before?
In part because black people can own those things more easily now.
Sure, but people pining for the lifestyle of the 50s forget they are looking at the top 10% of incomes. Life in the 50s wasn't that good compared to now for the AVERAGE person
Except they had things like the G.I. bill which gave them money to go to college or buy a house and improve their lives. Every man who was in the military in WWII had that as an option. Maybe some didn't utilize it, but that was by choice. If you include their spouses and children, that's way more than 10% of the population.
Wages were comparatively higher too.
But I don't know anyone on the left pining for the lifestyle of the 1950s, that's something conservatives want. I wouldn't mind the wages of the 1950s (adjusted for inflation) and I wouldn't mind taxing the rich at 90%, but I sure would mind the racism and the sexism.
I wouldn’t mind the wages of the 1950s (adjusted for inflation)
Adjusted for inflation, much lower than today
I wouldn’t mind taxing the rich at 90%
There were loopholes that allowed most people to pay much less, so that's why they closed those loopholes later
Adjusted for inflation, much lower than today
Evidence please.
There were loopholes that allowed most people to pay much less, so that’s why they closed those loopholes later
Underpaid employees: Corporations are going to fix this problem they created by paying employees their share of record profits?
Corporations: No, not like that!
Profits are unpaid wages, change my mind.
I agree with this statement but thought I'd have a go at challenging it just for fun. The nature of profits and wages is relative to whether or not a business model requires workers to make profit. For example some companies make money off of owning the result of a worker's labor (patents, software, creative work etc) rather than their ongoing labor. So while not all profits are necessarily unpaid wages, they are still dependent on the exchange of labor.
Profits can go to cover capitol expenditures on your business as well. And there's nothing wrong with that.
Profit is what's left of revenue after expenses are covered.
And capital expenditure isn't necessarily an expense in the accounting sense. CapEx comes from previous profit
It's an asset charged as a fixed expense, depreciated over time. It is an expense, generally property or equipment, but still is an expense, which is defined as money spent in pursuit of revenue, which is determined before profit.
Profits can be used to expand the business and hire more employees
No, that’s “capital expenses” and companies write that off on their taxes. Profit is what’s left after all expenses, including capital ones.
they can be used to build a doomsday bunker in the desert for the owners
They can be used for a lot of things...
wait, you mean the Trump Tax Cuts haven't trickled down to workers? well what in the Wide Wide World of Sports is a going on here?
My boss likes to show us how much money the company is making at our quarterly meetings. I think he thinks it's morale-building, but I know, in at least the case of me and a co-worker, that all it does is make us think of how low our pay is.
I would just straight up say that next time and make it weird.
Yeah, I want to keep my job. Until I find a better one.
How about we STOP TIEING ESSENTIAL FUCKING SERVICES TO OUR CORPORATE FUCKING OVERLORDS.
Jfc
We tried to de-couple healthcare from employment about a decade ago, and all the support for some form of universal healthcare seemed to vanish overnight as the general population fell for corporate propaganda and right-wing scare tactics.
I always wondered why neighborhoods, HOAs, and apartment buildings etc don't form their own insurance plans to entice people to live there. Businesses get better rates for group plans so why don't other organizations? Insurance isn't my field so I don't know if it's possible or how it would work, just curious.
It probably would work if you had a large enough pool of people, but how much bigger can you get than if 300 million people were pooled together and collectively they negotiated rates on drugs and doctor visits? Thus the ultimate idea of some form of universal coverage.
Where your idea kind of falls apart is that you need someone to manage all this. Good luck getting Kenny in apartment 5D to take care of this when he can't even turn the volume of his TV down after 10 PM. But I think obama care kind of does this on a state level. I could be wrong, but I think that's what the various marketplaces they talk about are. But each state manages it differently. Not shockingly, red states tend to mismanage things and offer worse services than blue states. In the end it is all a crutch. This should be on a national level like every other industrialized nation offers.
This should be on a national level like every other industrialized nation offers.
No disagreement there! Only comment is that Kenny in 5D can't possibly be worse than Carol in HR lol
Kenny in 5D actually died 2 weeks ago but his body hasn't decomposed yet because he has his AC set for 65 degrees. Eventually it will stink up the place and force Tom in 4D to relocate for 3 weeks as his apartment is cleaned up after Kenny in 5D's body liquefied and soaks through the floor and into Tom in 4D's ceiling.
If only Kenny had managed their HOA health plan and gone to see his doctor in time.
Poor Kenny in 5D. RIPeace
"Where your idea kind of falls apart is that you need someone to manage all this"
This is nearly nonsensical. It's not a completely fleshed out idea, but just because the commenter hasn't named a possible manager doesn't mean it's bad.
You think anybody is gonna make the perfect proposal to solve our problems in 50 words or less?
Back in his heyday Kenny in 5D could have. But not after his divorce. That really broke him. He missed his kids, but that bitch of an ex wife wouldn't let him see them. He was just a shell of a man after that. Of course now Kenny in 5D is dead. Rest in peace, Kenny in 5D.
But what about my badge of honor for finally getting a job with good benefits!?
This strikes me as a "you will own nothing and be happy" solution. Instead of paying workers a fair wage so they can put something into savings for a rainy day, you will be at the mercy of your employer for support.
This seems to be the trend. In the future, you will have most of your needs at least met, but not through your own means, because you will have no means whatsoever. You will not be able to take care of yourself without your corporation parent. This is a very coercive situation.
I'm not doing well healthwise right now and my employers told me that they were concerned about my health and I could take as many unpaid sick days as I want.
America's attitude towards healthcare is completely backasswards
Living as a Service
While wages are obviously a significant factor here, I still wouldn't be surprised if the primary cause for this is simply the fact that most people aren't very skilled at managing their personal finances.
I make a pretty decent living, but in discussions with my coworkers who earn as much as I do, and often even more, it becomes apparent that many of them are essentially living from hand to mouth. In contrast, I have a year's worth of wages invested in stocks and enough cash to purchase two more cars like the one I already own. Finances and saving are subjects I enjoy discussing, but the vast majority of people have zero interest in them, and this has a real impact on their lives.
You've been downvoted, but I get what you're saying. There's just people who never really got out of the pocket money model of spending whatever you have all the time.
It's quite possible to do everything right and still end up with not enough, but I definitely work with people who could do better. One guy, between them and their partner earn more than I do, yet are in far worse financial shape, and it's simply because they see money in their account, and see no reason not to spend it, meaning those little events (that don't happen all the time, but do happen) like a car failing an MOT, or a boiler breaking in winter, or a roof leak means they have no way to cover it.
I think there's definitely a market for managed bank accounts, that handle your bills and outgoings, save up an emergency pot for you, put into investments when that fills up, and give you a spuff money pot for takeaways and other frivolous shit.
City life can also be expensive, and too few people move away when it isn't working for them.
And those of us who have it relatively easy, have to live with the guilt of telling all our family members no all the fucking time.
If you’re family is constantly asking for money then they are shitty.
That’s a pretty big blanket sentiment, I have some family who would absolutely do this but some of them literally have no other options, it sucks but it’s how life is
It depends on why they’re asking. If they’re asking because they’re irresponsible, that’s one thing. If they’re asking because they are legitimately struggling against systemic issues, then it’s another.
Life is a lot more complicated than you’re implying, and family should be there to support each other.
Then again, so should society in general. Life should be challenging, but it shouldn’t be so hard that it’s impossible for so many people just to get by.
May I ask why you think life should be challenging?
Keep in mind that I said “challenging” not “difficult”.
But a challenge gives a person something to strive for. Motivation to be something greater. But I also believe the people should have all the support and encouragement they need to meet that challenge as well as all of the support they need should they fail— even if they fail repeatedly.
Because a system where people can avoid working would be bad for the economy. The government needs people to be able to pay a lot of taxes to afford things like the military. The whole system would collapse if some people could choose to have an easy life with a stable low income and not work
The economy exists to serve the people who live in it, not the other way around. If it's challenging just to live, the economy has failed, and if it's that way on purpose, it's just slavery with extra steps.
If your economy can't provide for national defense, protecting the environment, etc. then it's a failure
The United States has the largest economy, largest military and gives more to Ukraine in absolute terms. Even though certain nations like the Baltics give more as a percentage of their GDP, the US just has more to give and has a larger absolute help to Ukraine. This is because the US has a larger economy and tax base. It's not just affecting the citizens of the US, but also the entire world.
If something is challenging, then by definition, a substantial number of people who attempt it will fail. If you want life itself to be challenging, you are by necessity advocating for many people who attempt it to fail despite their best efforts. I'm not sure what exactly failing at life means in this context--probably something like not having adequate food, shelter, or medical care. What you seem to be saying is that denying people the necessities of life is a good thing if scares the rest of the population into maximizing their economic output. Squeezing the most possible work out of people who have no choice but to work is literally the value proposition of slavery.
The fact that you can use slave labor to do useful things, like defend Ukraine, cannot justify it. And I don't even know what you're getting at with "protecting the environment", because the economic system that makes people live in terror of losing their jobs is the same one that's actively making the planet uninhabitable.
Did it ever even occur to you that motivating people through fear might not even be the most effective way to get useful labor out of them? Or that even if it was, life is about more than economic output?
Yes, but "failing" doesn't mean you die. Failing means you rely on government programs.
probably something like not having adequate food, shelter, or medical care
My ex was a failure at life and she never had problems getting any of those things in California. You get a lot of benefits being under the poverty line
Sometimes that irresponsibility is a systemic issue. Low income home life leads to lack of education, drug addiction, crime, etc.
Some people wouldn't know what to do with money even if they had it.
That’s right on all points.
And a society as rich and advanced as ours should be there to support people in all cases. In the highest of highs, to help them responsibly manage their money, and the lowest of lows to help put their lives back together when they fail.
Agreed.
Looking down on poor people sure makes you feel better about yourself, doesn't it?
That is basically the opposite of what the person you replied to was saying. S/he's saying it's not their fault because of systemic problems.
Yes correct
Some people wouldn’t know what to do with money even if they had it.
OK, I'm probably misinterpreting your intent, but I don't know how to read that in any other way than saying some poor people aren't worth helping because they lack a skill set that wealthier people have. I find it pretty crazy that being bad at managing money is often seen as a moral failing even though it's a skill that nobody is born with and isn't even taught in schools (for the most part).
Yes, you are misinterpreting my intent, what you're saying is exactly my point. Wealthier people have more access to education on these topics because it's usually not free, additionally usually someone of low income who is a parent will also not have that knowledge to give their children
Literally I'm saying the exact opposite of what you're assuming, if they don't get the proper help then they can't help themselves, sometimes
Ok, my bad
This is an ignorant take. It can be correct in some cases, but oversimplifying and making assumptions like that is entirely devoid of rational thinking.
Or dying
Or desperate
Please tell me the TDLR is a pizza party!
this would be very helpful during the times where the $500 emergency is the need for a pizza party
The first change made it so employees may save up to $2,500 in after-tax money in a separate account alongside their retirement accounts. Workers would potentially be automatically enrolled in the programs, which would defer the money automatically through payroll deductions.
Read: banks lobby to get money automatically deposited into their specific accounts so they can generate interest from it the employees will never see, and make it more difficult for employees to actually get their money
Me, looking at a $500 dentist bill for a crown because teeth are luxury bones: Yeah…..fuck.
I had a root canal and crown, $2k. I'm financing a tooth now.
Worse: I had a root canal done years ago. Then I found out, after the tooth broke, that the root canal was done incorrectly and the tooth needed to be removed. I had to pay for the root canal and to fix the tooth and to have it removed. Fucking dentists, man.
I just had to pay a $50 copay to get a gastroenterologist to tell me he wasn't concerned about my problems, it was because of my ulcer, and to add Mylanta to my medications in the mornings. He literally could have told me that over the phone. American healthcare is a racket.
My dad needed $20,000 worth of dental work. So they took a trip to Costa Rica for maybe $3k-5k and got the dental work done for free. Because Costa Rica gives free healthcare, including dental, to anyone in its borders. And they got a good vacation out of it.
They could afford to do that though. Most people couldn't.
Your crown was only 500!?!
Ah yes, the time proven effective strategy to get the poor back on board the against-their-own-interests train:
"Unchecked Capitalism will save you from the problems that Unchecked Capitalism directly caused!" 🤣
If that sounds reasonable, here's a solution for climate change: lets double the amount of carbon shit we're pumping into the air. Fuck it, double or nothing!
Fuck employers, everything is TOO FUCKING EXPENSIVE
Wage increases are getting blown out of the water by inflation and cost of living. Everyone is really starting to feel that pinch. So naturally now is when the feds decide to unfreeze school loans. Really telling of how out of touch our government is
That's not true, median wage up on an inflation-adjusted basis
Cherry-picking stats that show people earning more doesn’t not even begin to describe the economic hardships so many people are facing. Yes, it is possible to live frugally if one wants to live only to survive. But the things in life that bring us just a bit of joy are more expensive than ever. For many, they are completely out of reach.
More people were facing economic hardships before than now because they earned less.
No shit the poverty rate is at an all time low. They didn't adjust it to 50k which is really where the new poverty line is.
Source: I made it up
Better than having your terrible take.
What's the comparable number in 2019? What percentage in poverty before the pandemic vs. now? If you don't have the answers to these questions, you're not actually contributing to the conversation
Numbers are pointless, as may be explaining myself further. There is no use in trying to counter numbers with numbers as many of these statistics are disingenuous already.
I mean, everyone is employed and has more money than before, but let's not stop us from being mad about the economy
Jesus dude, maybe take a minute from your Facebook level "research" and look around at the people you're claiming are doing SO MUCH BETTER struggling to rent a 1 bedroom because "hurr number higher!" Than people who bought homes and had yearly vacations on a single income with an entire family just decades prior. Get a grip, man.
63% of workers unable to pay a $500 emergency expense, survey finds. How employers may help change that
They will make it 83%
Or they may think that those workers being able to maybe pay < $500 in an emergency is a money-making opportunity...
It's also pretty hard when the corporations you work for aren't interested in paying you what you're worth. People need and deserve better wages
Corporations literally cannot pay you what you're worth. The very nature of capitalism requires exploitation. For capitalism to function, there must be an inequity between a worker's true value, i.e. their productive output, and their cost. The system is literally designed to fuck you over from the top down.
It's the same gall people had to call crypto a scam.
USD isn't?
Ehhh, I’d argue the exact opposite. The people at the top hoarding so much wealth are arguably the worst capitalists. Capitalism demands cash flow, and the more the better. Few people hoarding and controlling so much of it is breaking it.
I always love to point to healthcare. Between my portion and my employer my health insurance is over $15000 for my family. Yet I have a $5000 deductible still. Imagine if all that money that my employer is paying me I was actually getting. Then apply that to every family. But instead, a few companies make all the money off that. The problem is healthcare shouldn’t be a business, but a public service just like police, firefighters, roads, etc. In an emergency I’m not going to shop hospitals, and in non emergency I don’t have a choice anyway, my insurance company decides that.
It’s the most broken system and everyone at the top is making too much money from it that it will never change until it gets so bad for the middle class it somehow starts bringing them down
This is such a weird take. You say the people at the top are the worst capitalists, but they literally succeeded the most at capitalism. You say capitalism demands cash flow, but... does it? Who or what demands that cash flow? Certainly not the free market.
You then give a perfect example of capitalism failing, medical care.
Why defend capitalism?
I’m not defending it? I mean, I pointed out it’s issues and how the elites it strives to eliminate it has created. They won, they beat that system.
The people at the top are literally the best/winners at capitalism. They won the game, the game that's designed to funnel capital
Your pay is only relevant to the cost of goods and services.
People used to be rich earning $1,000 a year. Your pay is irrelevant, the costs of things is what’s more important.
And taxes, fucking stop taking everyone’s money
I personally liked paved roads and inspected meat and a fire department, but YMMV.
Pizza party in the conference room.
Of course I know this. It's me
people will worry so much about this but will elect the same people over and over again to lead based on shirt color
just because they change the shirt to red or blue same clothing factory
maybe younger people from a new political party might be able to help or rioting in the streets or something
I'm very fortunate to finally be able to cover a major expense like that. Nothing like going to the hospital, but if I needed new tires I wouldn't be completely broke.
It's a strange feeling.
narrator: They didn’t.
Republicans in Congress: THOSE ARE ROOKIE NUMBERS!! I WANNA SEE 85-90% UP THERE LET'S GO!!
So not only are employees getting raped by 401Ks and HSAs but a 3rd time with this new Emergency Savings Account. Why the fuck dont they just pay us more?
You do realize that 401k and HSA accounts are voluntary tax shelters for specific saving/spending purposes, right? Nobody is "getting raped" by these; they are a way for people to save a portion of their wages for a specific purpose without having to pay income tax on it (for HSA) or deferring its taxation until it's withdrawn after retirement age (with 401k). And 401k plans are commonly matched by employers, meaning that you get money for free by saving some of yours.
Some companies have mandatory 401k deductions whether you request it or not.
Ashley Furniture (sue me if you care)
Granted, it is technically a 401k and accumulates but they don't pay any towards it so I don't give a fuck, give it to me so I can invest it myself.
commonly matched by employers
Funny... funny guy.
No, some companies are opt-out instead of opt-in, meaning that you will contribute to a 401k by default, but you always have the option to change your contribution to zero. And yes, employers commonly match 401k contributions.
Even if they don't, the tax benefits of using a 401k makes them outweigh any private retirement investments you would make, with the exception of a traditional IRA.
They could just not tax the things that are eligible for HSA in the first place.
They could do single payer so everyone gets coverage at a lower tax rate than they currently pay for insurance.
They could fund social security based on a percentage of all income instead of having a cap around 100k.
They could get rid of all the tax breaks for the wealthy so the tax burden wouldn't need to be so hard on the median and lower income earners.
HSA are putting the blame on the person for being sick and 401k exists to both pump some mo ey into the system to inflate stocks and to get the regular person to care about the stock market. Both are just there to screw over the public for the benefit of the wealthy so we don't nationalize healthcare and properly fund social security.
Maybe the government should just stop taking so much off your pay cheque
You are aware there are several nations with higher taxes right? Its not a tax issue. Its a cost of other things thats a major issue. If low income people are still struggling after gettting their refund during tax prep, its not an income tax problem.
Especially given that the article mentions miami, and florida is in like the bottom 5 in income taxes
I’d like to know when “State and Federal taxes” worked 6 hours of my shift because I can’t remember.
Sometimes it goes into things people dont care about, and other times it goes into things people take for granted.
For example, if you took a road to work today, that road didnt pay for itself.
And businesses used those roads to move goods, but only have to pay taxes on profits.
Your taxes also go to the fire department and the health department. I'd say most people think those are pretty necessary.
A lot of people who pay $20-30k+ a year in taxes are also struggling.
Mortgages have gone up, milk has gone up, eggs are too expensive, a lot of countries (like Canada, where I live) are increasing carbon taxes. Gas is already $1.70 a litre!
Wages are one thing, but how many people can just swallow a mortgage payment that increase $500-$700 a month?
I get it, you want to make more money, but something the government can actually do is let you keep more of the money you do actually earn.
Are the people paying 20k-30k the people who cant afford the 500$ emergency spending though. Not saying there aren't any (as someone might have a ridiculous amount of debt) but those making that much are way more likely to afford the 500$ emergency fund than the low income who almost pay no income tax in the first place (no federal, as thats returned in the form of a refund, and variable state based on state.)
Changing icome tax doesnt adresss the majority of people who have the problem the post is about. Theres already like 8(?) States without income tax
You have to understand how expensive it is supporting a family right now. People are spending an insane amount of money on groceries alone. $1,000 - $1,800 a month
The gas to get to work for a two income household could be upwards of $1,000 a month.
Mortgage renewal? Hope you have an extra $700 a month laying around.
Cad payments? Ya that’s going to add another $200-$300 a month in interest payments alone now.
And forget it if you have kids. Daycare, physical activities, summer camp? Maybe another $12k per year depending on how many kids you have!
The issue here is that the middle class are also being destroyed and without them there’s no money to even give to the government to help lower income people.
In Canada, $150k a year for a family of 5 is low income now.
At least lower income people get subsidized food and housing. Middle class? They get 20% interest on credit cards to keep afloat.
This isn’t about wages, it’s about costs. All of them of which taxes are just one. A big one, but just one.
You can attack the corpo’s later, right now the fight is with the government to get the money going out under control.
You can get a 50% raise, but if you’re still spending 70% more to eat and have a roof over your head, it doesn’t really matter does it?
If shit was more affordable, maybe $40k a year could be a livable wage again. Cause right now it’s not.
So your answer to fixing a problem is lowering imcome tax? A solution that doesnt even fix the problem for the target audience in the first place. Its nonsensical to completely ignore the likely largest group of people that need the help.
The people who have debt in mortgages is based on what kind of home they bought. Its an opportunity cost on why they chose x home over what might have been the cheapest home they could have bought (not saying that there arent people who just buys the cheapest home possible in an area, but they arent likely the majoirty). The person who has a mortgage at least has a house, the people that cant afford the 500 month to month emergency fund likely has nothing.
I wont even get to the point where its the people who have houses are the ones making it harder for more houses to get built because they want to maintain the value of their house at the cost of those who have not.
So what I hear you saying is that families with homes should just lose their homes because funding the government is more important? And they should have thought of that before buying a home?
Are you a fucking idiot?
Let’s just make MORE poverty stricken people, the government comes before all! It sounds like you just want everyone to hand over their pay cheques to the government so they can decide who gets what and when they get it, so we can all be totally fucked.
This Lemmy crowd is filled with morons.
where did i state that I said it's more important. I only stated that ignoring the main group of people that the article is discussing is a pretty dumb fix.
there are a lot of adjustments a person could make per month due to less income, and housing doesn't have to be first. if one is spending 1000$ on groceries for a group, but someone barely making it by is making it with less means there's discrepancy in spending habits with groceries. can dial it down to the rest. Same goes with Children and other choices of spending, but it ultimately goes down to fixing costs because thats whats boning everyone, while the original comment chain was about fixing debt (in a way that doesn't help everyone, as there are already regions and people who are completely unaffected by income tax), which not exactly everyone who cant afford 500$ month to month is necessarily in.
Income tax is not a fix, its a band aid that works for some that makes no progress on fixing the actual problem and only kicks it down the road for the discussion to happen again later. You haven't even discussed what happens when there is no income tax and things get expensive enough then, what are you going to do then? You had all the time to discuss it at the point I mentioned some people already pay no income tax.
The gas to get to work for a two income household could be upwards of $1,000 a month.
What are you driving, two Escalades?
Honestly with the recent inflation they should not even collect taxes on the first 100k.
Agreed 100%
Our taxes aren’t even that high. Look at what people used to pay up until the 80’s. We should go back to where we actually taxed millionaires and corporations instead of coming up with yet another tax haven account for them. Regular people can’t contribute to these things because they don’t have the disposable income. They are meant for the rich with some bullshit excuse to make us feel good.
I pay 30% of every dollar I make and I also pay another 18% or so every time I spend a dollar directly to the government.
And the prices of EVERYTHING has Skyrocketed!
When prices go up, the goods and services taxes you pay also go up. When prices go down, they go down too.
Interest rates are killing people, prices are killing people, taxes on top of taxes are killing people
Well, I like roads and bridges being fixed, and good reliable weather forecasts, and standardized weights and measures, and a functional department of justice, labor, food and drug safety, standardized phone and Internet protocols so companies can't completely lock us in their walled gardens, cars that are safe to drive, etc. So I'm happy with the taxes part of that equation
That’s great, have a look at what those things should cost and then look at how the government is mismanaging their funding that we give them
Why even bother with wages, just have the corporations pay the government directly for our work. The government can figure out how to distribute everything and fuck us all
"Should" cost. Yeah I'm gonna need citations for that one. You really and honestly believe the libertarian nonsense that private, for-profit corporations are going to provide those same high quality services and fuck us less?
And make no mistake, those are high quality services. Corporations are perfect happy to use all the free data generated by the National Weather Service, US Geological Survey, NIH, NSF, NIST, etc precisely because it's world class. It's funny how the only things that people complain about the "government" doing are all the things that cost corporations money like product and environmental safety. Or social services that are deliberately inefficient so conservatives can keep complaining about how bad "government services" are. It would be a lot more efficient if they would just give poor people fucking cash.
Yes, lets destroy the commons even more. /s
It’s okay that you’ll lose your house, because there are people without houses.
Perfect retarded communist point of view. Let’s just make everyone poor, then we can just change the definition of what poor is
Just don't call me a capitalist, or I might take offense.
I don’t think I would ever mistake you for a capitalist
Henry Ford may have been a prick, but even he had the common sense to realize paying your workers enough to buy your products was mutually beneficial. All this wealth hoarding going on serves nobody but the ultra rich that are simply addicted to watching numbers go up.
Which is why I’m hesitant to actually call those greedy fucks “capitalists”, because they’re the very antithesis of capitalism. They literally break the system for their own benefit, and thanks to US politicians to being corrupt enough to allow themselves to be bought out for a few bucks from said greedy fucks, nobody in power is incentivized to actually do something.
Capitalism works with money flowing constantly, and it needs that to work well. When you have some Warren Buffet and Elongated Muskrat kind of people just hoarding wealth… well, you get the shitshow that is the the US today. $300B circulating in the system would be awesome, and I would think that is a good indicator of a healthy economy; but when $300B is pretty much tied to one person, then congrats, we missed the point of capitalism.
The only goal of capitalism is to raise capital. Any method that raises capital is as valid as any other. The working class people are essentially just a bank to draw capital from, nothing more. Not to them anyway.
Anything else they told you about capitalism in school was bullshit. It does one thing. Increase capital through any means.
There is a logical end point where the working class can keep no capital for themselves, and produce it until they die. And what happens when there's no more shareholder value to extract from the working class I wonder?
That's why we call it "late stage" capitalism.
This comment is so good that I want to bottle it, take it home, and bathe in it
No. He did it because turnover was so insane it was cheaper to raise pay.
Wasn't he the one that wanted to do full factory towns, not sure that money was ever going to leave him.
It doesn't, actually. You pay all of your workers more so some of them might buy your product, maybe?
The increase in wages for everyone will help, but then capitalists have no choice to attract labor. See: the wages now adjusted vs. the inflation
https://www.bls.gov/charts/usual-weekly-earnings/usual-weekly-earnings-over-time-total-men-women.htm#
This chart shows the median wage has gone up since the pandemic, even if using 2023 dollars
So the wages in the US are better than they have ever been, even inflation adjusted. You can go back as long as you want, they were not higher in the 50s, contrary to popular belief
That's just obviously false. Are you saying people who could pay for college by working summer jobs, and who could buy a car and house and raise a family on a single income were making less than people today who spend decades paying off student loans, and who can barely afford rent on a one-bedroom apartment?
https://oldurbanist.blogspot.com/2013/02/was-rise-of-car-ownership-responsible.html
home ownership and car ownership is up since the 1950s
how come more people have those things that are hard to afford than before?
In part because black people can own those things more easily now.
Sure, but people pining for the lifestyle of the 50s forget they are looking at the top 10% of incomes. Life in the 50s wasn't that good compared to now for the AVERAGE person
Except they had things like the G.I. bill which gave them money to go to college or buy a house and improve their lives. Every man who was in the military in WWII had that as an option. Maybe some didn't utilize it, but that was by choice. If you include their spouses and children, that's way more than 10% of the population.
Wages were comparatively higher too.
But I don't know anyone on the left pining for the lifestyle of the 1950s, that's something conservatives want. I wouldn't mind the wages of the 1950s (adjusted for inflation) and I wouldn't mind taxing the rich at 90%, but I sure would mind the racism and the sexism.
Adjusted for inflation, much lower than today
There were loopholes that allowed most people to pay much less, so that's why they closed those loopholes later
Evidence please.
Remind me how much rich people pay in taxes now.
We don't have good WAGE data before 1964
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:United_States_real_wages_%28red,_in_constant_2017_dollars%29.png
but we also have household income data for earlier years
https://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/famincome.html
but it doesn't match 100% because what a household is differs (households used to be bigger in the 1950s)
but you can see that 1950-1964 the household incomes grew quickly, so the 1950s were a period of growth, you were a lot better off by 1970
You made a claim about 1950s income you now can't back up? Interesting.
https://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/famincome.html
Look at it, family income was lower
Underpaid employees: Corporations are going to fix this problem they created by paying employees their share of record profits?
Corporations: No, not like that!
Profits are unpaid wages, change my mind.
I agree with this statement but thought I'd have a go at challenging it just for fun. The nature of profits and wages is relative to whether or not a business model requires workers to make profit. For example some companies make money off of owning the result of a worker's labor (patents, software, creative work etc) rather than their ongoing labor. So while not all profits are necessarily unpaid wages, they are still dependent on the exchange of labor.
Profits can go to cover capitol expenditures on your business as well. And there's nothing wrong with that.
Profit is what's left of revenue after expenses are covered.
And capital expenditure isn't necessarily an expense in the accounting sense. CapEx comes from previous profit
It's an asset charged as a fixed expense, depreciated over time. It is an expense, generally property or equipment, but still is an expense, which is defined as money spent in pursuit of revenue, which is determined before profit.
Profits can be used to expand the business and hire more employees
No, that’s “capital expenses” and companies write that off on their taxes. Profit is what’s left after all expenses, including capital ones.
they can be used to build a doomsday bunker in the desert for the owners
They can be used for a lot of things...
wait, you mean the Trump Tax Cuts haven't trickled down to workers? well what in the Wide Wide World of Sports is a going on here?
My boss likes to show us how much money the company is making at our quarterly meetings. I think he thinks it's morale-building, but I know, in at least the case of me and a co-worker, that all it does is make us think of how low our pay is.
I would just straight up say that next time and make it weird.
Yeah, I want to keep my job. Until I find a better one.
How about we STOP TIEING ESSENTIAL FUCKING SERVICES TO OUR CORPORATE FUCKING OVERLORDS.
Jfc
We tried to de-couple healthcare from employment about a decade ago, and all the support for some form of universal healthcare seemed to vanish overnight as the general population fell for corporate propaganda and right-wing scare tactics.
I always wondered why neighborhoods, HOAs, and apartment buildings etc don't form their own insurance plans to entice people to live there. Businesses get better rates for group plans so why don't other organizations? Insurance isn't my field so I don't know if it's possible or how it would work, just curious.
It probably would work if you had a large enough pool of people, but how much bigger can you get than if 300 million people were pooled together and collectively they negotiated rates on drugs and doctor visits? Thus the ultimate idea of some form of universal coverage.
Where your idea kind of falls apart is that you need someone to manage all this. Good luck getting Kenny in apartment 5D to take care of this when he can't even turn the volume of his TV down after 10 PM. But I think obama care kind of does this on a state level. I could be wrong, but I think that's what the various marketplaces they talk about are. But each state manages it differently. Not shockingly, red states tend to mismanage things and offer worse services than blue states. In the end it is all a crutch. This should be on a national level like every other industrialized nation offers.
No disagreement there! Only comment is that Kenny in 5D can't possibly be worse than Carol in HR lol
Kenny in 5D actually died 2 weeks ago but his body hasn't decomposed yet because he has his AC set for 65 degrees. Eventually it will stink up the place and force Tom in 4D to relocate for 3 weeks as his apartment is cleaned up after Kenny in 5D's body liquefied and soaks through the floor and into Tom in 4D's ceiling.
If only Kenny had managed their HOA health plan and gone to see his doctor in time.
Poor Kenny in 5D. RIPeace
"Where your idea kind of falls apart is that you need someone to manage all this"
This is nearly nonsensical. It's not a completely fleshed out idea, but just because the commenter hasn't named a possible manager doesn't mean it's bad.
You think anybody is gonna make the perfect proposal to solve our problems in 50 words or less?
Back in his heyday Kenny in 5D could have. But not after his divorce. That really broke him. He missed his kids, but that bitch of an ex wife wouldn't let him see them. He was just a shell of a man after that. Of course now Kenny in 5D is dead. Rest in peace, Kenny in 5D.
But what about my badge of honor for finally getting a job with good benefits!?
This strikes me as a "you will own nothing and be happy" solution. Instead of paying workers a fair wage so they can put something into savings for a rainy day, you will be at the mercy of your employer for support.
This seems to be the trend. In the future, you will have most of your needs at least met, but not through your own means, because you will have no means whatsoever. You will not be able to take care of yourself without your corporation parent. This is a very coercive situation.
I'm not doing well healthwise right now and my employers told me that they were concerned about my health and I could take as many unpaid sick days as I want.
America's attitude towards healthcare is completely backasswards
Living as a Service
While wages are obviously a significant factor here, I still wouldn't be surprised if the primary cause for this is simply the fact that most people aren't very skilled at managing their personal finances.
I make a pretty decent living, but in discussions with my coworkers who earn as much as I do, and often even more, it becomes apparent that many of them are essentially living from hand to mouth. In contrast, I have a year's worth of wages invested in stocks and enough cash to purchase two more cars like the one I already own. Finances and saving are subjects I enjoy discussing, but the vast majority of people have zero interest in them, and this has a real impact on their lives.
You've been downvoted, but I get what you're saying. There's just people who never really got out of the pocket money model of spending whatever you have all the time.
It's quite possible to do everything right and still end up with not enough, but I definitely work with people who could do better. One guy, between them and their partner earn more than I do, yet are in far worse financial shape, and it's simply because they see money in their account, and see no reason not to spend it, meaning those little events (that don't happen all the time, but do happen) like a car failing an MOT, or a boiler breaking in winter, or a roof leak means they have no way to cover it.
I think there's definitely a market for managed bank accounts, that handle your bills and outgoings, save up an emergency pot for you, put into investments when that fills up, and give you a spuff money pot for takeaways and other frivolous shit.
City life can also be expensive, and too few people move away when it isn't working for them.
And those of us who have it relatively easy, have to live with the guilt of telling all our family members no all the fucking time.
If you’re family is constantly asking for money then they are shitty.
That’s a pretty big blanket sentiment, I have some family who would absolutely do this but some of them literally have no other options, it sucks but it’s how life is
It depends on why they’re asking. If they’re asking because they’re irresponsible, that’s one thing. If they’re asking because they are legitimately struggling against systemic issues, then it’s another.
Life is a lot more complicated than you’re implying, and family should be there to support each other.
Then again, so should society in general. Life should be challenging, but it shouldn’t be so hard that it’s impossible for so many people just to get by.
May I ask why you think life should be challenging?
Keep in mind that I said “challenging” not “difficult”.
But a challenge gives a person something to strive for. Motivation to be something greater. But I also believe the people should have all the support and encouragement they need to meet that challenge as well as all of the support they need should they fail— even if they fail repeatedly.
Because a system where people can avoid working would be bad for the economy. The government needs people to be able to pay a lot of taxes to afford things like the military. The whole system would collapse if some people could choose to have an easy life with a stable low income and not work
The economy exists to serve the people who live in it, not the other way around. If it's challenging just to live, the economy has failed, and if it's that way on purpose, it's just slavery with extra steps.
If your economy can't provide for national defense, protecting the environment, etc. then it's a failure
Just look at aid to Ukraine
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2023/03/01/us-eclipses-all-other-nations-in-military-aid-to-ukraine/
The United States has the largest economy, largest military and gives more to Ukraine in absolute terms. Even though certain nations like the Baltics give more as a percentage of their GDP, the US just has more to give and has a larger absolute help to Ukraine. This is because the US has a larger economy and tax base. It's not just affecting the citizens of the US, but also the entire world.
If something is challenging, then by definition, a substantial number of people who attempt it will fail. If you want life itself to be challenging, you are by necessity advocating for many people who attempt it to fail despite their best efforts. I'm not sure what exactly failing at life means in this context--probably something like not having adequate food, shelter, or medical care. What you seem to be saying is that denying people the necessities of life is a good thing if scares the rest of the population into maximizing their economic output. Squeezing the most possible work out of people who have no choice but to work is literally the value proposition of slavery.
The fact that you can use slave labor to do useful things, like defend Ukraine, cannot justify it. And I don't even know what you're getting at with "protecting the environment", because the economic system that makes people live in terror of losing their jobs is the same one that's actively making the planet uninhabitable.
Did it ever even occur to you that motivating people through fear might not even be the most effective way to get useful labor out of them? Or that even if it was, life is about more than economic output?
Yes, but "failing" doesn't mean you die. Failing means you rely on government programs.
My ex was a failure at life and she never had problems getting any of those things in California. You get a lot of benefits being under the poverty line
Sometimes that irresponsibility is a systemic issue. Low income home life leads to lack of education, drug addiction, crime, etc.
Some people wouldn't know what to do with money even if they had it.
That’s right on all points.
And a society as rich and advanced as ours should be there to support people in all cases. In the highest of highs, to help them responsibly manage their money, and the lowest of lows to help put their lives back together when they fail.
Agreed.
Looking down on poor people sure makes you feel better about yourself, doesn't it?
That is basically the opposite of what the person you replied to was saying. S/he's saying it's not their fault because of systemic problems.
Yes correct
OK, I'm probably misinterpreting your intent, but I don't know how to read that in any other way than saying some poor people aren't worth helping because they lack a skill set that wealthier people have. I find it pretty crazy that being bad at managing money is often seen as a moral failing even though it's a skill that nobody is born with and isn't even taught in schools (for the most part).
Yes, you are misinterpreting my intent, what you're saying is exactly my point. Wealthier people have more access to education on these topics because it's usually not free, additionally usually someone of low income who is a parent will also not have that knowledge to give their children
Literally I'm saying the exact opposite of what you're assuming, if they don't get the proper help then they can't help themselves, sometimes
Ok, my bad
This is an ignorant take. It can be correct in some cases, but oversimplifying and making assumptions like that is entirely devoid of rational thinking.
Or dying
Or desperate
Please tell me the TDLR is a pizza party!
this would be very helpful during the times where the $500 emergency is the need for a pizza party
Read: banks lobby to get money automatically deposited into their specific accounts so they can generate interest from it the employees will never see, and make it more difficult for employees to actually get their money
Me, looking at a $500 dentist bill for a crown because teeth are luxury bones: Yeah…..fuck.
I had a root canal and crown, $2k. I'm financing a tooth now.
Worse: I had a root canal done years ago. Then I found out, after the tooth broke, that the root canal was done incorrectly and the tooth needed to be removed. I had to pay for the root canal and to fix the tooth and to have it removed. Fucking dentists, man.
I just had to pay a $50 copay to get a gastroenterologist to tell me he wasn't concerned about my problems, it was because of my ulcer, and to add Mylanta to my medications in the mornings. He literally could have told me that over the phone. American healthcare is a racket.
My dad needed $20,000 worth of dental work. So they took a trip to Costa Rica for maybe $3k-5k and got the dental work done for free. Because Costa Rica gives free healthcare, including dental, to anyone in its borders. And they got a good vacation out of it.
They could afford to do that though. Most people couldn't.
Your crown was only 500!?!
Ah yes, the time proven effective strategy to get the poor back on board the against-their-own-interests train:
"Unchecked Capitalism will save you from the problems that Unchecked Capitalism directly caused!" 🤣
If that sounds reasonable, here's a solution for climate change: lets double the amount of carbon shit we're pumping into the air. Fuck it, double or nothing!
Fuck employers, everything is TOO FUCKING EXPENSIVE
Wage increases are getting blown out of the water by inflation and cost of living. Everyone is really starting to feel that pinch. So naturally now is when the feds decide to unfreeze school loans. Really telling of how out of touch our government is
That's not true, median wage up on an inflation-adjusted basis
Cherry-picking stats that show people earning more doesn’t not even begin to describe the economic hardships so many people are facing. Yes, it is possible to live frugally if one wants to live only to survive. But the things in life that bring us just a bit of joy are more expensive than ever. For many, they are completely out of reach.
More people were facing economic hardships before than now because they earned less.
https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/visualizations/2022/demo/p60-277/figure1.pdf
The poverty rate is close to all-time lows
No shit the poverty rate is at an all time low. They didn't adjust it to 50k which is really where the new poverty line is.
Source: I made it up
Better than having your terrible take.
What's the comparable number in 2019? What percentage in poverty before the pandemic vs. now? If you don't have the answers to these questions, you're not actually contributing to the conversation
Numbers are pointless, as may be explaining myself further. There is no use in trying to counter numbers with numbers as many of these statistics are disingenuous already.
I mean, everyone is employed and has more money than before, but let's not stop us from being mad about the economy
Jesus dude, maybe take a minute from your Facebook level "research" and look around at the people you're claiming are doing SO MUCH BETTER struggling to rent a 1 bedroom because "hurr number higher!" Than people who bought homes and had yearly vacations on a single income with an entire family just decades prior. Get a grip, man.
That ratio tho
Oh, uh, there were hurricanes.
Supply chain.
You understand.
They will make it 83%
Or they may think that those workers being able to maybe pay < $500 in an emergency is a money-making opportunity...
It's also pretty hard when the corporations you work for aren't interested in paying you what you're worth. People need and deserve better wages
Corporations literally cannot pay you what you're worth. The very nature of capitalism requires exploitation. For capitalism to function, there must be an inequity between a worker's true value, i.e. their productive output, and their cost. The system is literally designed to fuck you over from the top down.
It's the same gall people had to call crypto a scam.
USD isn't?
Ehhh, I’d argue the exact opposite. The people at the top hoarding so much wealth are arguably the worst capitalists. Capitalism demands cash flow, and the more the better. Few people hoarding and controlling so much of it is breaking it.
I always love to point to healthcare. Between my portion and my employer my health insurance is over $15000 for my family. Yet I have a $5000 deductible still. Imagine if all that money that my employer is paying me I was actually getting. Then apply that to every family. But instead, a few companies make all the money off that. The problem is healthcare shouldn’t be a business, but a public service just like police, firefighters, roads, etc. In an emergency I’m not going to shop hospitals, and in non emergency I don’t have a choice anyway, my insurance company decides that.
It’s the most broken system and everyone at the top is making too much money from it that it will never change until it gets so bad for the middle class it somehow starts bringing them down
This is such a weird take. You say the people at the top are the worst capitalists, but they literally succeeded the most at capitalism. You say capitalism demands cash flow, but... does it? Who or what demands that cash flow? Certainly not the free market.
You then give a perfect example of capitalism failing, medical care.
Why defend capitalism?
I’m not defending it? I mean, I pointed out it’s issues and how the elites it strives to eliminate it has created. They won, they beat that system.
The people at the top are literally the best/winners at capitalism. They won the game, the game that's designed to funnel capital
Your pay is only relevant to the cost of goods and services.
People used to be rich earning $1,000 a year. Your pay is irrelevant, the costs of things is what’s more important.
And taxes, fucking stop taking everyone’s money
I personally liked paved roads and inspected meat and a fire department, but YMMV.
Pizza party in the conference room.
Of course I know this. It's me
people will worry so much about this but will elect the same people over and over again to lead based on shirt color just because they change the shirt to red or blue same clothing factory
maybe younger people from a new political party might be able to help or rioting in the streets or something
I'm very fortunate to finally be able to cover a major expense like that. Nothing like going to the hospital, but if I needed new tires I wouldn't be completely broke.
It's a strange feeling.
narrator: They didn’t.
Republicans in Congress: THOSE ARE ROOKIE NUMBERS!! I WANNA SEE 85-90% UP THERE LET'S GO!!
So not only are employees getting raped by 401Ks and HSAs but a 3rd time with this new Emergency Savings Account. Why the fuck dont they just pay us more?
You do realize that 401k and HSA accounts are voluntary tax shelters for specific saving/spending purposes, right? Nobody is "getting raped" by these; they are a way for people to save a portion of their wages for a specific purpose without having to pay income tax on it (for HSA) or deferring its taxation until it's withdrawn after retirement age (with 401k). And 401k plans are commonly matched by employers, meaning that you get money for free by saving some of yours.
Some companies have mandatory 401k deductions whether you request it or not.
Ashley Furniture (sue me if you care)
Granted, it is technically a 401k and accumulates but they don't pay any towards it so I don't give a fuck, give it to me so I can invest it myself.
Funny... funny guy.
No, some companies are opt-out instead of opt-in, meaning that you will contribute to a 401k by default, but you always have the option to change your contribution to zero. And yes, employers commonly match 401k contributions.
Even if they don't, the tax benefits of using a 401k makes them outweigh any private retirement investments you would make, with the exception of a traditional IRA.
They could just not tax the things that are eligible for HSA in the first place.
They could do single payer so everyone gets coverage at a lower tax rate than they currently pay for insurance.
They could fund social security based on a percentage of all income instead of having a cap around 100k.
They could get rid of all the tax breaks for the wealthy so the tax burden wouldn't need to be so hard on the median and lower income earners.
HSA are putting the blame on the person for being sick and 401k exists to both pump some mo ey into the system to inflate stocks and to get the regular person to care about the stock market. Both are just there to screw over the public for the benefit of the wealthy so we don't nationalize healthcare and properly fund social security.
Maybe the government should just stop taking so much off your pay cheque
You are aware there are several nations with higher taxes right? Its not a tax issue. Its a cost of other things thats a major issue. If low income people are still struggling after gettting their refund during tax prep, its not an income tax problem.
Especially given that the article mentions miami, and florida is in like the bottom 5 in income taxes
I’d like to know when “State and Federal taxes” worked 6 hours of my shift because I can’t remember.
Sometimes it goes into things people dont care about, and other times it goes into things people take for granted.
For example, if you took a road to work today, that road didnt pay for itself.
And businesses used those roads to move goods, but only have to pay taxes on profits.
Your taxes also go to the fire department and the health department. I'd say most people think those are pretty necessary.
A lot of people who pay $20-30k+ a year in taxes are also struggling.
Mortgages have gone up, milk has gone up, eggs are too expensive, a lot of countries (like Canada, where I live) are increasing carbon taxes. Gas is already $1.70 a litre!
Wages are one thing, but how many people can just swallow a mortgage payment that increase $500-$700 a month?
I get it, you want to make more money, but something the government can actually do is let you keep more of the money you do actually earn.
Are the people paying 20k-30k the people who cant afford the 500$ emergency spending though. Not saying there aren't any (as someone might have a ridiculous amount of debt) but those making that much are way more likely to afford the 500$ emergency fund than the low income who almost pay no income tax in the first place (no federal, as thats returned in the form of a refund, and variable state based on state.)
Changing icome tax doesnt adresss the majority of people who have the problem the post is about. Theres already like 8(?) States without income tax
You have to understand how expensive it is supporting a family right now. People are spending an insane amount of money on groceries alone. $1,000 - $1,800 a month
The gas to get to work for a two income household could be upwards of $1,000 a month.
Mortgage renewal? Hope you have an extra $700 a month laying around.
Cad payments? Ya that’s going to add another $200-$300 a month in interest payments alone now.
And forget it if you have kids. Daycare, physical activities, summer camp? Maybe another $12k per year depending on how many kids you have!
The issue here is that the middle class are also being destroyed and without them there’s no money to even give to the government to help lower income people.
In Canada, $150k a year for a family of 5 is low income now.
At least lower income people get subsidized food and housing. Middle class? They get 20% interest on credit cards to keep afloat.
This isn’t about wages, it’s about costs. All of them of which taxes are just one. A big one, but just one.
You can attack the corpo’s later, right now the fight is with the government to get the money going out under control.
You can get a 50% raise, but if you’re still spending 70% more to eat and have a roof over your head, it doesn’t really matter does it?
If shit was more affordable, maybe $40k a year could be a livable wage again. Cause right now it’s not.
So your answer to fixing a problem is lowering imcome tax? A solution that doesnt even fix the problem for the target audience in the first place. Its nonsensical to completely ignore the likely largest group of people that need the help.
The people who have debt in mortgages is based on what kind of home they bought. Its an opportunity cost on why they chose x home over what might have been the cheapest home they could have bought (not saying that there arent people who just buys the cheapest home possible in an area, but they arent likely the majoirty). The person who has a mortgage at least has a house, the people that cant afford the 500 month to month emergency fund likely has nothing.
I wont even get to the point where its the people who have houses are the ones making it harder for more houses to get built because they want to maintain the value of their house at the cost of those who have not.
So what I hear you saying is that families with homes should just lose their homes because funding the government is more important? And they should have thought of that before buying a home?
Are you a fucking idiot?
Let’s just make MORE poverty stricken people, the government comes before all! It sounds like you just want everyone to hand over their pay cheques to the government so they can decide who gets what and when they get it, so we can all be totally fucked.
This Lemmy crowd is filled with morons.
where did i state that I said it's more important. I only stated that ignoring the main group of people that the article is discussing is a pretty dumb fix.
there are a lot of adjustments a person could make per month due to less income, and housing doesn't have to be first. if one is spending 1000$ on groceries for a group, but someone barely making it by is making it with less means there's discrepancy in spending habits with groceries. can dial it down to the rest. Same goes with Children and other choices of spending, but it ultimately goes down to fixing costs because thats whats boning everyone, while the original comment chain was about fixing debt (in a way that doesn't help everyone, as there are already regions and people who are completely unaffected by income tax), which not exactly everyone who cant afford 500$ month to month is necessarily in.
Income tax is not a fix, its a band aid that works for some that makes no progress on fixing the actual problem and only kicks it down the road for the discussion to happen again later. You haven't even discussed what happens when there is no income tax and things get expensive enough then, what are you going to do then? You had all the time to discuss it at the point I mentioned some people already pay no income tax.
What are you driving, two Escalades?
Honestly with the recent inflation they should not even collect taxes on the first 100k.
Agreed 100%
Our taxes aren’t even that high. Look at what people used to pay up until the 80’s. We should go back to where we actually taxed millionaires and corporations instead of coming up with yet another tax haven account for them. Regular people can’t contribute to these things because they don’t have the disposable income. They are meant for the rich with some bullshit excuse to make us feel good.
I pay 30% of every dollar I make and I also pay another 18% or so every time I spend a dollar directly to the government.
And the prices of EVERYTHING has Skyrocketed!
When prices go up, the goods and services taxes you pay also go up. When prices go down, they go down too.
Interest rates are killing people, prices are killing people, taxes on top of taxes are killing people
Well, I like roads and bridges being fixed, and good reliable weather forecasts, and standardized weights and measures, and a functional department of justice, labor, food and drug safety, standardized phone and Internet protocols so companies can't completely lock us in their walled gardens, cars that are safe to drive, etc. So I'm happy with the taxes part of that equation
That’s great, have a look at what those things should cost and then look at how the government is mismanaging their funding that we give them
Why even bother with wages, just have the corporations pay the government directly for our work. The government can figure out how to distribute everything and fuck us all
"Should" cost. Yeah I'm gonna need citations for that one. You really and honestly believe the libertarian nonsense that private, for-profit corporations are going to provide those same high quality services and fuck us less?
And make no mistake, those are high quality services. Corporations are perfect happy to use all the free data generated by the National Weather Service, US Geological Survey, NIH, NSF, NIST, etc precisely because it's world class. It's funny how the only things that people complain about the "government" doing are all the things that cost corporations money like product and environmental safety. Or social services that are deliberately inefficient so conservatives can keep complaining about how bad "government services" are. It would be a lot more efficient if they would just give poor people fucking cash.
Yes, lets destroy the commons even more. /s
It’s okay that you’ll lose your house, because there are people without houses.
Perfect retarded communist point of view. Let’s just make everyone poor, then we can just change the definition of what poor is
Just don't call me a capitalist, or I might take offense.
I don’t think I would ever mistake you for a capitalist
Thanks!