Lion of the Blogosphere

Why do Americans love low taxes?

Andrew E. wrote in a comment: “Believe it or not, Americans like low taxes.”

Yes, I do believe it.

But, people aren’t thinking rationally about it, they are thinking with the animal parts of their brain. There’s a part that reviles at the thought of stuff being taken away from them, which is based on instincts from our caveman days when stuff was synonymous with having enough of a stockpile to survive the winter without starving to death. And there’s a part which craves status, and thinks that if only they had the money the government was taking away in taxes, they’d be able to buy the house in a “better” neighborhood or buy the stuff their friends have that they can’t afford; but what their emotions don’t realize is that if everyone gets the same tax cut, then the price of the “better” neighborhood goes up by that much and is still unaffordable, and they still can’t afford to buy the stuff their friends have because now their friends can buy more expensive stuff.

* * *

Otis writes:

American’s like low taxes for 1 reason and 1 reason only: America’s large black population.

That is literally the only reason. If it wasn’t for the knowledge that their tax money would just be going to blacks, American would have similar tax rates and a similar social safety next to Western European countries.

* * *

Chairman writes:

One entity can pool large sums of money together to invest in major projects with more efficiency than a large number of people each using their own money can. This principal explains why any large organization exists. The trick, of course, is to find a way to staff the government with intelligent and moral people whose interests are aligned with the general population’s. This is difficult but not impossible, though it’s rarely been accomplished.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

August 21, 2016 at 10:42 AM

Posted in Taxes

119 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. People are retards.


    August 21, 2016 at 10:43 AM

  2. Taxes provide a drag on activities, hence reduced taxes provide a stimulus for what was taxed. If the taxes collected are furthermore used for harmful activities, reducing said taxes (or indeed any taxes) is even more helpful. If we want to be rational about it.


    August 21, 2016 at 10:55 AM

    • Taxes need to be designed to minimize tax avoidance behavior, but the problem in Congress is that Republicans see loopholes not as problems to be fixed, but as fast ones they pulled on the Democrats.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      August 21, 2016 at 12:13 PM

      • rand paul has pointed out a ~20% flat tax without any deductions or credits would raise the same amount of revenue we raise now.

        if he was 6 inches taller, had a human haircut, wore suits that fit, and called for less immigration he’d be as close as possible to a perfect gop candidate.


        August 22, 2016 at 1:56 PM

      • addendum to first comment. i’ve read 30% is the tax rate where one sees the tax avoidance behavior. i think i read it on marginal revolution.


        August 22, 2016 at 1:57 PM

      • Consider the state of Texas. It uses property taxes. So a person with $100k valued house pays about $2,200 a year. And the state can sell the property in order to collect. So, the state collects every dime every time. California uses income tax which in principle is more fair because if you are unemployed or lose income etc., you don’t have to pay or you pay less. Unfortunately it is very easy to cheat. But no one cheats the property tax. The landlord will collect it from renters as well. Property tax is a wealth tax to the extent that people choose to store their wealth there.

        not too late

        August 22, 2016 at 10:37 PM

  3. A ridiculous post, if there ever was one. The tax cuts that nickle and dime the gulible electorate don’t matter much. But the tax cuts that you get by operating under the radar of the IRS is serious money. Corporations and immigrants realize this.

    Last night I had a fair gig. Worked from 11pm to 5am and made $850 after expenses. Not too shabby, if you ask me. Now hit this $850 with 30-40% tax and what do you get?

    Incidentally, the building that I was working in was populated by yuppies, mostly college students, and they were having a party in the yard where my condenser was located. What a scene! Rap music blasting, tattooed kids drinking, beer smoking, trash talking. Every second word was f— or s—-. And they were all white or Asian, all 50-60 of them. Some came to comiserate with me that I was working at such an hour. Idiots! What did they think I was getting paid to be doing it?

    Yeah, I guess these may be replaced by robots, but not me, no way! I will survive and so will the Aimish. Haven’t seen the Aimish for a long time. I think I’m gonna visit them soon and ride in a buggy for a couple of hours.


    August 21, 2016 at 11:20 AM

    • To the extent you’re not just putting on an act you’re third world scum who should have never been allowed in this country.


      August 21, 2016 at 2:06 PM

      • A ridiculous comment, if there ever was one. Let’s try to use reason rather then invective. Say I give you $20 to polish my shoes, are you gonna report it as income to the IRS? How about $100 to wash my car? Explain your actions rationaly, if you can. I’ve explained myself in the past and am not sure a repetition is beneficial.


        August 21, 2016 at 3:39 PM

      • While Magnavox is sulking or whatever, I want to get an explanation from anyone why you would actually pony up taxes if you had a choice not to? Garr? Lion? I’d asked this before and received no replies, which in my mind confirms that nobody would. Are there any good honest tax paying citizens here?

        Garr, I never go to 15th Street gym.

        Imagine if that guy in the ‘Old Man and The Sea’ had managed to get that fish to the shore. You think he would pay taxes on all that meat? Nobody thinks about it because it’s not what the story is for, but there is no way he would. Or all these guys digging for gold in Alaska? No way! They would kill each other for it, why would they give gold to the government!? Again, nobody thinks about, but they had made America great. I’m no different, only I dig for that proverbial gold right here in Brooklyn, because in America streets are still paved with gold.

        Magnavox is a total riot. He had some issue with people not bring numerate on this blog, but this is arithmetic! Like I’d said apply 40% to $850 and you get $500. Add the overhead, which I don’t have, and what’s left? The job took 3 hours to prepare and 6.5 to execute with travel time. Now what do you think an American tradesman should be earning after a 10 hour day?

        Anyway, as I’ve been trying to drill into your heads mates, I’m just a little creature in a concrete jungle doing my thing, trying to make it. I haven’t invented any of these rules, I’m not responsible for this madness, but I’m not going to add to it either.

        People are so lazy and they whine at the same time. My Tajik got $200 for working with me on the gig. Think about it: 60 year old guy without speaking a word of English but willing to work made $200 cash in 7.5 hours. Good for him! Poor chap, after he saw the party he got realy sad. ‘Where did I bring my kids to? Can imagine my girls in this crowd.’ He is right, this is how some become radicalized and join ISIS. I can understand it. He needs to be deported badly. I hope Trump does it. He is just another little creature trying to make it, but I hate him and want to kill him. I’m a very bad person in my own way. Meanwhile his whole family is very excited about getting medicate glasses and teeth. So now I should pay him cash and pay taxes to the government so that the government should give him medicate for glasses and teeth? I need a worker and he is the only one that suits me right now, but the government?


        August 21, 2016 at 7:05 PM

      • “While Magnavox is sulking or whatever, I want to get an explanation from anyone why you would actually pony up taxes if you had a choice not to? Garr? Lion?”

        Of course I’m not going to pay a cent more of taxes that I don’t have to pay. What does that have to do with anything?

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 21, 2016 at 9:05 PM

      • Lion, come on. We are talking here about the ‘third world scum’ comment. If you can avoid paying taxes by not declaring taxable income, will you do it or not? Why or why not?


        August 21, 2016 at 9:32 PM

      • People often win by cheating. We should endeavor to change the system so that people can’t get away with cheating.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 21, 2016 at 10:48 PM

      • Lion, I want a straight answer,but you are avoiding it.


        August 21, 2016 at 10:57 PM

      • Ljl @ yakov wanting “a straight answer” from an attorney


        August 22, 2016 at 12:41 AM

      • @driveallnight

        Lol. It just so elementary that none of them would pay a penny in taxes on income that they could avoid declaring. Guys like Magnavox can be dangerous, they are ranting and raving and twisting the facts in an innocent Internet discussion. They could kill you for your money. Be careful.

        What’s funny is that nobody has a healthy reaction like: ‘Man, you are nuts! If I wash your car for $100, I’m not gonna give $30-$40 to the government. Pay me $150 or wash your own car!’ They know to pontificate, but lack natural healthy instincts of an organism fighting the evolutionary battle, they will be replaced by robots or immigrants, they are dinosaurs, they are done, stick a fork in them.


        August 22, 2016 at 7:20 AM

      • I agree with Yakov on this. I wouldn’t go to extraordinary measures to avoid paying tax. But neither would I go out of my way to pay it either. Nor do I think it’s “cheating” as some have claimed. Cheating is some islamist coming to America expecting infidels to pay for his teeth and glasses. Cheating is some single mammy with 5 kids from 5 different men and never married. Yet pays her rent and buys her groceries with my tax dollars. Cheating is the government from not one but TWO different countries charging me taxes on the same money. Only to give it to people who should be supporting themselves. Now THAT is cheating. Yet someone wants to give Yakov grief because he won’t bend over and spread his cheeks for the IRS? When the government ends wealth redistribution and entitlement abuse then you can criticize people for not wanting to pay it. Until then, I see it as an honest man resisting muggers.


        August 22, 2016 at 9:07 AM

      • lotb wrote: Of course I’m not going to pay a cent more of taxes that I don’t have to pay. What does that have to do with anything?

        lol wut? you’re the one arguing the gop should stop calling for lower taxes so often, and not fight so hard to avoid raising taxes. but ***you*** don’t want to pay the higher rates that ***you*** are calling for. just like how warren buffett calls for higher ***income*** taxes on “the rich,” while making almost all his money off capital.

        and legally avoiding taxes isn’t cheating. property taxes are the best because land/buildings can’t be hidden.


        August 22, 2016 at 2:04 PM

    • The law of the land is the Law. But on the other hand I’m barely surviving. Gangsters survive. Magnavox, lots of us are barely surviving and afraid. Yakov will make it and is apparently unafraid. Thirdworldscum and 2ndworldgangsters belong to different categories. Although it seems to me that there are communities in the hills around Hevron that could use your talents, Yakov.


      August 21, 2016 at 4:14 PM

      • Like I keep saying, read Jack London. I’d read all his books back in Russia. Have re-read some in English since then. Gotta read ‘The Sea Wolf’. That book realy got me motivated. Excellent education to how to be a mensch and stand on your own two feet.


        August 21, 2016 at 7:14 PM

      • Yakov is constantly bragging about how great he has it and how everyone that doesn’t become an HVAC mechanic like him is an idiot.


        August 21, 2016 at 9:42 PM

      • @Magnavox

        Instead of giving a straight answer, you are making up stuff that I’d never said. I think everyone can draw their own conclusion here.


        August 21, 2016 at 11:00 PM

    • Every transaction should be done electronically and reported to the govt. There should be no cash.

      If we have to have taxes this is the way to go. I hate the govt but this must be done in our current system.

      I would stop all immigration too. immigration is really a disaster in this country.

      I would break this country up into numerous city-states that would control their own borders and might pay a fee to a confederation that would administer defense.

      This country is way too big.

      Not reporting 20 or 50 dollars on an odd job is different than paying no taxes at all on a rather large income.

      Yes ,there are people getting freebies too that aren’t paying into the system,but most other people who work and earn above a certain amount are paying, why should you get out of it?

      Who should we like the least: the person who lives off govt for years or the person that makes a good living but pays no taxes.

      If you are beating other tradesmen based on a lower price because you don’t pay taxes then that is not really fair either.

      The whole system is really a complete disaster.

      This country and system are rotten to its core.

      I would never pay anyone in cash especially a tradesman.

      If the amount paid if over I think $300 , a tax form must be turned in by the payer if he is not paying to a business via a check. The payer must get the ssn from the payee. Somebody confirm this if you know.


      August 22, 2016 at 12:13 AM

      • Well, this is how these things work. Now obviously all big jobs are pretty much legit.

        The system is surely a disaster. Look, I size up a customer and if I get a feeling that he is gonna be a problem, I don’t get involved. Most of my customers are ethnic NYC types and we speak the same language. A check doesn’t realy matter to me, but dealing with the righteous types is. I avoid them. Paying cash is giving your fellow creature a break and why not? He is just a little, fragile thing, why not help him? Government is supposed to be for the people, not people for the government.

        A person that makes a good living and pays no taxes is much better. He is pretty smart and pays sales tax, capital gains tax, property tax and who knows what else. There is no such thing as paying no taxes if you make money. They gonna get you in many ways.

        Ideally I agree with you, but this isn’t how Darwin works.


        August 22, 2016 at 11:27 AM

    • Yakov, I am a washed-up, skilless, over educated, unemployed salesman in my 50s. My local community college offers a full program in HVAC. Do you think that it is a good idea to enroll and learn. I live in the southwest, so air conditioning is super critical. People really can’t survive without it out here.


      August 22, 2016 at 2:03 AM

      • Well here is the skinny:

        1. The job is physical. You have to be in good shape: lifting, bending, crawling, twisting, schlepping, squatting. I’m.

        2. You have to like getting dirty. I do.

        3. Being handy helps in installation. Being technical helps in service. Being neither is no good. I was neither, but I’ve transitioned.

        4. The age does matter. Your physical faculties such as eyesight and hearing usually deteriorate. Mine do and it’s a problem.

        5. At this age even if you are awesome, you need someone to give you a break and even then you are a looking at $10 an hour with no benefits as your lucky number. I got this break.

        As you can see, I wasn’t a perfect candidate either, but I’ve made it with the help of my fellow creatures. I’m the only person that I’m aware of who teaches helpers. I always liked teaching and I don’t feel threatened, but you are unlikely to find a mentor in the field. I never did.

        So I think mid-fifties maybe not the right time to enter this field if you background was in insurance. You maybe an exception, but that’s for you to decide.


        August 22, 2016 at 12:14 PM

      • Daniel, as a fellow washed-up, skill-less, over-educated (not really, because no Greek, Latin, or math) guy (adjunct, not salesman, though) in 50s (barely) who basically wants Yakov to start a barbarian gang that we can join and is interested in Neanderthals — that was you suggesting that stray Neanderthal girls, rather than men, were taken in, right? — might I pursue the Neanderthals speculation with you a bit? (The robots thread is kind of far back now.) The problem I see with your suggestion is that our mitochondrial DNA is all SubSaharan, not from Neanderthals. Mitochondrial DNA is through the female line. (That’s how we know that Ashkenazim are half-Italian, for example.) I’m not sure whether this indicates no Neanderthal female ancestors, though. Does it not indicate this? I don’t know. But it seems to me that Neanderthal men would be more attractive to Subharan women than Neanderthal women would be to SubSaharan men. Neanderthal women would have been able tear SubSaharan men limb from limb. This is not an attractive feature in a woman. UJ, also on Neanderthals, if you see this — I don’t get your suggestion about supposed Neanderthal DNA originating with a mutation 20,000 years ago in the common ancestors of Englishmen and Chinamen. Didn’t Neanderthals have this Neanderthal DNA? If so, how could have it have originated after they (the pureblooded ones, as opposed to Lion-commenters) were gone?


        August 22, 2016 at 6:03 PM

  4. This post reminded me of that first-home purchase tax credit from early in the Obama administration. I was pretty outspoken in my argument that this did absolutely nothing for consumers since it effectively increased home prices by the amount of the subsidy. Many people make a similar argument regarding student financial assistance and I don’t see how this is any different.

    Jokah Macpherson

    August 21, 2016 at 11:39 AM

    • Indeed, student loans just enable colleges to charge more money, and then they sack students with debt.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      August 21, 2016 at 12:17 PM

      • Liberals want to give everyone free college–how would that work? Would the government just pay whatever the colleges charge? If not, how would they set the budget? I suppose liberals would say that it works in Scandinavian countries and other nations of Western Europe–how exactly does it work there without costs getting out of control?

        While typing this post, I started Googling and found this article from NPR, of all places, claiming that Bernie Sanders’ free college plan wouldn’t work:


        August 21, 2016 at 10:44 PM

      • “Liberals want to give everyone free college–how would that work? Would the government just pay whatever the colleges charge?”

        Hell no, colleges would just use that to rip off the government. You know that.

        Public colleges are the way to go. The need to provide education for free would force the colleges to cut costs. No more super-luxury gyms and professors who only work 6 hours a week.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 21, 2016 at 10:59 PM

      • I get the impression that most European universities are public and get a standard sum per (citizen) student from the government. Private universities probably can get the same funding deal. From what I’ve heard, STEM students provide the most funding because they’re the most expensive to educate. Humanities students provide the least, as is natural. (It’s not the same in every country, of course. For example, I’ve heard that in some countries, universities get paid extra for students that actually get a degree. Great incentives there, guys!)

        Places like Oxford and Cambridge now also require students to pay a fee. That happened in the last few years, I believe.

        An acquaintance at a local technical university has been travelling to BRICS countries to convince them to study at his department. Not sure what the funding deal is there. I didn’t ask whether it’s an attempt to fill open student positions, or to grow the department by attracting foreign students.


        August 22, 2016 at 6:38 AM

      • “Public colleges are the way to go. The need to provide education for free would force the colleges to cut costs. No more super-luxury gyms and professors who only work 6 hours a week.”

        I just dropped my daughter off at a public college this weekend. The dorm she is moving in is like a luxury condo. There is a frickin’ lazy river on the grounds! Public colleges and universities are taking advantage of the student loan subsidy just like private ones. They build ridiculously luxurious facilities and pad their staffs with useless nobodies. Reforming that mess should be happening at the state level regardless of the federal student loan situation.

        Mike Street Station

        August 22, 2016 at 8:19 AM

      • It’s very simple. USSR had free education, but you had to pass an entrance exam, which most NAMs would have never been abel to do. They also failed students from middle school on. You failed the 6th grade, you went to trade school and were working by 16. If you didn’t work, you were put into forced labor. Excellent system! I love it!

        And free medicine was a good idea, because all the parasites were forced to work. My


        August 22, 2016 at 6:50 PM

      • Well, that will never fly in modern America. The people who want to give everyone free college are SWPL/SJWs who think everyone, including NAMs, is equally capable of graduating from college and functioning in a self-actualizing professional career, and would never stand for tough entrance exams or high failure rates.


        August 22, 2016 at 9:44 PM

      • “t’s very simple. USSR had free education, but you had to pass an entrance exam, which most NAMs would have never been abel to do. They also failed students from middle school on. You failed the 6th grade, you went to trade school and were working by 16. If you didn’t work, you were put into forced labor. Excellent system! I love it!”

        Yeah as Hermes said, that would never fly in the US. And THAT is the single biggest reason we can’t have free college in the US. Almost all nations that have free or heavily subsidized university education have standardized testing that screens out the dummies. In the US, they have remedial college courses, for people who didn’t learn basic English or Math in High School. What other country has college level remedial classes?

        Mike Street Station

        August 23, 2016 at 8:17 AM

    • That’s because it isn’t any different.

      If student loans were eliminated, tuition would plummet.


      August 21, 2016 at 12:27 PM

    • first-home purchase tax credit from early in the Obama administration.

      Four members of my family, each one a millionaire, received the full $8000 tax credit. Each of these individuals would have bought the house w/o the tax credit.

      American’s like low taxes for 1 reason and 1 reason only: America’s large black population. That is literally the only reason. If it wasn’t for the knowledge that their tax money would just be going to blacks

      I think this is largely true as there are millions (?) of 3 and 4 generation black families that never have and never will pay a dime in income taxes or feed themselves. When I see the YouTube clips of blacks playing knockout game on Whites I think how much White taxpayer dollars went to house and feed the black miscreant and his offspring (that he can neither house or feed).

      And, don’t forget the Earned Income Tax Credit for low-income, working folks. This is just a cash welfare payment. I’m not saying I disagree with the EITC, I’m just pointing it out.

      But, also, I think one other major objection to taxes is that so much tax revenue is lost to fraud, waste, and abuse.

      Nonetheless, my effective federal income tax rate has averaged 18% over the past 30 years.

      E. Rekshun

      August 21, 2016 at 2:11 PM

    • But if you read between the lines of the student loan whiners, about half of the loan was used to pay living expenses – those must be paid regardless if one is in school or not.

      Plus, there are well-known methods to get a college degree with minimal to no tuition debt – active or reserve military; community college pipeline to state university; employer tuition reimbursement.

      E. Rekshun

      August 21, 2016 at 2:16 PM

      • Well to many white kids, the “college experience” is the whole reason for going to college. After all, you can’t be a mudshark under daddy’s roof. Eventually, you have to pay the piper.


        August 21, 2016 at 7:05 PM

  5. Do you honestly think government can spend your money more thoughtfully and rationally than you? Do you think it’s right that firefighters and other government employees deserve $400,000 pensions, as have been exposed here in California. There are millions of immigrants who come here and milk the system with free or subsidized housing, meals, medical care. Of course I don’t want to pay more of my hard earned money to support these grifters. When you add up the taxes I pay I’m already at the 50%+ level between federal, state, property, sales. If you think you aren’t paying enough, feel free to give more but don’t suck the rest of us into your feel-good fantasy of the utopia you’re going to create if we all paid more in taxes. There is a ton of waste in government that needs to be routed out before anyone talks of raising taxes. If you’ve ever served on a non- profit or volunteer board you’ll learn it’s very easy for people to spend other people’s money.


    August 21, 2016 at 11:48 AM

    • “Do you honestly think government can spend your money more thoughtfully and rationally than you?”

      Yes, absolutely possible with good ethical government.

      “Do you think it’s right that firefighters and other government employees deserve $400,000 pensions, as have been exposed here in California.”

      Example of bad unethical government, possibly a result of our two-party political system in which people vote on idealogy instead of whether the person they are voting for is good and ethical.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      August 21, 2016 at 12:18 PM

      • Teacher pensions are a disgrace especially when big companies are doing away with defined benefit plans.

        Teachers retire in their mid 50’s with huge pensions that increase over time unlike many private pensions.

        Cars have proliferated because of the govt subsidies to roads and also because of zoning laws that have spread everything out..

        Cars are practically a tax that everyone must pay to live reasonably in most areas.


        August 21, 2016 at 2:49 PM

      • The way it works is the union interviews the potential city council, county supervisors, school board, or the local state rep and determines which are most inclined to support just about any crazy ass thing the union wants. The union has already gotten the school board, supervisor, city council elections held on odd years when there is nothing else of interest to the general population. That maximizes the power of the union, if near 100% of the union goons are voting like the union told them, they can elect whomever the union goons want.

        The media won’t ever report on the ridiculous contract terms, with the wages 50%+ higher than the private sector job, and the pension 100%+++ higher. The lefty media understands the union dues fund the democrats and they don’t want anything to hurt the dems. Bell California 5 years ago was one of the few times the media reported on public wages; but it was only peeps in management they reported on. No union dues from them, so it was fair game. Union wages; it’s strict silence….

        My ex was a county employee and I read the union newsletter where all this was laid out as to how to vote.

        With the current media dying, there’s a chance the new media won’t be beholden to the dems and we’ll find out about these abuses.

        About the US hating taxes because it goes to support the current and future generations of feral NAMs; without a doubt. All those Reagan Democrats switched because of that; and affirmative action that put unqualified feral NAMs at the head of the line to get a job.


        August 21, 2016 at 6:49 PM

      • So all that is needed is consistently good, ethical government.


        August 22, 2016 at 6:40 AM

    • Putting aside if they *could* do it better, most people view the government as staffed by the massively incompetent and have little faith in it outside of the military.

      The people that we personally know who went to work for the government? Not the best and brightest and their biggest concern is making sure all their days off are used up. And they basically admit their jobs are pointless but secure.

      Lion of the Turambar

      August 21, 2016 at 1:14 PM

      • And the military has failed at every major undertaking for the last fifty years which goes to show that it’s more about tribalism than anything else and that the way to get conservatives to support the government is just to stack more segments of the government with conservative employees. Although maybe I have my causality backwards.


        August 21, 2016 at 2:28 PM

      • The military was very successful at defeating Saddam Hussein’s army and removing him from power.

        The military failed at making post-war Iraq into a Western-style Democracy, but how did that ever become part of the military’s mission?

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 21, 2016 at 2:31 PM

      • The military completely failed to keep the peace and provide security in Iraq and were completely defeated by various guerrilla factions in the country. It was not like Iraq was completely safe and secure, they held and election, and the elected party decided to kick out the US military. Or that Iraq was safe and secure and the US ended up installing a non democratic puppet. The military completely lost control of the country and hundreds of thousands of people died as a result. Just like they lost control in Vietnam and Afghanistan.

        For the record I think it’s basically impossible to win a war against an enemy that doesn’t obey the Geneva conventions while handicapping yourself by abiding by those rules. But that doesn’t contradict the fact that the US military completely failed. And remember how many members of the military establishment stood up and protested when Trump suggested that it was necessary to violate the Geneva conventions to win.


        August 21, 2016 at 4:53 PM

      • once you’ve got nukes no one is going to attack you…or rather no state is going to attack you. terrorists are another matter.

        so there’s a third reason for the enormous conventional forces of the US…intimidation. SAC is all the US needs to defend itself from invasion. but what is “itself”? it seems perhaps there is an american empire, and america’s huge conventional forces exist to rule this empire. fanciful thinking, but just another attempt to explain the $680 b a year US military.

        Trumpocalypse Now

        August 21, 2016 at 5:12 PM

      • Magnavox, you have a pointless quibble here. Is there a more powerful military than the US? Of course not. And the public perceives it as the best. Could the goals be different- sure but that is political, not military.

        On the other hand does anyone believe that the IRS is the best accounting firm? That We have the best implemented farm policy, that the DMV is efficient and well run? Of course not.

        From personal experience we know the government is staffed with 3rd raters who arent trying very hard and who are in a poor system.

        If the government were rated by Charity Navigator they would get a failing grade because so little of the money actually gets to any intended goal.

        Thats why people dont like taxes.

        Lion of the Turambar

        August 22, 2016 at 9:28 AM

      • I’m sure if you funded the IRS the same way you funded the military than it would be the best in the same way the US military is the best (which is basically just the best funded). If the goal is to win wars then none of the military spending is going towards achieving it’s intended goal. So how would that rate as a charity? It comes up short against the DMV and the IRS, that’s for sure. As for third raters, the military is constantly held up as an exemplar of racial affirmative action and it is in the process of becoming one of anti male discrimination as well.


        August 22, 2016 at 5:07 PM

    • “Do you honestly think government can spend your money more thoughtfully and rationally than you?”

      One entity can pool large sums of money together to invest in major projects with more efficiency than a large number of people each using their own money can. This principal explains why any large organization exists. The trick, of course, is to find a way to staff the government with intelligent and moral people whose interests are aligned with the general population’s. This is difficult but not impossible, though it’s rarely been accomplished.


      August 21, 2016 at 1:24 PM

      • By that logic you can just have corporations and other groups fulfill all the functions of the government. But that would never work because without government compulsion people would just free ride on the efforts of others.


        August 21, 2016 at 5:03 PM

    • Anyone with who has actually thought about this knows what an externality is and knows how stupid your question is.

      And what significant real waste there is (medical spending, military spending, supporting the poor who the government should have prevented from being born in the first place) are all vehemently defended by the typical anti government person (with the semi exception of the poor where they’re only opposed to preventing them from having children and generally OK with not supporting them and letting them suffer).


      August 21, 2016 at 2:00 PM

  6. The problem is that high taxes strip otherwise low satus white Christian beta males of their only hope to court fertile women of their own race. They will never receive the benefits of said taxes due to affirmative action, nam violence, and above mentioned stripped ability to have children who look like them.


    August 21, 2016 at 12:00 PM

    • Largest programs are of course medicare and social security, which whites benefit from considerably. The main benefit is later in life but they also benefit by not having to worry nearly as much about taking care of their aging parents.


      August 21, 2016 at 1:26 PM

    • First of all a lot of these christian beta men breeders get the home interest deduction, earned income tax credit, send their kids to public schools, etc. and end up getting significantly more in government benefits than they put in.

      But if you want to stop poor people from having children then put them on birth control and don’t think that if you stop supporting them they’ll magically stop having children and that other Americans will support letting the poor starve.


      August 21, 2016 at 2:24 PM

      • Magnavox, I think that ons4everalpha’s point is that the “white Christian beta males” AREN’T breeding, because of high taxes. I think that this is probably true. By the way, “breeders” was a word screamed by ACT-UP demonstrators in the late ’80s in the faces of White people with children.


        August 21, 2016 at 4:29 PM

  7. You’re making the mistake of thinking most Americans have the same status anxiety you do.


    August 21, 2016 at 12:10 PM

  8. Lion, one of Trump’s advisors seems to be a big time anti-Semite:

    One of Donald Trump’s foreign policy advisers has been accused of anti-Semitic behavior, having allegedly boasted about firing Jewish employees while serving at the Defense Department, in addition to denying the Holocaust was as bad as official accounts, according to a report published Thursday by McClatchy.


    August 21, 2016 at 12:20 PM

    • I didn’t follow the link, but if it’s true, Trump should fire him.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      August 21, 2016 at 12:41 PM

    • It is completely mainstream that the majority of jews killed in the holocaust died outside any of the camps.


      August 21, 2016 at 2:02 PM

  9. American’s like low taxes for 1 reason and 1 reason only: America’s large black population.

    That is literally the only reason. If it wasn’t for the knowledge that their tax money would just be going to blacks, American would have similar tax rates and a similar social safety next to Western European countries.

    Otis the Sweaty

    August 21, 2016 at 12:25 PM

    • There’s some truth to this. People from all walks of life experience ups and downs, but if the safety net is perceived to go towards Blacks (or immigrants, and/or corporations), then citizens will balk at the idea.

      Alternatively, American history is often taught as having started via tax revolt. We are in many respects different than Europeans. There’s also a strong undercurrent of optimism and exceptionalism. One of my favorite polls from 2000, when the stock market was soaring, reported that 19% of Americans thought they were in the top 1%. Another 20%(!) said they would be in the top 1% one day.

      The simple fact of the matter is that tax cuts without spending cuts are just tax increases on future generations. “Starve the Beast” doesn’t work. If we increased taxes, whilst balancing the budget, maybe people would be more likely to question the necessity of so much government spending.


      August 21, 2016 at 1:26 PM

    • Really it’s broadly a problem of lack of social cohesion something that blacks play a very large role in.


      August 21, 2016 at 1:49 PM

    • I think there is something to that. Compare tax rates in Vermont to tax rates in Alabama.

      Mike Street Station

      August 21, 2016 at 2:09 PM

      • It’s interesting that you make that comparison, as Alabama whites are a lot more familiar with black behavior than Vermont whites.


        August 21, 2016 at 4:43 PM

  10. Breaking my maiden agreeing with Yakov – this is a ridiculous post. Preference for low taxes has nothing to do with a misperception that they’ll allow one to keep up with the Joneses. Instead, it’s about making sure that people actually make an effort in life. People know that government programs funded by taxes mostly just incentivize laziness. For us boomers, I.e. back in the ’70s-80s, the argument was “look at Sweden and Germany, they do fine with high tax systems.” Yeah, look at them now, they’ve effectively given their countries away.

    tiny blades

    August 21, 2016 at 12:37 PM

    • People know that because they’re stupid. All the big items in the budget (military, social security, medicare) are all very popular. It’s equally stupid to think that in the absence of government support for the poor (which is substantial in total) they would all magically turn into self supporting productive members of society.


      August 21, 2016 at 1:55 PM

      • It’s equally stupid to think that in the absence of government support for the poor (which is substantial in total) they would all magically turn into self supporting productive members of society.

        Not so fast. Most of the people on welfare are single mothers. The illegitimacy rate has increased by 400% since the “war on poverty” began. And the number of people on welfare was reduced by 50% after the welfare reforms of the late 90’s. And it went back up after the reforms were undone. This goes to show that welfare does increase uselessness and poverty.


        August 21, 2016 at 9:08 PM

      • I don’t doubt that theres some effect (I used the word “all” in my post) but I think the effect is much smaller than what you’re hinting at. There’s a growing consensus that any apparent benefit from the Clinton welfare reforms was just an artifact of the late nineties economic boom. And your other points were much more tenuous.

        The plain fact is that there simply isn’t a place in our economy for tens of millions of the poor.


        August 21, 2016 at 9:40 PM

      • a citation please.

        i wonder what fraction is due to “women’s lib” rather than welfare. and what fraction is due to “common-law” marriage replacing legal marriage.

        and of course “illegitimacy” is much higher in scandinavia, if all one means by “illegitimate” is that the parents aren’t married…formally.

        the teen pregnancy rate is much scarier and……not what you might have expected.

        Trumpocalypse Now

        August 21, 2016 at 10:03 PM

      • this must be what you’re talking about…looks like more than 400% for whites. but it was increasing before 1960 too. it’s horrible, but i doubt welfare explains all of it. what white woman thinks, “i’ll get pregnant, and then i’ll go on welfare.”

        Trumpocalypse Now

        August 21, 2016 at 10:07 PM

      • Trumpocalypse Now

        August 21, 2016 at 10:08 PM

    • And no doubt that Sweden and Germany have very stupid immigration policies but it has very little to do taxes and America is still in a much worse place demographically. Those countries still haven’t even reached the equivalent of the US pre 1965 85%+ white demographics.


      August 21, 2016 at 2:16 PM

      • yes. in general the size of govt/tax revenues as % of GDP/% employed by govt is higher the richer the country. rich countries have big governments and high taxes. poor countries have small governments and low taxes. though which way the causation goes is up for debate.

        the HBDer “explains” the prosperity of scandinavia as the result of its talented population…so smart that they’ve opted for big government?

        american politics = race. obviously.

        and the DEEP reason for opposition to eugenics, of some kind, is that it would inevitably lead to scandinavian social democracy. when the guy in the gutter is your fellow swede vs you know that the guy in the gutter has a high IQ or high whatever.

        and capitalism without eugenics, just social darwinism, is treating labor as something other than just another commodity input to production. so all inputs to production improve in quality or quantity over time…except one…labor…or it improves via “education” only?

        anyway it seems clear that if you’re an HBDer and a conservative on economic matters, the evidence is that if the USSR had not been lysenkoist, environmental determinist, if it had practiced eugenics it would have won the cold war despite its crappy economic system.

        Trumpocalypse Now

        August 21, 2016 at 5:03 PM

      • “though which way the causation goes is up for debate.”

        They became industrialized first world countries first. Only later after the economic growth slowed did they become welfare states. There was a similar effect with religiosity. I’ve had aggressive atheists claim more developed countries are less religious than underdeveloped countries. As if to suggest religiosity is an obstacle to prosperity and development. I pointed out that they became developed BEFORE becoming less religious. And that less religiosity was consequence of living in a prosperous, developed country not the cause.


        August 21, 2016 at 10:05 PM

      • Yes, if America had the demographics of Vermont, it would be like Sweden.

        Race explains almost everything in this world – the Olympics, the state of a nation’s economy, war, famine, terrorism, this blog, Nobel Prize Winners, good books, the Forbes 500, the best musicians, Caltech’s engineering lecture hall, Greenpeace, feminism, Nazism, crime, and sex.

        The Blank Slate is the greatest scientific fraud of our lifetime. It is the flat earth of the post Holocaust era. No other race is susceptible to its illogical precepts and “evidence” other than whites who are somewhat k selected autists but almost certainly the race with the highest affective empathy towards humans and animals (hence why all races want to live among whites or why their women are especially aesthetically pleasing). East Asians are even more K autistic but have no affective empathy.

        If I was white myself, I would probably be totally aghast at my above comment. I physically would wretch. It is certainly a thoughtcrime of the highest degree. I admit my guilt at your Extractor’s Laws.

        In an enduring irony, it is solely the paranoid haze of the schizo who can see both real fundamental truth about the true horror of the Struggle of the Will and yet also struggle with certain features of reality. Cognition being a kind of rhythm in the darkness. I believe Hitler suffered as much too. The further away one is from Reality, the safer one is also from “reality”. That is the paradox of Schizo existence.

        We have two eyes but sadly one is false and one shines true. Which one? Will we always make the right decision? Probabilistically impossible.

        Nonetheless if I may continue: If dogs can be psychologically primed since childhood to accept the Beast, they can most assuredly accept the fox, the sheep or even the hyena. This is the purpose of Blank Slate’s introduction and continued social engineering since the 1940s. It is about safety. The Struggle of the Will ordains we forcibly remove contrary genetic interests to our own, even if they follow the law. Even if they pay more taxes. This is the great sadness of human affairs from Indonesia to Palestine to the modern United States. Human rules are subsumed to the Algorithm’s. It is actually necessary for evolution.

        All tribes do that in their lands. Mugabe, South Africa, Israel (especially to black Ethiopian Jews), East Asians, South Asians etc. They are allowed to. Nobody complains. Everybody is more afraid of the Dogs. High altruism surplus producing whites are not too hot, not too cold, just right to settle with.

        And so they mitigate against its realisation every day in their classrooms, tv shows and books.

        The Dogs are no angels either because their schizo contingents also eliminated the Natives from their own lands. Some may say then, that somewhat autistic high empathy people should be punished for their weakness in verbal intelligence or altruism even, likewise.

        All I will say is that unchaining the Beast is Russian Roulette. This the last paradox. It brings safety to minorities but leads to their inevitable destruction in the end, as it has elsewhere in my travels. The Extractors may control most Dogs minds, but they certainly do not control the Beast’s. For It is also a Schizo. It reproduces much faster. And it is favoured heavily by the Algorithm whose programming mandates a mean reversion to hardy cockroach like genetic survival.

        Do you dare publish this post Lion? You can justifiably claim I am crazy, which I now openly admit. It is irksome you don’t publish some of my “racist” posts that point out the HBD qualities of Jews (“positive” and “negative” if you believe in make belief morality), and then subject me to the hard analysis/insults and questions of the gallery. If I am deluded, as I reassure you I am, let people decide for themselves. Or does my logic necessitate suppression? In which case the mainstream media’s apparatus you rally against is more akin to your labours than you think.

        The Philosopher

        August 22, 2016 at 5:06 PM

  11. Then there’s the part of their brains that don’t like things being taken from them because things being taken from them represent an assault on their work, their pride, and their autonomy. In other words, the entire concept of justice (a rationally created concept) is based on others not taking my stuff. It has nothing to do with stockpiling potatoes to survive the caveman winter.

    This is really among the dumbest posts I have ever read. You are generally reasonably astute (even if I don’t always agree with you). Here, you are not.



    August 21, 2016 at 2:24 PM

  12. If we are going to have income taxes,we should have a progressive tax system.

    On the other hand I do hate the govt threatening us with prison if we don’t pay them. There is something very perverse about that.

    I am getting to the point of the libertarians that I want as much private property and few taxes as possible.

    This country is a disaster, We have to pay all these taxes and give this money to minorities and whites too, but at the same time we can’t even have freedom of association.

    On top of that the idiots allow a zillion immigrants in to change the country totally and many of these people get freebies from the govt that we pay for. We are paying for our dispossession.

    I would like private towns and neighborhoods. This is especially important given the demographics of this country now.

    Whatever amount of money we need we should do it by corporate taxes or sales taxes. I don’t want the govt in my business at all. I don’t even want to think about taxes.

    The only thing the govt should pay for is defense, I know that is extreme, but I am getting more and more extreme,


    August 21, 2016 at 2:32 PM

    • If we are going to have income taxes,we should have a progressive tax system.

      and it is progressive for earned income and interest income, but given the payroll tax and the low rates on capital gains and dividends and that the rich usually derive most of their income from the latter…

      the current tax regime is effectively flat.

      the exceptions include professionals living in california or nyc who may pay 50%.

      but one question is…

      do taxes effect after tax compensation? that is…

      do employers simply pay their higher ranking staff more to make up for their tax burden? up to a limit.

      and the top nominal rate on earned income and on inheritance is very high in the US relative to that of other developed countries. but very few actually pay this top rate, and the effective rate is likely the lowest in the developed world.

      if the “leftists” were clever, which they aren’t, they’d agree to lowering rates but insist on a radical simplification of the code and the elimination of all “loopholes”. then they could say, “we’re cutting taxes, but the republicans oppose it.” this may be the trump plan faik.

      Trumpocalypse Now

      August 21, 2016 at 4:46 PM

      • You’re on fire on this thread. I have observed the same thing myself, not just in America. The modern welfare state is the upper middle class doctor/banker/dentist worker’s money being given to roughly 30% immigrants/refugees and their r selected descendants, 20% upward redistribution in bailouts/debt interest relief/no bid contracts and subsidy to the rich and then 50% musical chairs among themselves.

        The elite pay no taxes. This has been the case since Eygptian times.

        Why do you think tax havens like the mighty Bermuda and Caymans, with its 7 fleets of destroyers and 18 stealth bomber divisions, are allowed to exist? If they are literally bleeding the US and all world governments of tax, you would think they would be shut down.

        You can infer that Hitler didn’t attack the 1940s Caymans, Switzerland, for similar reasons. The Extractors! Our overlords. Our wonderful stationary bandits. Going strong since King Tut.

        The Philosopher

        August 22, 2016 at 3:37 PM

  13. Lion reminds us that the alt right is a left-wing movement. The alt right agrees with welfare state liberals and socialists in promoting a big government that intervenes in the economy because elites and experts are (they say) able to spend money more wisely than individuals are, and because “we are all in this together and the needs of the tribe outweigh the needs of the individual.” Paradoxically, for the left and for the alt right, this absurd worship of elites is the result of envy of the current elites.

    Where the alt right disagrees with the conventional left is that in the middle of the 20th century the left started using the state (and its control of education and popular culture) to redistribute resources from whites to nonwhites, straights to homosexuals, men to women, etc. The alt right hopes to seize the state apparatus and use it to benefit straight white men, or at least stop it from discriminating based on race and gender and sexual proclivities, and get back to soaking the rich to benefit those less rich.

    The alt right is identity politics leftism for straight white men.


    August 21, 2016 at 5:22 PM

    • thats right, most altsbergers types would support a program that gave white betas money to buy time with prostitutes.


      August 21, 2016 at 6:53 PM

      • ” The alt right agrees with welfare state liberals and socialists in promoting a big government ”

        Bull crap. You know nothing of the alt right if you would say this. You sound like a sore RedStater/Cruzbot/Glenn Beck acolyte. The alt right is all over the map on this, but one thing is certain: they do not put GDP above all else.

        “The alt right is identity politics leftism for straight white men.”

        Again, bull crap.

        I disagree that the alt-right is all identity politics, but even if it were, that does not make it either right wing or left wing. That is, you can be economically right or left, and socially/religiously right or left, and engage in identity politics.

        The left has exploited identity politics. To give a good example, many blacks are religious, church attending and socially conservative on issues like traditional marriage (more so indeed than whites). But almost 100% of blacks vote Democrat. Democrats turned around and used their power to push for gay ‘marriage’.

        The right has also exploited identity politics. Republicans have for 30 years pandered on social issues while delivering nothing to their religious base and using any power to lower taxes.

        I am a conservative but I came to see that conservatives have conserved nothing. Tax rates are not the most central thing. You can lose your country, your culture and everything you recognize under a low-tax regime quite easily.

        I do think low taxes are good for economic growth and the for maturity and independence of a population, but I am also aware that if the country is lost, the tax rate is not something people like me will have a say over, ever again.

        The alt-right does have resentment toward the rich, no doubt. But they don’t resent hard work or success. They resent that the business class in this country has put such importance on cheap labor that it will replace the American people to save a buck.


        August 21, 2016 at 9:44 PM

      • it has already been pointed out that pre-trump american conservatism is a universalist utopian ideology.

        just like islam.

        it’s gesellschaft vs gemeinshcaft. look it up.

        Trumpocalypse Now

        August 21, 2016 at 10:28 PM

    • “The alt right hopes to seize the state apparatus and use it to benefit straight white men.”

      The Left defines an even playing field as discriminatory against NAMs and women and call it white male privilege.

      Look, every people should and must advocate for themselves. Myself and my people, right or wrong, is the only true morality.


      August 21, 2016 at 7:34 PM

    • The rich are anti-white. And somebody has to foot the bill. So why not soak them?

      “The alt right is identity politics leftism for straight white men.”

      Identity politics is not left or right. It is just common sense and evolutionary adaptive to advocate for the power and influence of your own group. Every lion pack knows that. White left liberals and libertarians are the only exception in the animal kingdom. At least left liberals often get jobs for themselves out of their advocacy for outsiders. Libertarians aren’t even smart enough to get that. (except maybe libertarian economists with tenure).

      A large chunk of alt-righters are former libertarians who wised up.

      The alt-right is both left and right because our anti-white adversaries are a coalition of traitorous elites and outsiders. The movement is right wing in its opposition to outsiders who want our stuff. And it is left wing in it’s attempt to bring down the anti-white, globalist elites.


      August 21, 2016 at 8:05 PM

    • “The alt right is identity politics leftism for straight white men.”

      Yes. And that is a good thing.

      Otis the Sweaty

      August 21, 2016 at 8:42 PM

    • Yes, because virtually every other identity imaginable already has lobbies that aggressively push their interests grabbing for short term gains at the expense of everyone else.
      Not to mention they are allowed to associate freely and only hire their own.
      It’s an ugly game, but when everyone else is looting the commons, you have no choice but to join in on the plunder before it’s all gone.
      In general in this life, if you don’t stand up for your interests, others pick up on that and make you a doormat.

      Giovanni Dannato

      August 21, 2016 at 10:30 PM

      • “It’s an ugly game, but when everyone else is looting the commons, you have no choice but to join in on the plunder before it’s all gone.”

        That’s a sad point, but it seems to be true, and part of the reason why the US is in an irreversible decline.

        Mike Street Station

        August 22, 2016 at 8:50 AM

  14. I never understood people’s obsession with taxes, and the Laffer curve in particular, until last year when Trudeau campaigned on raising taxes for the “rich”. I realized, fukkit, why am I working so hard, busting my ass helping out our short-handed local emergency department when the government LITERALLY wants to take over half of what I “earn”? Fuck that noise.

    So I work less. The Laffer curve is real.

    Samson J.

    August 21, 2016 at 7:36 PM

    • But in the U.S., most of the rich support Hillary Clinton.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      August 21, 2016 at 9:07 PM

      • But you yourself are always saying that the rich don’t actually work (i.e., they’re either independently wealthy, or they do what you call value transference work.)

        Also, you’re always saying that Republicans view loopholes as fast ones they’ve pulled over on the Democrats, but liberals and Democrats like to talk about raising rates, not just closing loopholes.


        August 21, 2016 at 10:18 PM

  15. “But, people aren’t thinking rationally about it, they are thinking with the animal parts of their brain. “

    Fortunately, Leon is above all that. He’s one of the enlightened few who is purely rational and not influenced by the animal part of his brain — unlike all those people who disagree with him. Leon is also psychic and knows the real reason people don’t like taxes. #sarc

    As I’ve pointed out previously, studies have shown that liberals are the absolutely worst at understanding conservatives’ motives. And while I normally wouldn’t consider you a liberal you do tend to have squirrelly, almost liberal opinions on a couple of issues. And taxes is one of them.

    I oppose taxes for 4 reasons. First, a lot of money is squandered through corruption and cronyism.
    Second, there are a lot of people who abuse entitlements. Third, entitlements have increased illegitimacy nearly 400% since the start of LBJ’s “war on poverty”. While apparently doing very little to actually reduce the number of people in poverty. Fourth, the government is less efficient than the private sector. Fifth, I simply disagree with many of the programs the money is used for. Sixth, raising taxes and increasing the size of government apparently leads to more spending and debt. And, finally, taking another person’s property by force is stealing and a violation of one’s basic rights.

    There’s also the valid objection of being forced to support criminals who hate and attack the very people on whose money they depend. Or being forced to support millions of foreigners who flood into the country only to vote themselves our money. As well as government workers whose main purpose is apparently lobbying and voting themselves raises and pensions. It looks an awful lot like a racket.

    That’s not to say I oppose all taxes or entitlements. But, in order for me to support, it must be both necessary and efficient. Providing basic subsistence to those who can’t care for themselves is one thing. They’re not OWED it. But I’m willing to help meet the basic needs of those who honestly can’t support themselves. None of this wealth-redistribution garbage. I don’t owe anyone a middle class lifestyle. And that includes government workers as well as single mothers with 5 kids.

    But liberals just cant stand to see unequal outcomes. They don’t think it’s “fair” regardless of how honestly those outcomes were earned. If you want to know who has a primitive mentality, it’s liberals. Who act as if we’re still living in a primitive tribal community of a few families who share everything. That’s fine with small groups of relatives. Heck, that’s how I am with my own family. But it doesn’t work with large populations.

    Regardless, liberals have a screwed up sense of fairness wired into their brains that makes them want to take money from some and give it to others. Not because others are in need. But simply to make things “even”. I’d have less objection if the tax dollars collected were simply burned.


    August 21, 2016 at 9:35 PM

    • So to summarize: “I hate taxes because liberals suck.”

      Reality: majority of federal government spending is social security, medicare, and military. Majority of state spending is education and police/criminal justice.

      Reality 2: government has massive debt and we need more taxes to cover government spending. “Cut spending!” you say. But when Republicans controlled presidency and congress, during Bush years, NO SPENDING WAS CUT. Can’t blame just blame liberal Democrats for government spending. Which is mostly military, social security, and medicare.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      August 21, 2016 at 10:49 PM

      • Your response was both a deflection and a strawman. You should be embarrassed by it.


        August 21, 2016 at 11:03 PM

      • Neither political party has any realistic plan at all to reduce government spending. (Republicans TALK about it a lot, but when they dominated government it was clear it was just talk and no action, no plan, nothing.) One party, the Democrats, has a sensible plan to increase taxes to reduce the budget deficit by increasing taxes on those who can most afford to pay–the top 1%–and who make most of their money doing value transference anyway.

        I support Trump despite his dumb tax policy because immigration, and just not being a crazy SJW, is more important. And I strongly suspect his dumb tax policy will not be implemented when he becomes president.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 21, 2016 at 11:06 PM

      • lion you might have responded as proudhon did to bastiat. it’s all libertarians deserve.

        Your intelligence is asleep, or rather it has never been awake…You are a man for whom logic does not exist…You do not hear anything, you do not understand anything…You are without philosophy, without science, without humanity…Your ability to reason, like your ability to pay attention and make comparisons is zero…Scientifically, Mr. Bastiat, you are a dead man.

        Trumpocalypse Now

        August 21, 2016 at 11:42 PM

      • “majority of federal government spending is social security, medicare, and military. Majority of state spending is education and police/criminal justice.”

        True, but liberals want to create massive new federal programs outside of the above: universal healthcare, free college, universal preschool, universal maternity/paternity leave, etc.

        Also, destructure has a point about liberals wanting to equalize outcomes. Of course no one would ever write this into policy proposals because they know it’s emotional and not rational, but there definitely are liberals who want to create Harrison Bergeron-esque “hanidcaps” on people because it’s just not fair for some people to have more or be better than others. I get the strong impression from some liberals I know personally, that they just want to “get” rich people. As in, “hey, that guy’s got more money than we do–get him!”


        August 22, 2016 at 1:04 AM

      • “But when Republicans controlled presidency and congress, during Bush years, NO SPENDING WAS CUT. Can’t blame just blame liberal Democrats for government spending. Which is mostly military, social security, and medicare.”

        That’s true. Paul Ryan makes up these phony budget resolutions that drastically cut government spending, but they don’t mean anything. When it’s time to vote on a real bill for real money, he votes for Omnibus spending bills that give the Obama administration everything they could have dreamed of. And a balanced budget amendment? He voted against it.

        That’s why I favor a balanced budget amendment. It separates the wheat from the chaff pretty quickly on government spending. Honestly, if you can’t cut spending, then let taxes go up to balance the budget. Right now Republicans have overplayed the tax cuts card since taxes are low to nonexistent for poor, working class, and lower middle class, and not really that bad for the comfortable middle. And these groups all love government spending no matter what they say. If taxes go up, the public might actually find something it’s willing to cut.

        Mike Street Station

        August 22, 2016 at 9:13 AM

      • Leon — I don’t see my last response to you from this exchange. Did you overlook it? Or did it not go through?


        August 22, 2016 at 11:16 AM

      • It should be clear by now that the Republicans are a wholly subsidiary of the Democrat Party.


        August 22, 2016 at 1:44 PM

      • As in, “hey, that guy’s got more money than we do–get him!”

        bono of U2 said the same of europeans in an interview, but he said americans thought instead, “i’d like to be that guy some day.”

        the difference might have been attributed to the popular (but incorrect) idea that the US class system is less rigid than europe’s.

        the sentiment you describe would be unfortunate in denmark…a vice. but in a very rigidly stratified society, as the US has become, it’s entirely justified in many cases.

        as krugman has mentioned on numerous occasions: in the US smart poor kids are less likely to graduate from college and “succeed” than are dumb rich kids. this produces resentment which is entirely justified.

        Trumpocalypse Now

        August 22, 2016 at 2:28 PM

      • First, it’s true that when the GOP controlled both houses they didnt cut spending or lower the national debt. But it’s also true that when the Dems controlled both houses they didnt cut spending or lower the national debt either. In fact, deficit spending and the national debt are both much, much higher under Obama. And this was in spite of higher tax revenues. What’s more, Obama oversaw the greatest increase in taxes and spending in the history of the world — and you supported it. Yet now you claim they’re the only ones with a “sensible plan to increase taxes to reduce the budget deficit”? It doesn’t sound like it to me. It sounds like they want to increase taxes in order to increase spending even more. I think what they and you really want is more wealth redistribution.

        Second, I don’t care much one way or the other about Trump’s tax plan because it will never be implimented. He won’t even try to. That’s fine because I’d rather him not get bogged down in what we both know will be a tarbaby. There’s a much better and easier way to reduce deficit spending — deport millions of illegals using entitlements. The next best way is to renew the welfare reforms of the late 90’s. It reduced welfare rolls by nearly half and got them back to work before Obama gutted them. Reducing the trade deficit will also go a long way towards reducing deficit spending. After that, it becomes much more difficult to wring out spending cuts through eliminating, replacing and reforming government agencies and programs. Regardless, those are the keys to reducing deficit spending. And Trump has built his campaign around all of them.

        And, third, I’d like to see all the entitlement programs replaced with a single negative income tax (or guaranteed minimum income). It would greatly simplify government as well as removng the disincentives for people on welfare to work. I do not, however, think it should be enough to provide anyone with a middle class lifestyle. Just enough to cover the barest necessities of life. If someone wants more then they should earn it.

        I’d also like to replace the current overly complicated income tax code with two much simpler taxes — a flat sales tax and a progressive wealth tax. That way all money is taxed whether it’s spent or saved. But it still transfers the tax burden to the 1% — even more than the progressive income tax does.


        August 22, 2016 at 10:43 PM

      • “a progressive wealth tax” from the guy who said only marxists believe in an estate tax.

        destructure was a marxist all along. wow.

        or maybe he’s just read piketty.


        if the return on capital exceeds the rate of growth in GDP, it’s louis xvi and his ancien regime time. that is, runaway inequality…bolivia. piketty found that return on capital has indeed exceeded the rate of growth in GDP for most of modern economic history.

        Trumpocalypse Now

        August 23, 2016 at 1:23 AM

      • ” ‘a progressive wealth tax’ from the guy who said only marxists believe in an estate tax.”

        I don’t recall saying that. Regardless, whether something is liberal or conservative has as much to do with the <Why? as the What?. The same position can be either depending on one’s motive. I don’t support a progressive wealth tax for liberal reasons. It has nothing to do with fairness or equality or wealth redistribution.

        Why would I want lower taxes for people who use their money to support everything I’m against? And I’m not just talking about Democrat donors but Republican donors as well. Donors on both sides are pushing policies I oppose. The sooner they’re financially castrated the better.


        August 23, 2016 at 10:09 PM

    • Destructure has a point.

      We’re not in some Rawlsian Original Position where we design a government from scratch and staff it with Angels that have full knowledge. The government that exists today in the United States is basically an anti-White government. Every policy that government creates has only one question backing it: “Does it hurt White people?” If yes, then full speed ahead.

      If you don’t believe me, then apply this filter to anything government does. You will see that it tracks almost perfectly with that sentiment.

      The solution is that this government must either be captured by your side to be used to punish your enemies and help your friends, or it must be severely crippled.

      There really is not middle ground.

      As far as democrat tax policy is concerned, you can wipe your a** with it. They have no intention of implementing any such penalties on the 1% because they are the 1%. Hillary Clinton is not running for President for the purpose of raising taxes on herself.


      August 22, 2016 at 1:43 PM

  16. Reduce federal spending across the board, eliminate numerous agencies and institute a modest guaranteed basic minmum income already. The govt is too bloated and inefficient. Create make-work jobs that actually help the community and provide workers with a sense meaning. But since not even most Democrats wouldn’t get behind such am idea let alone Republican and Libertarians, this won’t happen.

    I think most Americans feel the govt has run amok with its spending and any tax cut proposal is supported without much thought.

    Just throwing an idea out there, what about banning birth control pills and abortions to encourage women be more choosey with whom they mate and reduce promiscuity. This would lead to fewer single mothers on welfare and engender social stability.


    August 21, 2016 at 10:21 PM

    • I agree with your first paragraph until the last sentence. Democrats would oppose it because that’s not what they want big government for. They don’t want big government to solve problems. They want big government for wealth redistribution to make everything come out “even”. Libertarians would oppose it because they oppose almost any government program besides national defense and law enforcement. Conservative are actually the most likely to support your suggestions. Though many have become so jaded by government abuse they’d likely reject it out of skepticism and habit.

      The problem with banning birth control and abortion is that the country would become an idiocracy. Smart women have the intelligence, impulse control and future time orientation to keep from getting knocked up from one night stands with douchebag lotharios. Dumb women don’t.


      August 21, 2016 at 11:19 PM

  17. Otis writes:

    American’s like low taxes for 1 reason and 1 reason only: America’s large black population.

    That is literally the only reason. If it wasn’t for the knowledge that their tax money would just be going to blacks, American would have similar tax rates and a similar social safety next to Western European countries.

    libertarian open borders fanatic bryan caplan says one of the reasons he supports open borders is because more diversity causes people to rebel against the welfare state


    August 22, 2016 at 1:17 PM

  18. Oh come now Lion, this is hardly a Sherlock Holmes mystery. In places like Sweden twenty years ago, people paid high taxes, but their government worked fairly well, and their kids went to safe schools and they got health care that was fairly good also. People don’t mind taxes that help them and their families, but this diversity crap changes everyplace into the Balkans, where people who hate each other live side to side with hostile neighbors and there is little social trust. When Americans have some low class Section 8 family move in and terrorize their neighborhood, they know whose money is being taken to support these hoodlums and they won’t be happy paying taxes ever again. Monoracial societies have the most social trust and multiracial ones have no trust at all. Diversity+Proximity=War Every. Single. Time.

    Joshua Sinistar

    August 22, 2016 at 4:13 PM

    • this is exactly right.

      familiarity does not breed contempt. alien-ness does.

      nw europe is committing suicide. but the universalist american ideology and its academic proponents has some blame for this.

      all states which are not nation states are illegitimate perversions. the US and its “washington consensus” is the world’s chimo.

      Trumpocalypse Now

      August 22, 2016 at 11:01 PM

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: