21.3k
since 3 years, 9 months ago
46 of 46
Tip Reveddit Real-Time can notify you when your content is removed.
your account history
Tip Check if your account has any removed comments.
view my removed comments you are viewing a single comment's thread.
view all comments
Taxing unrealized gains is a slippery slope. Why stop at person who have 100 million plus in wealth.
The same will happen with this new tax, it is not meant for the upper class but the middle. Bullish on wealth gap.
The US middle class was destroyed 40 years ago
Might as well finish it off for good, right?
Taxing billionaires…the surefire way to destroy the middle class
Don't worry. The boomers who create and vote this law would also exempt their fellow boomers.
The government's favorite game is "just the tip" when it comes to creating new taxes. Taxes never go back down and they sure as hell never go away.
It's just the tip on everything. Look at the patriot act... still taking shoes off in the airport. How about two weeks to flatten the curve, then it's lockdowns and masks.
The government never relinquishes any control.
53% Of Americans don’t pay an income tax because they are too poor.
Based on how the majority of people are exempt from income tax, it hits the “high net worth” target.
Plus, they don’t amend the constitution for a “temporary” thing, so I’m doubting the other part of your claim.
income tax was illegal under the constitution until it was ammended. makes you wonder what the point of a constitution is if it can be amended by the people it (supposedly) restrains.
The point of our constitution is exactly that it can be amended...
ever heard of the fox watching the henhouse
What a shit take.
Yeah, we also didn't have roads, electricity, or Penicillin so I don't really get the point you're trying to make.
You can go back to the woods, I'm gonna live in a society.
Reagan was wrong about a lot of things.
It won't.. that's how it starts everytime the cap just gets lower and lower over the years and money increases pulling more people into it. Next thing you know you've tax brackets.
The "slippery slope" argument is a logical fallacy.
Gay marriage has been federally legal for 7 years, how long until I can marry my dog??
No it's not
This really needs to be retired as a fallacy. Same with whataboutism.
I think we just need to use both properly. Actual precedents and direct comparisons aren't fallacious.
Taxation law that has been included in the past to only be attributed to a certain "class" of individuals, has at a later time been attributed to everyone.
We’re not there yet but you can change your gender now…
It’s only a “fallacy” until it’s not.
People have been able to change their gender for decades in most states. You just didn't care until it was a culture war talking point.
Neither did you
Yeah, no, I don't care that much. Obviously I support bills that make life easy for trans people, but those were uncontroversial until recently and are not a major national priority.
You realize that it's only one political party bringing this up, right? I don't see bills regulating how teachers bring up LGBTQ issues in liberal states. I don't see democrats bringing it up during supreme court nomination hearings. Honestly it's a little pathetic.
And in this context the guy I responded to is totally wrong in a factual sense. You're just trying to make a snappy comeback.
You don't understand the meaning of fallacy.
Make an argument against the tax all you want, but the moment you use a fallacy as the crux of that argument, it becomes meaningless. That's just how it works. This applies to both sides of any argument.
If a law was passed to revoke the legality of gay marriage and an LGB redditor claimed "If they come after us, what's to stop them from going after other minorities next?", it would be equally fallacious.
It is not the position that's wrong, it's the argument itself.
You sound like a republican
Slippery slope is a logical fallacy
It is if there is no valid likelihood of the outcome. Additionally if the outcome you are suggesting is an extreme case
It's not. Why have a 35% income tax bracket? Never a shortage of poors willing to fight for the interests if billionaires.
Slippery slope arguments are mostly bullshit. If you're saying this step isn't bad, but it might lead to a subsequent step being bad, then you should be OK with this step then fight the next one. Its kind of disingenuous, like how far right politicians argued that legalizing gay marriage would be a slippery slope to beastiality.
My argument is the likelihood for the cap to be lowered from 100 million. There is validity in my position. Also it is not an extreme measure to suggest such an outcome. Hence it does not fall into the realm of being a fallacy.
You are hung up on a poor analogy to counter my position. It does not hold any validity or likelihood. The conclusion is an extreme result that being beastiality.
Lastly why must you use a right wing political reference? It would be far easier to suggest an analogy of ...“If we are willing to reduce the number of jurors from 12 to 10, then why not reduce it to just 2 people, 1 person, or none at all?”
So, do nothing? That works for the billionaires…
Basically yeah, thats what this fear mongering is asking without directly saying it.
"Don't tax the rich! Because if you do, they will come for me next!"
Meanwhile wealth inequality skyrockets and the rich laughs.
Sounds better than paying unrealized fucking gains tax
Are you a billionaire? If not, it’s nothing but a win for you. This closes loopholes that the HYPER rich use to avoid contributing.
That’s insanity. You give an inch, they take a mile.
Eventually, we’d all be paying federal tax on home equity. Come to think of it, it’s a great way to discourage home ownership along with their current plans to eliminate single family zoning.
All because we want to “stick it to the billionaires”
what's wrong with eliminating the single family zoning retirement?
Who is ‘they’? Because we have a multitude of data that billionaires and large corporations will take 10 miles on one inch. Despite your great and longing fears, we don’t have a ton of support fir government somehow going rogue and stealing everything you have.
We also have more than enough data to indicate that these acerbic fears are very much reinforced through paying people to sow this very scenario ‘they are coming for you, be scared all the time’.
I’m not scared.
They is the never ending encroach of the federal government.
You’re not “scared” because you probably don’t have any money.
Hahaha. Sure. So you are scared? I’m sure the billionaires appreciate your fear and will eventually start contributing on their own, right? I mean, outside of penis rockets to mars and mega yachts.
Let me put it a different way. Think of that restrictive scary place of high taxes, Scandinavia. People seem to be living pretty well even with all that scary encroachment. People start and maintain businesses and wealthy people build and maintain wealth. It isn’t perfect, but it’s nowhere near the fear in this country. Who wins with pushing out fear through the news, etc? It ain’t most people..
Yes. I am scared that the federal government will take more of money as my income level increases as my career progresses as has been the case for my entire working life.
Comparing Sweden or some other country with a population in the tens of millions to a nation with 350 million people isn’t a comparison.
I have no interest in paying for your safety net.