• Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’m disabled and make less than $20k a year in SSDI. What’s in it for me? Oh and fuck Trump regardless.

  • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Trump wants me to sell out my country for less than $50k?!? How is that money going to help me when living in the country becomes unbearable and my dollar is worth a fraction of what it does today?

    EDIT: The problem is the suburban $139k bracket, living paycheck to paycheck and in debt up to their eyeballs. That $1000 difference might look real juicy to those guys.

    • Didros@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      How the fuck do you manage to spend 139k a year? People don’t make any god damn sense.

      • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Oh man, it happens without you knowing it. I got caught in that once. Between my wife and I we were making close to $200k and we couldn’t survive two months without a paycheck. Mortgage, car payments, school loans, credit cards payments and taxes for start. Then you want to make yourself feel better because your job and traffic to and from work are sucking the life right out of you, so you start buying shit and decorating so you can have a sanctuary, all the while you are strengthening the chains around your neck.

        A slave with a nice car and house is still a slave. They just are less aware of it…until they want to quit and realize that they can’t.

        • Didros@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          Huh, being raised poor I hardly ever buy anything for myself. I generally fill out my I-9’s with zero dependents so that I get more tax taken out throughout the year and get a little back at tax season. We buy used cars rather than paying interest on car payments. Never had school loans because I knew I wouldn’t make enough in the real world to pay for it. Never had debt on a credit card other than a few periods of unemployment, but paying those off when possible was always a priority.

          Never had much support from my parents, and I’m naturally good with numbers and statistics, so I tend to think in terms of value gained for purchases.

          But I also could pack everything I own onto a pick-up truck and drive off with it, still wear clothes I bought at my frist job at Sears almost 20 years ago.

          Just accepted from an early age I was going to be poor, and really leaned into it.

          • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            So was I. My wife and I grew up poor. Imagine then what happens when you go from celebrating a $200 bank account balance to $200k/yr in two years. We got caught up in the typical life of endless debt that was suburbia during the dot-com boom. After I lost my dot-com job (technically the company stopped existing) and we realized how trapped we were, we got our senses back and we haven’t had new debt since. If I can’t buy it cash, then I can’t afford it.

  • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Wtf? Why am I benefiting most under Harris? Shouldn’t the be the guys on the very bottom?

    I mean, I’ll take it, but…weird?

    (also fuck Trump, he can eat dirty diapers)

    • Karjalan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Classic conservative playbook. Our country gave “everyone a tax break” which equates to $20 a month on average, then added fees to prescriptions, massively defunded public services and has generally made the economy worse, and thus everything cost more…

      Somehow they’re still popular. That’s how powerful the story of “Conservative good for economy” is. Even even they’re actively fucking it up, people still want to vote for them because “they are good for the economy”

    • Rakonat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Don’t forget 2016 when Trump said he was going to cut taxes for all Americans and the plan Congress pushed through raised taxes on average by 4000 a year for middle and working class incomes. But the super rich got back millions and millions.

      • moving to lemme.zip. @lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        You couldn’t have just spent that time explaining it rather than being snarky? This graph either says Donnie is raising my tax or my income will go up more.

        Not everyone is always on top of their game and the smartest person on the Internet…

      • vxx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        If everyone was voting what’s best for them according to this graph, the election would be a blowout win for Harris.

    • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      What do you mean this is purposely not clear? Is interpolation so hard for folks?

      If you make $200k, you’re probably going to land somewhere between the $130k and $330k income levels, meaning your tax savings under Trump’s proposed plan will be between $4k and $9k, likely roughly $6.5k. For Harris’ proposed plan you’ll be between $3k and $2k, likely close to $2.5k.

      Yes, the amounts aren’t linear, so it’s hard to say exactly where you will land, but also these are proposed plans, so they’re estimates to begin with. I wouldn’t be adjusting my personal budgeting off of a wish list from two people who do not control tax laws.

      It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand from the chart that for most Americans (see, median household income $81k), Harris’s tax proposal will net more savings on their annual income, while Trump’s plan favors people in higher income brackets.

      Trump’s plan will increase the national deficit because everyone pays less in taxes. Harris’ plan tries to be closer to revenue neutral by putting more of the tax burden on the top 1%.

      Who you vote for is your decision, but the fact that we have a populous that can’t understand fairly straightforward tables to help inform decision-making is part of the reason why we are so fucked.

  • Makeitstop@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    We need a tax that kicks in when anyone gets a total compensation that is some multiple of the poverty line and some other multiple of the lowest compensation given to anyone working for their company (including subsidiaries, contractors or part time work extrapolated to full time, and not including overtime). The amount should take into account both the lowest pay and the distribution curve of pay, so that the worse the pay inequality is the higher the tax goes.

    Suddenly, the only way the executives can actually get the benefit of those bonuses and stocks is if they’re raising wages across the board as well.

    • 5oap10116@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      It’s funny because Americans have been radicalized against taxes saying its wage theft and taking away all their earnings…, but historically, when taxes increase, firms have an incentive to pay their workers more so wages generally increase with tax increases. You’re pecking at the reason why tit works that way. It’s arguably counter intuitive but that’s why the propaganda against higher taxes works so well.

      • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Taxes on wages are theft because you created your labor. Taxes on property and pollution aren’t theft because nobody created the earth. The rich have successfully conflated them all as just taxes, and most of us have no idea how tax incidence works.

        You’re pecking at the reason why tit works that way.

  • njm1314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    I assume this isn’t including some of the other things in Trump’s proposals like getting rid of tax credits for having a child.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Also, what he already did. The home office tax credit was dropped for W2 employees as part of his plan. Wasn’t really noticed at the time, but circumstances later on meant that a lot of people could have been taking that credit if someone else was President. Amounts to a few hundred a year–not huge, but not nothing.

      IIRC, it automatically goes back to the way it was in a few more years assuming nothing else changes.

  • Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Changing taxes levied on income doesn’t change the income itself. Do they mean remaining income after tax?

    Are you guys taxed at the source or where does this confusion come from?

  • COASTER1921@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    I thought the top 0.1% was more like $3 million. Either way it’s still an incredibly large amount of money for 1 in 1000 people to be making. With 131 million households that’s 131000 households making more than $14 million per year which is WILD. One in a thousand isn’t that uncommon, yet I’d never guess who were making that kind of money. They must just be living in completely separate spaces.

    • boonhet@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I think nearly 10% of the US population is millionaires (by wealth, not income) and the percentage is even more if you take home equity into account.

      Say what you will about the country, but there isn’t a prosperity problem, only a rampant inequality problem.

      • COASTER1921@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Millionare in assets is vastly different than $1 million per year in income. It’s pretty much a requirement to have $1 million in assets to be able to retire lately and assuming years of compounding growth in the market this is pretty easily attainable by retirement for most (I know this is a big assumption but our whole economy is built on it).

        • grysbok@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          “Millionaire in assets” is even less impressive when you factor in someone’s home value. Like, Zillow keeps telling me my condo is worth $350k. I guess I am worth that on paper, but it’s not liquid or “walking around” money.

  • x00z@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    The ones that make 14 million or more would have AT LEAST $544,135 to waste on Trump propaganda (comes from 376,910 + 167,225)

  • Aermis@lemmy.world
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    I might break 140k this year living near Seattle for a single income household with 3 children under 6. Is this graph saying that Trump’s tax plan will benifit me, a middle class, some would argue lower middle class in this location, better than Harris?

    • Corndog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I haven’t looked into the specifics of these policies, so I could be wrong, but I’d say no.

      This graph doesn’t really take into account everything it should IMO. The massive tax cuts to the wealthy are going to dramatically screw over people with lower incomes, because there’ll be less money overall. I believe Trump’s case would involve making up that deficit with really high tariffs on things, especially Chinese goods. This means that, although your taxes would be slightly lower on paper, you’re spending a lot more money for literally everything that’s made in China (or contains parts or materials from China). Typically tax cuts for the wealthy also involve money leaving crucial areas for lower income areas, like schools and infrastructure. The Harris plan (I believe) is revenue neutral, meaning for you it’s literally free money with no downsides. In her case the extra money comes from slightly increasing the tax rates of the wealthy (as you can see here).

      It’s also worth noting that your income is taxes in the brackets it falls in. The first $39,000 is taxed at that (lower) rate, then the next bit is taxed in the next bracket, etc. Breaking the $140,000 mark doesnt mean all your income is now taxed at a higher rate. I THINK this is taken into account in this graph, but I haven’t looked into it to be sure. I wanted to mention it though because it’s a constant point of confusion for people.

      Hope this helps.

    • justme@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yes the graph says that your income would be around 0.7% higher. What the dramatic increase of the others will do to the value of your income (inflation) and hence the stuff you can actually effort with this, is up to discussion of somebody who knows this stuff better than me.

      • Aermis@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        I’m not voting for Trump for a thousand dollars on my tax return. Seeing by the down votes people really think any kind of scrutiny shouldn’t be discussed, and no one wants to talk about a family man and his income. This fight between getting income relief for the bottom class and letting millionaires run free leaves the middle class more or less get pulled.

        My income is fine with me, I make enough to survive even with the high prices of groceries. I’m looking for a better life for my family. Something I have many options for, where millions are struggling to put food on the table. So I know where my heart is.

        • prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          The issue here is that for those of us who are actually in the middle class a thousand bucks shouldn’t make us betray folks who need the help more than us.

          IMO

        • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          It only goes so if Trump doesn’t place the tariffs he says he wants to place, because then prices on all goods increase across the board…

          He wants 100% tarrifs which is just a tax on us in the end on everything from China and Mexico. And 20% on everywhere else.

          So every item you buy, mark the price up by such, and then ask yourself if you spend $1000 that year.

          Note: never has he mentioned food being exempt.

          Throw in the deportations and you look at the building unions who say they are 400,000 workers short, and you realize labor shortages will increase building costs which in turn drive up insurance costs for houses…

          So your income will go up by a $1000, and your expenses will go up dramatically

          • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            He wants 100% tarrifs which is just a tax on us in the end on everything from China and Mexico. And 20% on everywhere else.

            I legitimately think he doesn’t understand that.

            • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 months ago

              To be fair if someone worded it to him like I worded it there, it isn’t very clear. I really need to take more time to phrase sentences more clearly. (Off topic but just needed to criticize myself there)