9/27/17

Trump’s Tax Plan (Public Enslavement Act) Needs Four Brackets, Not Three

President Trump is a great guy, immeasurably better than Hillary Clinton in all things, and Bernie Sanders might be anti-Semitic since he is against funding Israeli defense needs. Even so, the new tax plan is little more than a public enslavement act.

Interpreting the new Trump tax plan from the bottom up. Here’s how it works…

The bottom 1/3rd bracket are dirt and not economically significant. Fifty million of them alone have less than ½ of 1% of the national income together.

The second bracket-ostensibly the middle class are regarded by the most rich as the new poor class. They will protect the class above them a little because they are insecure.

The top third class is really, for the most rich 10% of the top 1% that own a third of all U.S. wealth, the new middle class. It has numerous petty millionaires who work in the Senate and will protect their class interests. That is a good class for the most rich to hide in protected by their Senate servant class-peers making tax law.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/09/27/trump-tax-plan-called-a-huge-cut-for-the-top-1-percent/

One of the oldest political arguments, in fact a foundational one for democracy, is that between the demos and oligarchy. Socrates supported oligarchy and corrupted youth to believe that oligarchy is a good thing, and the democracy ordered him executed.

President Trump’s tax plan with just three tax brackets provides a large insulating class for the top 1% to hide in. It’s an amusing ad hoc union to benefit plutocrats. The super-rich are not like those marginally qualified for the upper third of the nation’s income earners. They are a danger to the freedom and democratic form of government. Yet if properly harnessed they can be of service to the people and environment rather than dooming it to their whims and caprice.

The over-concentration of wealth present de facto oligarchy. Defending democracy requires taxation on the rich sufficient to prevent their purchase of the democracy and control of all economic networks through ownership. The top 5% of income earners should be charged a 65% tax rate. The founders revolted against foreign aristocracy that was domestic aristocracy too; Presidents since Ronald Reagan have given them love as if they were sweet toes to lavishly suck.

If those super-rich people wanted to accumulate even more wealth they would need to just produce more and be of more benefit to the nation rather than extend domination over every aspect of the economy stagnating innovation and controlling the media that conditions the electorate about public issues and who to victimize. A feedback-control loop need be formed with taxation that prevents the rich from becoming royals yet allows them to work to increase wealth with the entire average worth of the people proportionately increasing.

Black Lives Matter protest about all sorts of issues rather superfluously because the issues are over generalized. The takeover of the economy by the super-rich that will reduce Americans to little more than lasting wage servitude and that is something they could meaningfully protest about, and should., or would if they were not trained to just react with race content as their red flag. If the super-rich would just wear red for a few days B.LM. might more readily recognize what issues to charge. Maybe Americans have been conditioned to become dopey slaves of plutocrats and nothing can be done about it. Time will tell if the people are really lost without a clue about the founding father’s political philosophy.


The corporate tax rate being lowered to 20% might increase revenue or not. The proposal seems somewhat like President Reagan’s supply-side economics that got the ball rolling on the deficit build up. I read somewhere that multi-national corporations pay no net taxes because of deductions and clever accounting as it is, and that U.S. corporations pay less than 5% as it is, so getting anything from them could be an improvement. President Trump’s tax plan just requires some simple modifications and could be given a chance.


Atheists May Hate Godel's Incompleteness Theorems

I believe the simple explanation for Godel's incompleteness theorems is that there cannot be a set of all sets including itself, with th...