MA 2022 Question 1 (Boston, Belchertown, Harwich: rental, condo, college)

[WestieWhitie]

Originally Posted by thinkingotherthings

What is the moral justification for voting to take more money from people just because they earned a lot of it? My family is nowhere near $1M HHI mark, but the idea that anyone has a moral entitlement to anyone else's income doesn't sit right with me.

Those of you voting yes, would you also vote yes to a measure that increased taxes on yourself to transfer more resources to those with lower incomes than you?

If you vote yes on this but stop short of calling for uniformly equal wealth distribution, then where do you draw the line and on what principle?

Because it’s very easy to be generous with someone else’s money, of course!

[simplexsimon]

Originally Posted by thinkingotherthings

What is the moral justification for voting to take more money from people just because they earned a lot of it? My family is nowhere near $1M HHI mark, but the idea that anyone has a moral entitlement to anyone else's income doesn't sit right with me.

Those of you voting yes, would you also vote yes to a measure that increased taxes on yourself to transfer more resources to those with lower incomes than you?

If you vote yes on this but stop short of calling for uniformly equal wealth distribution, then where do you draw the line and on what principle?

I believe the line here is $1 million. When I make over $1 million, I'll pay it.

[BostonBornMassMade]

Originally Posted by thinkingotherthings

What is the moral justification for voting to take more money from people just because they earned a lot of it? My family is nowhere near $1M HHI mark, but the idea that anyone has a moral entitlement to anyone else's income doesn't sit right with me.

Those of you voting yes, would you also vote yes to a measure that increased taxes on yourself to transfer more resources to those with lower incomes than you?

If you vote yes on this but stop short of calling for uniformly equal wealth distribution, then where do you draw the line and on what principle?

we reasonably expect people not to be unreasonably selfish. You're always on the receiving end of "someone elses" money whenever you receive or utilize a public good. This is an illogical argument.

[bostongymjunkie]

Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade

we reasonably expect people not to be unreasonably selfish. You're always on the receiving end of "someone elses" money whenever you receive or utilize a public good. This is an illogical argument.

Yes but some contribute more to the public good than do others. Few cannot, many choose to take more than they give back. In short, lots of selfishness in this society. It's not unreasonable to question where your tax dollars are going and it's not unreasonable to object or ask questions when you believe tax increases are not justified. Also, most people are not the future benefactors of their mommy and daddy's wealth. What they have, is what they earn. Who are you to say they are unreasonable if they have issues with how much of it is taken from them?

[mdovell]

Right but some of the ways how spending has not been allocated make little sense. Consider some of the basics here. Having a flat income tax is one thing that keeps things a bit in check. CT used to be flat but it's nearly as complicated as the federal tax. If we start talking about an extra 4% on a million who is to say that it won't drop to 750K in another five years? CT income tax was said to be temporary and then became permanent.

1) Why are used products charged sales tax?

2) Why are sales taxes going to the MBTA despite the fact that no one west of Worcester has access?

The argument usually is we need more money for education and transit. Well obviously other RTAs are underfunded when sales taxes are allocated to the MBTA instead of equally among the RTA's. Education? Make more of it online. Get the top level 1 schools to make videos of content and teach level 4 and 5's. I'm not saying classrooms of 60+ kids but if the content is there just share it.

[BostonBornMassMade]

Originally Posted by bostongymjunkie

Yes but some contribute more to the public good than do others. Few cannot, many choose to take more than they give back. In short, lots of selfishness in this society. It's not unreasonable to question where your tax dollars are going and it's not unreasonable to object or ask questions when you believe tax increases are not justified. Also, most people are not the future benefactors of their mommy and daddy's wealth. What they have, is what they earn. Who are you to say they are unreasonable if they have issues with how much of it is taken from them?

Maybe in tax money but does what they do to garner a $1M income actually contribute more to the public good than a plumber of massage therapist? That’s highly debatable.

They can have an issue but the point of the tax is to work against selfishness. If your pro-selfishness than just say that- but your in the minority. I have gripes with lot of things questions about lots of things I don’t reasonably expect policy to fall in line with me?


You’ll never know where your actual identifiable dollar goes to, if you somehow did- you’d probably be a Scrooge. Not the worst thing to be but it’s a thing

[bostongymjunkie]

Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade

Maybe in tax money but does what they do to garner a $1M income actually contribute more to the public good than a plumber of massage therapist? That’s highly debatable.

They can have an issue but the point of the tax is to work against selfishness. If your pro-selfishness than just say that- but your in the minority. I have gripes with lot of things questions about lots of things I don’t reasonably expect policy to fall in line with me?


You’ll never know where your actual identifiable dollar goes to, if you somehow did- you’d probably be a Scrooge. Not the worst thing to be but it’s a thing

Nah, the point of the tax is so selfish people can $hit themselves into thinking they aren't selfish because they support taking other people's money.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by simplexsimon

When I make over $1 million, I'll pay it.

Funny how it always works like that.

[bostongymjunkie]

Originally Posted by mdovell

Right but some of the ways how spending has not been allocated make little sense. Consider some of the basics here. Having a flat income tax is one thing that keeps things a bit in check. CT used to be flat but it's nearly as complicated as the federal tax. If we start talking about an extra 4% on a million who is to say that it won't drop to 750K in another five years? CT income tax was said to be temporary and then became permanent.

1) Why are used products charged sales tax?

2) Why are sales taxes going to the MBTA despite the fact that no one west of Worcester has access?

The argument usually is we need more money for education and transit. Well obviously other RTAs are underfunded when sales taxes are allocated to the MBTA instead of equally among the RTA's. Education? Make more of it online. Get the top level 1 schools to make videos of content and teach level 4 and 5's. I'm not saying classrooms of 60+ kids but if the content is there just share it.

Actually, I like the national sales tax for fed income tax. Your tax is based on consumption. It also tacitly encourages savings. At the state level I'd iike to see something that also takes consumption into account but a basic flat tax is certainly better thn what we have now I think.

[WestieWhitie]

Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade

we reasonably expect people not to be unreasonably selfish. You're always on the receiving end of "someone elses" money whenever you receive or utilize a public good. This is an illogical argument.

So homie, is it logical to demand someone else who utilized $10K worth of public good and already pays $100,000 worth of taxes based on current tax laws pays even more while you utilize the same $10,000 worth but only pay $1,000?