There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

eek2121 ,

Slightly off topic. A lot of public schools already get free meals thanks to federal education dollars. The school lunches are free in my area because of this, even though the (red) state won’t act.

The state has attempted to kill off those dollars in the past.

prole ,

The GOP is dead set on continuing something called “school lunch debt.” Let that phrase sink in for a moment.

npr.org/…/schools-ended-universal-free-lunch-now-…

www.npr.org/transcripts/1167163106

jacobin.com/…/universal-free-school-meals-program…

fne8w2ah ,

Common sense rules in these blue areas.

Hnazant ,

Indiana did free meals, then announced kids had to get approved nicknames like Florida…

wrath-sedan ,
@wrath-sedan@kbin.social avatar

Honestly, as a Hoosier, surprised they even went for the free meals.

fylkenny ,

What are approved nicknames? That’s usually not how nicknames work.

grysbok ,
@grysbok@lemmy.sdf.org avatar

I read an article about it recently. If a student asks to be called by a name other than the one they were registered with (for example, Benjamin asks to be called Ben or William asks to be called Sir Buttface) the school is supposed to inform the parents and get approval. A “side” effect of this is outing trans kids to their parents.

fylkenny ,

Thanks for explaining. Does sound like the only effect this law has.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

The other (minor but possibly cumulative) effect is that it annoys every parent whose child doesn’t go by their birth name. Enough little cuts like that and the GOP loses plenty of voters.

Pratai ,

That’s a weird nickname.

grysbok ,
@grysbok@lemmy.sdf.org avatar

Kids get named Montana, Washington, and Indiana. “Florida” could be an ironic nickname for any of those.

Ghostalmedia ,
@Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world avatar

Just to clarify for other here. Indiana does not do universal free lunch like Massachusetts. You have to apply for it.

FrankLaskey ,

Colorado did something similar last year as well.

npr.org/…/colorado-free-school-lunch-results-meas…

Etterra ,

Good. Now slap a 0 to the end of that 4, and then double it.

AnonTwo ,

I'm pretty sure at an 80% rate the millionaires would just spend the rate moving, out of state or out of country depending on how far reaching it was.

don ,

That’s exactly how that would go.

CubbyTustard ,

deleted_by_author

    •
    yoyogamer ,

    People found all sorts of loopholes to not pay that. Nobody paid that much taxes.

    CubbyTustard ,

    deleted_by_author

    •
    yoyogamer ,

    So lemmy is just as stupidly socialist communist as reddit… got it…

    prole ,

    Nobody paid that much taxes.

    Do you have any evidence for that claim, or are you just stating it with certainty because it feels right to you?

    Nobody paid 90% of their total income because that’s not how tax brackets work.

    yoyogamer ,

    So lemmy is just as stupidly socialist communist as reddit… got it…

    prole ,

    Because I know how taxes work?

    idiomaddict ,

    Then we’d be rid of them at least

    DessertStorms ,
    @DessertStorms@kbin.social avatar

    And nothing of value was lost...

    Like, oh no, what would a state do without their money hoarding exploiters that alredy contribute less than the bare minimum???
    And worse - if everyone decided to make these laws, where will the poor millionaires escape to then???

    Oh, won't someone think of the millionaires!!!11

    atzanteol ,

    And nothing of value was lost…

    Except the taxable income you wanted to tax?

    DessertStorms ,
    @DessertStorms@kbin.social avatar

    I don't want to tax, I want to eat.

    prole ,

    You mean the money that we already aren’t getting?

    prole ,

    Oh look, someone else who doesn’t understand how progressive tax brackets work. Their effective tax rate wouldn’t be 80%, only income above a certain (very high) number would be taxed at 80%.

    don ,

    In other words, “Don’t provide children with free meals.”

    wrath-sedan ,
    @wrath-sedan@kbin.social avatar

    Made me curious what the total tax rate would be in Mass. Apparently it has a flat 5% income tax, plus 4% millionaires tax, plus federal rate for income over about 578k is 37%, so altogether it’s 46% for income over a mil in Mass.

    Definitely think it should be higher for such wildly high income. Also disappointed to see for being a relatively progressive state Mass has a flat rather than progressive income tax.

    zephyreks ,

    As your income increases, your ability to reduce taxable income also increases. The goal of the state is basically to target the lazy.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    Definitely think it should be higher for such wildly high income.

    Higher, nothing. There should be a rate above which it’s taxed at 100%. No one needs to be as rich as Musk or Zuckerberg or Bezos.

    BubblyMango ,

    And no millioneir will keep his money in a state where those are the tax rates. If you make it too high you literally get nothing.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    Awww. Too bad for them. What will we do without millionaires hoarding their wealth?!

    uberkalden ,

    No, he’s saying they will keep it. Just in a way that mass gets literally nothing

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    So either they will get a lot of money or things won’t be any different except millionaires won’t be there hoarding wealth?

    I’m not seeing a downside yet.

    doyoulikemyparka ,

    I think they mean the millionaires will find other ways to hoard it to avoid tax levels they won’t stomach. Fair? No. Reality? Probably.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    People make the same argument about not returning to the tax rates of the 1950s. I say let’s try it and find out.

    pinkdrunkenelephants ,

    It would take massive and severe state action to deprive the rich of that wealth, and that money would still not find its way into the hands of the poor because the state, and corrupt bureaucrats within it, would take it for themselves.

    The poor themselves would have to band together, organize, steal back all the resources from the rich, and distribute it amongst themselves fairly. And that won’t work without a deeply organized plan everyone in the group already agrees to, and even then it might not because the sociopaths and evil people among the poor – which comprises of a lot of them, sorry-not-sorry but it’s true – will just hoard all of those resources, creating a new ruling class.

    Stuff like a ruling class is just the human condition because humanity is inherently evil. The non-evil humans will have to accept that reality is like this, figure out who is trustworthy and who is not, band together the like-minded, isolate themselves and pray a sociopath or evil person never infiltrates their ranks, figure out how to suss them out, and kill them.

    Until humanity itself evolves to be more docile, it’ll never change.

    doyoulikemyparka ,

    I … honestly would be up for this approach. When do you run for office, sir?

    yoyogamer ,

    And yet you guys wonder why millionaires move to Texas. You increase the taxes above a certain number and they’ll take all their wealth, consumption and their taxes to another state.

    Taxes should be sustainable. High taxes on rich people aren’t sustainable because they’ll leave taking whatever taxes they pay and whatever consumption they do which contributes to the economy.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    The wealth that they hoard? The consumption they import? Let me guess, they’re also “job creators.”

    yoyogamer ,

    Who pays your salary?

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    A corporation. Not a rich individual.

    yoyogamer ,

    Who do you think created these corporations? Rich people with aim to make more money.

    Capitalism pays your salary. Without capitalism and with theft of wealth via unfair taxation, your job won’t exist.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    Rich people do not need to exist for corporations to exist. Also, you think wage theft doesn’t happen under capitalism?

    According to the Economic Policy Institute, wage theft costs U.S. workers as much as $50 billion per year — a number far higher than all robberies, burglaries and motor vehicle thefts combined.

    inthesetimes.com/…/wage-theft-union-labor-biden-i…

    All right! Go capitalism!

    Katana314 ,

    Not to discourage continued bleeding of the rich, but I wonder if this is the right way to go about it. Theoretically, we should already have a lot of laws on the books that slam millionaires for their advantageous position. But, their budget also allows for accountants that shift and hide that money, sometimes on a questionable basis of legality.

    Could one prong on this assault be to increase the IRS’ operating budget, so that they’re able to track down and stop more of these tax haven shenanigans?

    phillaholic ,

    Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good enough. This is working, let it work. If they start avoiding it the rules can be changed.

    abraxas ,

    Exactly. When I supported this, there was that wince of “this won’t get the people it really needs to hit”… but it does enough.

    And tbh, I know some wealthy fucking people who legitimately don’t cross the line. $1M/yr is a lot of bloody money. That means if I found a way to “only” make $900,000/yr, I’m immune to this tax.

    Also, anyone hiring for $900,000/yr?

    phillaholic ,

    Right? I hear this all the time about inheritance tax. Im more than willing to pay inheritance tax, meaning I’m getting like $3.5 Million to start.

    AlecStewart1st , (edited )

    Could one prong on this assault be to increase the IRS’ operating budget, so that they’re able to track down and stop more of these tax haven shenanigans?

    Well you could simply start by plugging up a few questionable tax loopholes.

    Whether or not the reason the IRS can’t collect the tax revenue to be able to provide certain services is because of them not having enough money, I don’t know.

    But if you’re issue is with certain laws on taxation, it would makes more sense to deal with those first.

    EDIT: To mention something else that’s important to all of this, there’s something called the Laffer Curve. The simple explanation is that there’s a happy medium between the percentage of income tax and the amount of tax revenue gained. Too much or too little income taxation and you end up with less tax revenue. You can see this in a few times during US history where the income tax wasn’t as high, but the tax revenue was great. So to further determine where we should go with income tax you could look at the past few years of projected and actual tax revenue, as well as spending to service government debt among other government spending.

    I’m not an economist nor an accountant, but this is likely what you’d have to do to figure out the balance between taxation and government spending in order to have money for certain social services. However, no one wants to do that and another big problem is the government doesn’t like being told it needs to manage it’s spending better.

    elucubra ,

    It’s not bleeding anyone. My father was an airline flag carrier captain in Europe. He made what he called “an obscene paycheck”. When taxes came around, he would say: look at what they are taking from me, I must be making a ton!

    Piers ,

    And most likely he was paying more then than someone earning the same amount does today. We’re not even close to scrapping our way back out of society being profoundly imbalanced towards the wealthy.

    vzq , (edited )

    And that’s still only employee money. Very very high paid employee money, but ultimately still labor.

    You wouldn’t believe what you can pull down if you live off other people’s labor.

    cokane_88 ,
    @cokane_88@lemmy.world avatar

    And my kid will still refuse to eat it… We had free lunches here during the pandemic.

    SMITHandWESSON ,
    @SMITHandWESSON@lemmy.world avatar

    How did you do the custom font on your username? It looks awesome!!!

    Double_A ,
    @Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de avatar

    4% of WHAT is taxed?

    ilikekeyboards ,

    Yeah, most millionaires have no profit and they’re in the red. We need even more taxes on small aircrafts that are used for private charter, more taxes on purchasing and operating helicopters, taxes on the kerosene not used in military scope.

    Taxes on luxury cars that only the billionaire’s afford. Every car over 150.000 USD should have a 100% tax to feed the homeless and the kids

    rifugee ,

    Per the article, it’s an income tax on any income over a million dollars, so it’s essentially an additional state income tax bracket. So, if an entity makes exactly 1 million this year then they won’t pay any extra, but if they make 2 million, then they pay 4 percent on that additional 1 mill (40k), over whatever else they would owe before the additional tax.

    Like all income tax, there are ways to avoid it or reduce your burden, but not every person/company goes to those lengths.

    I personally think a wealth tax is fairer for society, but it’s pretty hard to implement and of course has a ton of very wealthy opposition.

    Double_A ,
    @Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de avatar

    I personally think a wealth tax is fairer for society

    The most reasonable way I’ve seen so far is to assume that your wealth passively creates x% of extra income for you, and then tax that amount as income. That also simplifies the tax system, since you only need enter your assets, and not what exacts trades and profits you made.

    Buelldozer ,
    @Buelldozer@lemmy.today avatar

    The most reasonable way I’ve seen so far is to assume that your wealth passively creates x% of extra income for you, and then tax that amount as income.

    I can make it simpler yet and close the Billionaire Income Loophole, where their “income” is taking out loans against value of their investments by simply taxing those loans. No need to value something, they’ve already done it when they took out the loan. If you borrowed 10 Million against a portfolio of 50 Million then you should be taxed on the 10 Million. That’s the value you assigned and the benefit you received.

    This would also catch the “Buy, Borrow, Die” / Step-Up scheme that the ultra-wealthy use.

    FireTower ,
    @FireTower@lemmy.world avatar

    I was curious about the budgeting implications because enacting a increase to revenue doesn’t necessarily mean increased spending would be covered. For any one to lazy to go off site, but also interested:

    “$1 billion of the state’s record $56.2 billion fiscal budget for 2024 came from the state’s new 4% tax on millionaires.”

    “State lawmakers agreed to put $523 million of revenue from the new tax toward education and put $477 million aside for transportation.”

    Didn’t find the cost there but on one of their sources:

    “A portion of that money will go toward the $172 million needed to provide free school meals, the State House News Service reported.”

    DessertStorms ,
    @DessertStorms@kbin.social avatar

    So out of a billion extra dollars, they didn't even spend 20% on the kids (it's too early for me to do the calculation out of the total budget, but it'd be pitiful).
    Which is great, but using them as a headline all things considered seems manipulative and like they're burying the lead.

    Good for the kids, don't get me wrong, but somewhere along the way a lot more of that money has been spent on other things, and most likely is lining the pockets of the already rich and powerful.

    So yeah, it's a great example of what a tiny hike in taxing the rich can do, but it not only doesn't come close to being enough, it also feels like another scam where good publicity hides a whole manner of sins going on behind the scenes.

    wrath-sedan ,
    @wrath-sedan@kbin.social avatar

    I mean all we know so far is that half of the new tax is going to education (and 172mil of that has already gone towards an excellent cause) and half is going to transportation. Of course skimming off the top is incredibly common, but I think it’s far too early to call the amount misspent.

    zephyreks ,

    If they could line the pockets of the MBTA, that would be great thanks.

    FireTower ,
    @FireTower@lemmy.world avatar

    Sorry if my quoting gave off the wrong impression. I believe it meant that of the total 1 billion dollars 523 million will be spent on education. Of the 523 million to be spent on education 172 million will be used to pay for lunches. The remaining 351 million I would assume is being used for other educational expenses like new equipment or for salaries.

    Perhaps there is miss management of the funds but I don’t think that it fair to conclude the 351 million has been misappropriated just based on this information.

    jatone ,

    why spend more on something than you need to? plenty of others besides kids who could use the services the additional money will pay for.

    eran_morad ,

    but muh freedumb

    BrianTheeBiscuiteer ,

    First they came for the millionaires, and I did not speak out - because it’s only 4 fucking percent and they’re still not going to lose any sleep over their bills or if they’ll ever retire.

    stealin ,

    They don’t need more tax they just need to stop squandering it. My town has turned into idiots first sim city playthrough.

    surewhynotlem ,

    You should run for office

    Pussydogger ,

    The food still looks pretty garbage compare to Japan!

    Compactor9679 ,

    Have to love when people say anything is “free”

    piecat ,

    Good point! These kids should starve if their parents don’t work hard enough. Those millions and billionaires worked hard for their money!

    Compactor9679 ,

    You mean to tell me that people who work in the US dont get enough money to buy food? Lol, you have not been outisde of the US have you?

    jatone ,

    I’d ask if you understood how cost of living works; but clearly you don’t.

    Pratai ,

    This is fantastic news!

    md5crypto ,

    Will simply drive more rich people out of the state.

    Saneless ,

    They always say that and they never leave

    A lot of bluster and blubbering about what would happen if so and so law passed. Never works. They’re still making plenty and once they’re done whining they stay put

    coredev ,

    Revenue from the new income tax is earmarked for public school meals.

    As the kids get free food now, some rich people must be left in the state. Maybe the ones with an actual heart?

    Looking at this from a community perspective, rich people that don’t contribute to the community is kind of worthless anyway.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •