The unintended consequences (if it fact they are unintended) would see something akin to the great depression, but probably worse.
United States Biden administration policies and actions - megathread
- Thread starter Tyzuris
- Start date
Bigking321
Well-known member
Yep. They want to control every single part of the economy and eliminate anyway to do something else.
That way if you step out of line there's nothing you can do. You might say something critical of the government and violate terms of service and the bank will stop letting you use them, the IRS will be able to track anyone that you help or helps you, going to digital currency means you can't just use cash to get around it.
They want permanent entrenched control of the populace. Any way out will be crushed.
Last edited:
You think the dems care.
They have the greens pushing for climate change!!!
Also, this is gonna hurt trucking companies, because they are going to have to pay for the tax of the trucking.
Which is going to increase QLL goods on tje US.
Probably lead to companies laying people off and Truckers Probably going on strike and all.
Sobek
Disgusting Scalie
I am sus of this. How did this agreement work? Who did they speak with? Because the GOP is very far from a unified party right now, if they worked out something with Mitch the Bitch than it's probably nearly worthless when it comes to the MAGA wing.
Not really. A lot of companies track the milage of their vehicle via the pump. Either an employee or the vehicle in question has an assigned fuel card. When they use the pump it can request the number on the odometer and it needs to be entered to continue before they can refuel. That info is transmitted to the company. They could require you to scan your driver's license to track your odometer and do the math.
bintananth
behind a desk
That would fall down and go boom in an instant because a fair number of people own multiple cars and a lot of people with licenses don't own a vehicle.
Then there's the issue of the gasoline powered stuff used for lawn care which aren't driven anywhere because you have to carry them to use them.
Ehh a little of column a, a little of column b i guess?🤔😊
Arch Dornan
Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
Someone's distressed.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
As Bintanath mentions, there's other uses for fuel, including a very large percentage of Americans who own a gas-powered lawn mower. Unless insanely draconian measures are implemented, 'force a tax at the pump' methods are functionally impossible for private citizens moving their own vehicles, because you need exceptions made for things like that.
Far more likely is an expansion of current digital toll systems, that run on cameras taking shots of your license plate as you pass through various places, so it would literally just pan out as a toll system, and a justification for putting cameras on literally every road.
Because things aren't nightmarishly dystopian enough yet.
Bassoe
Well-known member
Communist Russia openly admitted it wanted our leadership dead and our system conquered and superseded by theirs. Communist China discovered lying about their intentions and bribing politicians works a lot better than honesty for preventing them from fighting back.
bintananth
behind a desk
A commie SCOTUS would say "NOPE!" to such an expansion of the toll system faster than the conservative one we currently have. Roads are a public good and the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956 says that a paved road can not be a toll road if it's the only public paved path connecting two parts of the US.
strunkenwhite
Well-known member
On the one hand, if they think that gasoline usage is starting to decouple from road usage (going from regular cars to regular cars versus fuel-sipper hybrids versus plug-in hybrids and electric-only cars) then it makes sense that they'd be grasping for an alternative way to raise funds from drivers.
On the other hand, I don't like this and it also sounds like a terrible plan.
I'd actually be okay with this part, depending on its implementation (no small caveat). It's non-transferred unrealized gain taxation I have a big problem with.
A tax that waits until I die, and only hits the part above like $12 million? If the government has to collect taxes at all (hint: yes), this is fine. The step up in basis is utterly senseless to me. Having said that, naturally I agree with some protections for passing down things like the small family business or farm intact.
Typhonis
Well-known member
Biden policies need better arguments than Orange Man Bad (msn.com)
An interesting article about the problems Biden faces. Seems the Dems forgot that they lost by narrow margins in several areas and thus why they are having problems passing bills and such.
You need to win the argument before you win votes.
An interesting article about the problems Biden faces. Seems the Dems forgot that they lost by narrow margins in several areas and thus why they are having problems passing bills and such.
You need to win the argument before you win votes.
Aww...shucks.
I hope it continues.
Death Taxes are terrible, and I mean TERRIBLE.
They are the ultimate way to DESTROY companies built and owned by families.
They are the ultimate way to force privately owned companies to become Corporate owned b/c upon death the heirs are forced to sell in order to pay the Death Tax. MAYBY 1% of all companies have the liquid assets to pay the Death tax upon time of inheritance.
The death tax has been championed by every large corporation in America and quite a few overseas. It's why family farming has become corporate.
strunkenwhite
Well-known member
What percentage of companies are even subject to the tax in the first place? Can you point me to data on that being a major reason for the corporatization of farms (out of the hands of families)?
On a basic level, would it be accurate to say you take the position that the "all-at-once" nature of the tax is a drawback that outweighs the benefit of delaying the collection of the tax for the person's entire life, or do you not even consider that a benefit? (I'm assuming that the overall tax revenue collected is the same with or without the tax, because that's the only sensible way to discuss it as opposed to other forms of taxation.)
On a basic level, would it be accurate to say you take the position that the "all-at-once" nature of the tax is a drawback that outweighs the benefit of delaying the collection of the tax for the person's entire life, or do you not even consider that a benefit? (I'm assuming that the overall tax revenue collected is the same with or without the tax, because that's the only sensible way to discuss it as opposed to other forms of taxation.)
Death taxes are unjust from the get go, and are mostly there to destroy generational wealth for anyone who isn't uberwealthy.
There are legal ways to avoid paying as much, such as trusts and such, but the fact that there is a death tax at all is unjust.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
To echo this, part of why death taxes are unjust, is because you're paying that tax on wealth that you were already taxed for earning.
So it's a whole 'nother layer of tax.
At a basic level you're operating on the assumption that a person's wealth prior to death hasn't already been taxed.
Let's take a look at the farming familiy as an example.
Land - that's taxed EVERY year through property taxes
Crops - every bit that's sold counts as income for the purpose of income taxes from Feds/state &/or local govts.
Equipment - Taxed when it was purchased
Housing and Building for business - yup, all that got taxed too
So at what point was the Farmer NOT paying their taxes?
Also, why do you assume that life must be taxed?
Bigking321
Well-known member
The estate tax is pure evil. I completely oppose it.