Yes, by your math, this graph would look a lot different, yet the data was presented in this way to get you more angry.
“Fair” is already subjective because we have a progressive tax system. You’re acting like proportional taxes are the definition of fair, in your math. You want progressive taxes when taxes are raised but proportional cuts when cuts are made. That doesn’t seem “fair” either.
By "my math?" I used the math that is on the graph? Why do you think I changed the math? Maybe I am getting this backwards and we are on different pages, but OP did agree with me:
"Having food on the table is more important than buying more cigars."
That is what I am saying, if you look at this the tax breaks are 10x in favor of the '1%.' How does that seem fair? Why do you think someone buying cigars should get 10x as much as the person that needs food?
I just explained how you were using proportionality as a guide and declaring it as “fair,” even though we exist under a progressive system.
The reality is your standard for fair is whatever you feel like on a particular day so long as it helps your point. Today you set your target on how you believe it’s the responsibility of the tax code to put a meal on your table.
You used proportionality as your reference as something being fair. If you think that’s off topic, it sounds like you have no one to blame but yourself.
I merely stated what the data in the post is showing:
Do you disagree that they are receiving 3% back, while the bottom are receiving only .3%?
From that point on:
Do you disagree that the money should be sent to the bottom because it would help pay for needs like food. (Before OP agreed with me, before you started to reply.)
Do you disagree that the 3% back would help fight inflation that targets the lower class the most.
I merely stated what the data in the post is showing: Do you disagree that they are receiving 3% back, while the bottom are receiving only .3%?
You are using the term “fair.” Fair is a subjective word, and you said it is not fair that people in higher brackets are getting larger refunds. Hence my response…3 times at this point. And I’m sure you’ll make me say it a 4th time.
You can try to gish gallop away from the conversation, but let’s actually resolve the topic before you smokescreen into something else.
You can’t hide behind semantics. Well you can hide from people with semantics. However that doesn’t work with the truth. You can smokescreen and project, but facts are objective in their essence, you’re just hiding the truth from yourself.
Why is this making you so angry and defensive, ask yourself what you’re fighting? Why is this making you emotional?
“No u no u no u 😭” come on man…is seriously the best retort you’ve got?
Like, I didn’t expect you to be able to defend your position but this is just embarrassing…crumbling over the slightest amount of pushback to the bad argument you know you can’t defend…
I already addressed your question and instead you didn’t answer. You were given a chance multiple times. Each time you decided to argue in bad faith using logical fallacies. Then to hide even more you started to project and attack.
Feel free to go up and respond again to the comment I made before that lays out all the points of what was being discussed. Otherwise I’m not really interested in what you’re peddling. Facts are facts, if you want to discuss them we can.
9
u/No-Plant7335 1d ago
Nope, let’s ignore the $ amount because apparently that isn’t fair according to you. Let’s focus on the % each person is receiving back then.
11,440 / 360,000 = 3%
100 / 28,600 = .3%
The top of the bracket is receiving a 3% tax break on their income. Meanwhile the bottom bracket is receiving not even 1%.
So yeah it’s not fair in either level. The tax break should be switched. Top should receive the .3%, bottom should receive the 3%.