this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2025
1704 points (98.1% liked)
Comic Strips
19635 readers
1528 users here now
Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.
The rules are simple:
- The post can be a single image, an image gallery, or a link to a specific comic hosted on another site (the author's website, for instance).
- The comic must be a complete story.
- If it is an external link, it must be to a specific story, not to the root of the site.
- You may post comics from others or your own.
- If you are posting a comic of your own, a maximum of one per week is allowed (I know, your comics are great, but this rule helps avoid spam).
- The comic can be in any language, but if it's not in English, OP must include an English translation in the post's 'body' field (note: you don't need to select a specific language when posting a comic).
- Politeness.
- AI-generated comics aren't allowed.
- Adult content is not allowed. This community aims to be fun for people of all ages.
Web of links
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world: "I use Arch btw"
- !memes@lemmy.world: memes (you don't say!)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is som weird metaphor... So some people get voluntary "cancer" in hope theycan fight it and it will benefit them in the long run, and some don't. While someone will have just the benefits and not the cancer while everyone chips in.
I get that in the long run highly educated people tend to pay more taxes. So makeing education affordable in is a net benefit for everyone. But this analogy is just weird...
I don't know man, at the end of the day it is unfair, and making fun of that seems inappropriate.
Sounds wrong, in general the more you make the less you pay in the Usa, in other countries it probably sounds a bit more plausible.
The US has a progressive income tax, so it is true that people with higher education pay more income tax as a whole. The main difference with other countries is that it has a fairly low percentage cap and an absurdly low capital gains tax. The wealthy paying a low tax rate because of most of their earnings being asset based instead of income based doesn't change the fact that the people who get paid higher incomes from their jobs that required higher education pay more income tax.
Exactly, it's like when you look at US median wealth distribution, if you don't strip off the 0.1% at the top that have over a billion dollars in assets, then it makes everything massively lopsided and skews incredibly higher than reality.
Being told that at the age of 35, your average peers have a net worth of $175,000 is not anywhere near true for most people that's actually 35 and surrounded by peers.
You just have a couple of money bag multi-billionaires massively counterbalancing the far higher number of people with negative net worth.
Sure that's how it's supposed to work but I imagine we'll find the higher the income the less you pay as a percentage given the plethora of tax evasion schemes available.
It's highly dependent. Your doctor that makes $250,000 a year probably pays his fair share of $250,000 following the tax codes.
He doesn't really have the time or interest in finding loopholes in order to save the few thousands of dollars it might save him.
Most likely, he hires a qualified CPA and allows the CPA to manage his tax returns.
The people that are doing the tax dodging are the businesses that make millions a year, and they're using their business assets in order to decrease the amount of taxes they and their business pays.
They hire accountants and they do everything they can to not pay taxes, wherever the law allows for you to legally not pay them.
My opinion is that the actual solution is not to villainize the businesses for taking advantage of the tax loopholes but rather it is to villainize our politicians who created the tax loopholes as kickbacks for their friends that give them perks in real life.
There have been proposals to fix this, things like the VAT in England, and they are always loudly shouted down by the news corporations who are in the pocket and owned by the businesses that would be most negatively affected by them.
the pols own the businesses and/or get donations/kickbacks from them
If you think tax evasion is more common in business id say I'm fairly certain you are wrong and it's statistics will support that.
We simply don't know because the it's does not focus in higher earners because they can fight it, us poors can't.
I mean, I'm pretty sure that petty tax dodging happens even amongst the poorest of people, but if you look at what you would get out of going after the perpetrators, doing things like closing tax loopholes and instituting a VAT, things like that, would do more to solve the problem than auditing every single family that makes under $70,000 a year and finding out where they have made mistakes, accidental or otherwise, in their tax filings.
Instituting a corporate flat tax on any company that has revenues of over $500 million a year would put hundreds of billions of dollars into the federal economy.
With that money, corporations would actually save quite a bit of money because they wouldn't have to hire so many freaking accountants, and that much income could take care of the $1.6 trillion student loan debt crisis in half a decade.
After that was taken care of, it could all be thrown into Social Security and take care of that looming crisis. It would alleviate so many financial concerns from the country that it's actually concerning that we are not even beginning to consider doing such a thing.
Yep. Great comment.
Tax enforcement has costs. Some taxes cost more than others to institution, and tax enforcement makes zero sense for poor people where the cost of enforcement exceeds the revenue.
Which is precisely why the IRS has been so gutted, because a broke IRS has no money to audit rich people who are doing massive, illegal, and blatant tax evasion systematically.
And the media focuses on what people buy with food stamps as if they should only be able to buy beans with them.
Agreed.
Agreed.
Agreed.
Also agreed.
Nah, our tax structure is all kinds of fucked up and the middle class pays the most in tax. You don't start getting to skip out on taxes until you make 50x what the average college graduate earns.
100k + is not middle class.
Do you have anything to back that up?
Here's my link: The salary you need to be considered middle class in every U.S. state—it’s close to $200,000 in 2 of them. In every single state 100k is middle class.
I don't need my own you just proved my point, 100k is not middle class.
i believe your source even makes note that the American "middle class" is considered working class just about everywhere else.
And in which state is 100k more than double the median income? Did you actually look at the article, or did you hit the second paragraph and assume?
That's not how most of the world defines middle class because it's a useless stat that does not reflect societal issues via economics.
I looked at the article.
Did you?
Okay, I thought we were talking about the US tax structure.
The us tax structure doesn't involve classes. There is no irs definition of middle class because that simply isn't what they do.