Re: Tariffs and bikes

On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 10:16:40 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

On 4/5/2025 9:37 AM, John B. wrote:

On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 08:35:17 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
 

On 4/5/2025 4:43 AM, John B. wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 04:19:45 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>

On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 00:08:53 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>

On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:

On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:

>
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own facts.

>
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative facts" if you
don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't that made clear during
Trump version 1?
>

USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on earth, such that
the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of all income tax.
>
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/

>
The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth disparity of
developed nations. Granted, not as bad as many small 3rd world
countries - but I think we should not be striving to emulate those.
>
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic- justice/income-
and-wealth-inequality/
>
I'd say that means our tax structure is still insufficiently progressive.
>
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our nation was
founded on the idea of doing away with a privileged class lording it
over those purportedly of less worth. Also the idea of everyone (well,
as long as their complexion wasn't too dark) getting an equal shot at
prosperity. If nothing else, those ideas, if implemented, work toward
keeping the masses content enough that they don't literally rebel.
Rebellions are messy, unpredictable, and bad for bike shops.
>
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in millions per
year and pay lower rates than struggling middle Americans, in part
because of clever deductions. Remember Leona Helmsley? "Taxes are for
little people."
>
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is free of Social
Security duties. Because hey, one's third mega- mansion is much more
important than better food for the family making $50,000 per year. Why
should the ultra-rich help to keep Social Security afloat?
>
>

>
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable earnings,
ignoring that fully half the country pays no income tax.  Many of those
receive 'negative tax' payments and in fact dos very well on relief,
much better than many working people.

>
"The disparity is a myth"??  The GINI index for the U.S. is higher
(worse) than for Britain, Italy, France, Austria, Canada, Australia,
Ireland, Sweden, Albania, Croatia, etc. etc. etc. Yes, it's not as bad
as South Africa, Mexico, Venezuela, Columbia, but it's hardly a myth.
>

>
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some inherited wealth but
almost all the top earners are self made ...

>
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments to inherited
wealth. I'm basically saying that our current laws and tax structures
favor the wealthy and especially the very wealthy. That includes
corporations, for which it's not that unusual to pay next to zero
federal taxes. Tax shelters are available to those with tons of money.
Helmsley's "little people" have no access to that trickery.
>

Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.

>
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was that everyone
should get an equal shot if their skin wasn't too dark. Did you somehow
forget that black slavery existed back then? Slaves did not get an equal
shot.
>
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with anecdotes about
modern black guys who have gotten rich. But surely even you don't think
it's as likely for a young black guy to succeed as it is for a young
white guy.
>

There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than the top 19
countries of Africa combined.
>
Go stick your racism somewhere else.

>
I was not comparing black Americans to black Africans. I was comparing
black Americans to white Americans. And in my original statement, I was
comparing those groups in 1776.

>
The Leftists racism nonsense is not working any more as more and more
non-white people walk away from the Democrat Party. Perhaps they
should stop using it.

>
'Re Frank's post above... in early  America George Washington, a 3rd
generation slave owner,  assumed ownership of his first 10 slaves when
he was 11 years old. At his death there were 317 slaves  at Mount
Vernon.

>
True although most were acquired at his marriage.
>
Odd though that people do harp on him, and on Thomas
Jefferson as well, while exempting John Adams and Benjamin
Franklin from that line of conversation.
>
And the same people have no time or attention for today's
open slave markets across the Gulf region, into Sudan and
now, with the sudden absence of French special forces,
across the Sahel as the jihadis take over.
>
Not to mention massive scale vivisection of political
prisoners by the CCP for their international organ selling
programs.  Oh no, not at all important when bashing Mr
Washington is so entertaining.

 
 
It is difficult to understand how telling the truth is "bashing". Or
has the truth become a sin in modern America?
 
As Winston Churchill (and others )  said, “Those that fail to learn
from history are doomed to repeat it.”

>
It's true. We all have read multiple contemporary accounts.
No reasonable person doubts that truth.
>
When incessant harping on that, with no mention of his other
actions over a long life (and not all exemplary, for example
that French and Indian War incident) it may well be called
bashing. YVVM.
>
Similarly my criticism of the modern education racket is
that young people can recount all of our country's sins,
which were real, but none of the good we have done.

Not to start another helmet or gun fight but the bad things stick
right out in front of "God and Everyone" - long series of "wars" to
deprive the original owners of their land for example,  what are the
"good things"?

--
Cheers,

John B.