Do you think nobody pays taxes?

I did not dislike having my taxes raised.

And no, Philly does not have a blog tax. What Philly has is a Business Privilege tax - any business that is located in Philadelphia has to pay a tax on gross receipts - professional bloggers are no exception. Of course you will justify that tax somehow (think of all the fantastic services city of Philadelphia provides to its citizens!! I mean we have trash collection and sometimes even the snow will get cleaned), but the reality is that it is one of the reasons why many businesses avoid setting up shop here.

When were your taxes raised, at least on the federal level?

Has the tax brought in enough revenue to offset the business that didn't come? I'm guessing no.

There are qualitative differences of course too. Taxes are a nuanced subject and should probably be done in certain cycles, yes

I'm just tired of reading Teahadist fiscal inanity lately and get testy.

When they were raised.

As opposed to Mr. I don't pay any taxes yet I feel completely justified in making fun of people who are against raising them.

Federal income taxes haven't been increased since before you were in grade school.

Do these ad hominem arguments work usually work for you?

I think it was, at least in the making.

How would you go about quantifying that effect? More importantly, why is it relevant? Is the justification for any tax in the trade-offs that it creates?

What you just said is completely meaningless.

As opposed to Mr. I don't pay any taxes yet I feel completely justified in making fun of people who are against raising them.

Got it!

Uh, yeah? Isn't that most policy humans agree to set forth, justification based on trade-offs?

Yeah, I'm living the high life. No, I'm against raising it for anyone that isn't in the top 2%.

That real wages have stagnated at best for all but the wealthy since the 70s is not a coincidence.

Economic inequality and staggered social mobility is a hell of a good way to perpetuate long-term societal instability.

How would it be implemented? I have no clue. Could it be implemented? No idea.

No, I am trying to say policy is generally based when weighing positive, negative, neutral and mixed trade-offs.

Top 2% for obvious reasons.

And yes, that's true. Christ, even the Mises Institute has acknowledged this shit. A bunch of real reds there.

And no, I didn't say that. It is indisputably a factor, it is not in itself an inevitable cause nor will its effects always be visible immediately in some or many forms.

What are you talking about? All I asked about was how it could be quantified, not if the effect could be implemented.

Great! So now that we've established that taxation has negative economic effects that outweigh positive taxation revenue, are you onboard with getting rid of taxation altogether?

Which are?

Here's the real wage chart from 1967 to 2003. As you can see your original statement is NOT true. And this is BEFORE taking into account lower taxation and the fact that inflation has a lower impact on the poor than on the rich.

So how do you explain the fact that as income inequality has increased, societal stability has also increased? What are the other factors that are accounting for this seeming discrepancy?

Did Tyler win?

And all its implications.