Alpha men and red-pillers, beware the side affects of Trump's new tax plan.
The Trump tax plan which was enacted into law on December 22, 2017 has been touted for all its benefits in reducing corporate tax rates and streamlining taxes for individuals. One big loser of the Trump tax plan – unhappily married or soon to be married men. Perhaps because Trump is on his third wife and has an iron clad prenup which he has fine tuned over the years and perhaps because the conservative GOP party members who put “family first” have simply ignored or forgotten about most men who are toiling away in unhappy marriages and relationships; the new Trump tax plan eliminates alimony payments from the list of allowable itemized deductions for U.S. marriages on or after December 31, 2018.
This is terrible for men. According to a recent census taken in the U.S. of divorced couples, men are paying a whopping 97% of total alimony, despite the fact that 40% of households include higher wage earning women. (https://www.forbes.com/sites/emmajohnson/2014/11/20/why-do-so-few-men-get-alimony/#7a72db3954b9)
The family court system in the U.S. as well as most other developed nations is a boondoggle for women. They divorce system is already setup in such a way that women get most of the benefits and men lose their life savings, their house and their future income to greedy ex-wives who game the divorce system and extract as many benefits as they can. Perhaps for this reason, the tax code in the U.S. changed after 1950 to allow divorced individuals (mostly men) who were shouldering the burdens of alimony payments to deduct these payments from their taxes. Although it did not completely eliminate the unfairness of the 50-50 divorce system where women were marrying wealthier or well-to-do men and later divorcing them for money and guaranteed monthly payments, it did at least provide some tax relief while turning the free money spousal support into “taxable income” for other spouse. No more.
Under the new tax scheme, if you get divorced after December 31, 2018, your out-sized alimony payments to your greedy ex-wife will no longer be tax deductible. That means if you earn $100K and are paying your ex-wife $40K in spousal support, you get 0 tax benefit for the support payments while your ex-wife does not have to pay any money on the free $40K in spousal income that she is receiving. Basically, this incentivizes your greedy ex-wife to continue to apply for more spousal support payments from you and stash them away “tax free” while you shoulder than entire tax burden for the income and support payments and get no benefit in return.
This elimination of the alimony deduction is ridiculous. Out of touch law makers believe this is good for the family because it will discourage divorce. History tells us otherwise. (Over 50% of marriages in modern Western civilizations now fail). Tax regulations have not changed or eliminated the decline in marriage rates and the increase in divorce rates. This is because tax and economic policies have not kept pace with gender issues, the rise of feminism in culture, economics and politics, and the general weakening of men in education and the workforce.
As men, we should not accept this bad fiscal policy and punishment designed to give women even more freebies and financial incentives to divorce us and take away our hard-earned incomes and live savings. In my opinion, if you are a man thinking of getting married and raising a family, either: (a) don’t get married and look for another arrangement; or (b) get an iron-clad prenup after consultation with no fewer than 3 good lawyers. If you are already in a bad marriage and thinking about getting divorced, you need to legally divorce before December 31, 2018, or get hit with the divorce penalty tax.
*this article originally appeared at www.menslaws.com: http://menslaws.com/index.php/trump-tax-bill-eliminates-alimony-deduction-another-big-reason-avoid-marriage-get-divorced-december-31-2018/
[deleted]
0kool74 6y ago
"Into the valley of death go the 600"
Had my memory of that refreshed from a Blindside clip the other night. But these men aren't courageous....they aren't valiant....they do nothing to ascribe the label of honor. No...they are brainwashed, conditioned, and succumb to the current social construct even with OVERWHELMING evidence out there today that marriage is NOWHERE NEAR in their best interest.
I really don't feel sorry for these people. Probably better than 95% of women in the West are not marriage material....hell, probably not even LTR material either. And to be stupid enough to put a ring on one of them? Well, you deserve whatever hell awaits you. I'm sure Pinhead will find your pain exquisite!
quigleh 6y ago
Alimony is actually very rare these days, and child support has never been deductible. This is not a big deal.
JFMX1996 6y ago
This bums me out. I didn't plan on getting married, but I actually hoped some day Trump would fix marriage laws...
If he wanted to discourage divorce, maybe he should've ended alimony and enabled a way to observe how child support payments are spent.
Theguygotgame777 6y ago
Oh it'll sure as hell encourage men not to get divorced! But it won't encourage women not to.
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
gELSK 6y ago
// , He has a prenup. So this alimony shit is waaaay outside of his frame. And he's staying within his frame.
And no, he's not RP. Who on this sub is saying this?
[deleted]
[deleted] 6y ago
I think marriage will eventually just be abandoned as a social convention.
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
[deleted] 6y ago
Less religion and less marriages increase the dependence on the state. Yes, Christianity and marriage are bonkers but if you had sat me down and told me the alternative was a breakdown in the social fabric and an increase in government control I'd have seriously considered becoming a missionary.
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. We're trying to convince little Susie why wearing thongs and looking for Dicks to suck at age 12 is wrong when a healthy fear of her soul may be just enough to keep her from taking a dive into the cock carousel.
Religion and marriage didn't go away, people now simply worship the state and marry the state. Nothing has changed, and since atheists tend to be leftists, they're your enemies when it comes to freeing us from state control.
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
[deleted] 6y ago
We're witnessing gene warfare. The collectivists versus the individualists.
Rabbits versus wolves.
Rabbits only care about eating and screwing, one rabbit is as good as any other. No need for family units, just enough kids to keep up with the loss from predators.
Wolves care about strong family units, miser resources, merit, and have a strong in-group preference.
The "issue" with humans is that they can be both, because humans can adapt their behavior based off of environmental cues on-the-fly.
Rabbits are easier to control, and don't care about each other. As long as they to eat and fuck, they're happy. The state is counting on this.
But you have to attack the children when they're young before the programming is completely set. That means breaking down the family and religion. Single moms, remove the fathers, etc.
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
[deleted]
destraht 6y ago
The more that I see of this progressive liberalism the more that I am thinking that organized religion is good for the masses. It seems to me that there are at any time so few actually creative individuals and that the vast majority are just slurping down the cues from the official source. I think that people will be fake liars and hypocrites regardless so they might as well be putting on a show based around something that promotes life and the future rather than a nihilistic dead end like liberalism. I get that common people got tired of the churches bullshit but then they just changed the source of their programming to the master Marxist social engineers and in a way its extra bad because instead of feeling like they are rightfully submitting they now believe that they are coming up with the shit all on their own (they're not).
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
destraht 6y ago
I think that ideally all of the go-along-to-get-along masses "believe" in a religion that promotes non-violence and allows for other people to do what they want to do. I'll still take a bunch of atheists over Muslims any day because atheism is
baselesshallow and it can dissolve into another more useful religion eventually but Islam seems to fester until it is beaten back with the sword.[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
destraht 6y ago
It just seems like it leaves a disillusioned pile of rubbish in its wake and then snuffs itself out. My point is that atheism doens't have a future. Its more like a disease such as rabies. It will run its course and then the survivors go into something that will likely endure a hell of a lot longer than atheism.
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
destraht 6y ago
Didn't the USSR collapse because suddenly nobody gave a fuck about it anymore? You could say that the US opposed them but on the backside they were always propping them with food and anything else to keep the big military expenditures and adventures going. The fuckers had Ukraine, which is one of the most productive farmlands in the world and they needed external food to survive. Then poof one day people decided that they didn't give a fuck and it was over.
justshootinblanks 6y ago
This new treatment in the USA is exactly how 'child support' in Australia operates. The men pay CS with post tax money and the buttercups receive it tax free.
It is enough to turn a man off working hard, dropping back earnings to just be enough to spend time with his kids.
GreenPiller 6y ago
Holy shit thank you for this post, I really feel sorry for married men.
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
[deleted]
Dragon_Garoo 6y ago
I agree with this whole-heartedly. It's time for a change. The men that espouse these RP ideals - even if you fall short of them - need to help usher other men along. I give the guidance to my boys, hopefully they get it. My daughter is already talking marriage to her boyfriend, and I've explained all the issues with the wall and value etc to her. She's a bit shocked but she inherently knew it already, to some degree. I reach out to guys when I see that it's possible. It's not always. Often they recoil; those ones are not saveable. But find a guy that's just been dumped? Score.
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
Dragon_Garoo 6y ago
Thanks mate. I know I'm hated by some BP betas because I speak the truth. Truth is, I'm still going through my journey of 'RP Woke'. It's a path I wish I had taken earlier, and one I think we need more men on. I'd love to see the lodge come back as a space for men.
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
Dragon_Garoo 6y ago
Thanks mate. I think that groups like the Proud Boys are starting to fill in that gap, from the bygone era. I think there's strength in also just having a 'space' that's gonad-centric... where guys can just be guys and not stress.
[deleted]
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
wanderer779 6y ago
If you incentivize divorce then living in sin paradoxically becomes the pro-family move
juliusstreicher 6y ago
Which will be interpreted in the courts as a common law marriage! Wheel in the sky keeps on turning!
general-heartless 6y ago
We live in a paradoxical world.
JohnGalt316 6y ago
why are people mad at this?
blue pills pay extra taxes for the good of our society
that is what we need
darkrood 6y ago
Memba those Married RPer?!!
Now the potential pistol got hollow point bullet option so if she ever use the gun, it will hurt even more.
Dojolow 6y ago
That's an interesting way of looking at it.
Also, the men who are Red Pill enough (early enough and for long enough. . .i.e. before December 31 2018), will basically just have the ladder kicked from future generations of potential blue pillers turned red. Meaning. . .that they won't be able to compete with us for women/resources.
Basically, if anyone after December 31, 2018 gets married (ie. most leftist redditor men) They're absolutely FUCKED. . .and they deserve it. They've been willingly brainwashed for FAAR too long, given all the information we have at our literal fingertips. tyranny should never have had the opportunity to rear its head again.
Too bad.
But, from this perspective, knowing that I won't get fucked. I wasn't planning on getting married anyway as long as the family courts, no-fault divorce, and losing half your shit plus alimony was a thing anyway, I guess I might as well stay out of the U.S. for good this time.
destraht 6y ago
I think that getting married only makes sense if it is with a woman in another country and you don't bring her back and don't register the marriage with the US authorities. Ideally I'd like to have my passport from one country, income from another, savings stored in another and then wife and children in another. As far as marrying in the states - you just can't do it. I'm looking to make a family abroad and I've already lived in other places for the majority of the last ten years so its just about pulling the trigger. I'll marryto a woman, gain the residency so that I don't need to do border runs and then I'll spend the majority of my time there and sending money when I'm away. If shit goes bad then I can bail out and choose exactly the manner in which I'll support my children. This puts a woman in the natural position of needing to keep her man interested and around and grateful for his presence. By doing this I'll be able to retain power and so I'll have a decent chance of raising up the kids without crazy upheaval. At least I'll be in a respectable position and without that there isn't any hope and its just an expensive time bomb.
Adam1394 6y ago
Paying tax for alimony is a thing in Central/Eastern Europe for 25 year.
But this doesn't compute with our "Eastern European Heaven" forced here, right?
abstractplebbit 6y ago
In what way is this any worse than getting taxed on money you earn if you are just single?
NullIsUndefined 6y ago
Alimony is so stupid. We already have welfare to prevent poverty below a minimum level. Why cant exwives who leave their husbands live off of that? Then at least they are just living off the tax pool and redistributing wealth. Rather than saying they are entitled to their ex husbands salary.
[deleted] 6y ago
Exwives should not get any assistance for leaving their husbands. Period.
[deleted] 6y ago
So basically a prisoner on death row now no longer gets a last meal?
[deleted] 6y ago
[--removed--]
M_Justice 6y ago
The premise you mention, a government the looks after the interest of divorced single men is apparently synonymous in your logic of a government that looks after the interests of a cheating and whoring wife who seeks tax free alimony. But I guess that doesn't apply to you, since you are posting as a gay lube oil dude.
[deleted] 6y ago
[--removed--]
destraht 6y ago
I can tell from your ridiculously negative tone that you aren't the only one having a pretty meh holiday. Or maybe you've too much frustrating acid in your muscles from working out.
gELSK 6y ago
// , Tell us more about his feelings. They're obviously important to you. /s
Dojolow 6y ago
u/destraht You should lay off the Soy. You're getting triggered WAY too easily.
[deleted] 6y ago
[--removed--]
AnjaJutta 6y ago
Is the government a Beta Bucks Death Robot which systematically removes wealth from every middle class penis wielder to feed single mothers?
destraht 6y ago
Yes it pretty much is. We mostly just had an issue with GayLubeOil jumping on OP, acting superior and talking down to him for no reason. It really didn't read like OP had some great illusions about government and GayLubeOil did his thing inappropriately. I think that should be reserved for dumbass bluepill comments and not factual and helpful posts full of good information.
[deleted]
babaner1 6y ago
Jesus Christ, the guy wasn’t saying that the government are our friends, he literally pointed out a law that will fuck a lot of people over especially men. Infact he’s doing the opposite. And yes guys let’s insult someone that was genuinely posting something valuable and mention people’s IQ because you’re to stupid to develop any thought that could be considered serious, because your so cool. The government will always be there , if we are to live in a civilised society there must be a functioning society, now here’s the choice people , behave like this dipshit and ignore the crocodile thinking it will eat you last or actually do something about it. And yes I agree that the cheating whoring wife is a great ally to the government, the problem with you is that you are only pointing out the clear problems that the majority of this sub already knows of, now please give us the solutions.
Hillarysdilddo_2016 6y ago
I am looking around and not seeing any civilized society. Let me know when you find it. We are living in backwards, regressive, anti-intellectual, anti-science and oppressive times.
Hardly, civilized.
[deleted]
gELSK 6y ago
Men usually have no say in divorce
This is something women could avoid, if they chose. But they don't. Women initiate more than 70% of divorces.
Marriage is oftener worse than divorce, even.
maplemaximus 6y ago
"Avoid" "Corrects itself"
We've lost our backbones. You don't avoid it, you face it head the fuck on, you don't hope it correct's itself you make it correct itself.
StrongAffordance 6y ago
I think you mean collectively avoiding marriage.
[deleted]
StrongAffordance 6y ago
Ah I see what you mean. Right.
[deleted] 6y ago
[--removed--]
babaner1 6y ago
as I said before, I know the government is fucking us over, I told you this already, you don’t have to tell me the problem I already know of. What I want to know are the solutions to this problem, I mean here’s a conflict, is your plan to defeat the enemy by saying how bad they are or actually come up with solutions that can destroy this enemy.
And I think you get me wrong, feminism, and this whole fucking system is decadent. What I mean with civilisation is not someone accepting to get fucked over by his wife, it’s the things such as police,organised military,healthcare. All of them are run by the government , so yes the government is only an evil if we let it be. Civilisation is the sole reason why you can start as a low life pleb and make your way up to the top, 500 years earlier and you would have have been born as a lowlife Pleb, lived as one and died as one. To put a cap on this, I know perfectly well how corrupt and decadent this system is, but I don’t wanna embrace this system, I wanna replace it.
[deleted] 6y ago
The solution to excessive government control is less government control.
Don't look to the government to treat the symptoms of the poison when they're feeding you the aresinc.
[deleted] 6y ago
[--removed--]
[deleted]
babaner1 6y ago
Okay so tell me the solution, according to you government doesn’t work, so I’m gonna assume your an anarchist, now your getting it wrong. You need to understand the seriousness of the situation. See what you are doing won’t work , infact it will only make it worse, you tend to not play the game I tend to play the game with my rules, we are different. And I don’t care call me blue pill because I disagree with you. But what the government is doing now is just a step ahead, eventually it will come to the point where this sub gets banned, and then move on to the point where red pill becomes a memory, you want to accept that fine to ahead. However if you wanna continue this pm me as I don’t wanna derail this.
[deleted] 6y ago
[--removed--]
babaner1 6y ago
First of , I didn’t mention the word anti establishment, I specifically mentioned that removing the government which means having volountary institutions is anarchistic by nature, just one google away to learn that but I guess google is blue pill so fuck that.
See this is where your wrong again, I said I wanna change the structure and society that we are currently in, you however went on and on how bad and evil the government and society is, without mentioning any words of change to this decadence. And please tell me one society that functioned without a police force,standing army and healthcare. This is the problem that I’ve noticed with you, your making statements and claims with no backup or logic,it fails anyone to actually take you seriously.
You wanna change the structure or you claim to see a different one then mine , then share them, let us hear what you see that I don’t, instead of just calling me blue pill. And I didn’t predict anything, I’m simply saying that should the ways go as they are now those possibilities could be reality. As I said before I have no problem with arguementing you, but since I don’t wanna derail ops thread I suggest that you pm me.
[deleted] 6y ago
[--removed--]
babaner1 6y ago
Is this your best answer ? First you claim that plenty of modern societies function just fine without those things mentioned above , without any facts or proof and then direct it to some traditional tribes of Central Asia, which according to you are living fine, even though that sentence is so vague that it makes no sense. You then mention ethnic tribal law, which is a contradiction to your earlier statement, laws tend to be broken which requires some services of punishment that’s what constitutes a law, enforced by a police force otherwise it’s just a vague idea at best. We’re not genetically built to follow laws, which means some will break them.
I haven’t taken any pick on history, civilisation has existed for more then 4000 years,not 50, this era is just another chapter of the whole book. And if you wanna go beyond that and live like a Neanderthal, be my guest no ones gonna stop you. And don’t get me wrong , I know the society is decadent, I don’t disagree. But I believe that there should be a way to change that , you don’t. But you ignored my question, please share us how a red pilled society would look like or even better you’re society.
crimsonkodiak 6y ago
While I agree with the general sentiment - the change is bad policy and frankly just plain mean - the effect is being overstated.
What will likely happen is that alimony amounts will be reduced by states/courts going forward. States set alimony guidance in the 20-40% range with the knowledge that those amounts are tax deductible. There's no particular reason to think the guidelines won't be reduced to reflect the fact it's not deductible going forward. It's not hard - just reduce the amounts by 1/3 or calculate them based on net income, not gross.
Failing to do so would be a windfall for the receiving spouse and there's no policy reason not to.
Of course, the entire pie to be split is now somewhat smaller, which is the whole point of the change, but unless you're talking about really high earners and lots of money in maintenance, the difference isn't that huge.
RedPilledGodEmperor 6y ago
Things that will never happen for $100.
Dojolow 6y ago
I highly doubt the family courts will change anything, if anything, they'd probably increase the payments more.
general-heartless 6y ago
Well... if trump is trying to keep families together, this is a good thing. This law will only affect weak men who aren't good with money and who give their money to women with joint bank accounts. This will be average news for everyone else..
FaderOne 6y ago
Thanks for sharing this! Well thought out, educational and timely post.
Hope the right RPers benefit from this.
Thoughts on the tax plan outside of this?
Tie5o11 6y ago
I think people tend to look at policy, or anything politically related, as "all good" or "all bad".
I think the tax bill is overall a strong net positive. Lowering the corporate tax rate from 39% to 21%, primarily benefits small and mid size businesses (that make up 95% of corporations). Before this bill, many of the top 5% of corporations, were incentivized to avoid the astronomical 39% rate, and would seek out loopholes or hold money off shores.
Lowering the personal tax rates and reducing the number of brackets, and especially those that make up the middle class income brackets is great for a country that has seen the middle class get strung out for too long.
The child tax credit is good for traditionalists who advocate strong families and raising children. And, it is a progressive (in tax code terms, not political terms) tax cut, as equal amount of money returned to families make up a might higher % of poor/middle class disposable spending money than it would to rich families with children.
As a small government Conservative, I LOVE the provision to cap mortgage state tax deductions at $750,000. This is going to put increasing pressure on high tax states- such as California, New York, Illinois, etc- which are already facing major budget issues, to lower their tax rate or face bankruptcy. Now, the federal government will no longer subsidize high tax states by allowing people to write off their high state property taxes. This will increase the pressure on upper middle class people to move out of states like NY and California, a trend that has been happening, albeit slowly, for some time. It also makes it, so that the few people who end up paying more under this plan, are the rich (in mostly blue states- who tend to be your coastal left wing elitists).
However, this provision to eliminate spousal support deductions can be a negative to men and further handcuff them to a bad marital situation, as the OP describes.
Additionally, not eliminating the carried interest loophole is allowing a corrupt tax loophole to continue on. Basically, it forces the taxpayer (read, you and me) to subsidize investment firms, as they somehow ruled that the service they provide their clients is not a service, but an investment, despite the fact that these investment firms do not invest their own cash.
Overall- its a net positive to me. It's surprisingly progressive (in the sense it helps the middle class disproportionately), and puts a lot more cash back into small and mid sized businesses to be re-invested into the economy. But, like anything, its not black and white and is not a perfect bill, and this is a far from perfect iteration of our tax code.
M_Justice 6y ago
I think the reduction of corporate tax rates and otherwise business friendly incentives are a positive development. So is the safety from death tax penalties and more estate friendly rules.
metallicdrama 6y ago
They also DOUBLED the standard deduction so most people who do itemize don’t have to bother or make out even better. Only suckers pay alimony anymore. I don’t know a single guy who’ve ever paid alimony and they all made 6 figures. And this is in NY.
I def agree that men generally are becoming 2nd class citizens. But honestly, we should worry more about why we even pay an unconstitutional personal income tax and address that. We also need to focus more on chaining women to the stove again. Not some point on tax deductions.
MAGA_God-Emperor 6y ago
Don't claim removal of the itemized deductions is simply out of touch politicians. The problem has and will continue to be the feminine court system.
TRP helps keep men out of the feminine divorce courts. Focus on fixing the system that creates the unfair alimony. Don't complain that the unfair payments are now not tax deductible.
M_Justice 6y ago
Agreed. But this is the consequence of doing nothing and allowing the feminist court system to dominate. Helping red pillers also means guiding us through bad fiscal feminist policy loopholes that find their way into everything, including so called alpha tax policies. See how evil they are now? Managed to even let this seep into trump's tax plan.
Dragon_Garoo 6y ago
This has been the case in Canada for many years. It's criminal. My ex gets to live rent free, and still bitches about 'paying for everything for the kids'. Gets them to try and hit me up for cash I don't have. Love them but can't wait till they are 25. Yes. 25 in Canada, if they stay in school. Hate to say it but want them to go into trades or just fail out. Would be nice to have that money, y'know, to leave something behind for them. Such a waste.
mgtowolf 6y ago
Personally, I am sick of all the tax bullshit. Make all income taxable, alamoney, whatever. Tax it at a flat rate % and be done with it. It's better than what we got now. People get discounts for being married, why? People get discounts for having the scratch to hire a slimeball attorney(myself included), why? Everyone pays a low flat tax percentage on their income.
Sure, I will end up paying a lot more than some janitor or whatnot, I am really OK with that. People love to shit on the janitors, ditch diggers, lots of "no skill jobs", as if they should just blow their brains out and stop existing. These people are doing a job that needs to be done. Ever been in a public building where the janitor just died, and they are trying to find another one? It's disgusting after even one day.
Another one I get annoyed at, talking about fast food walkers like they have no skill. Been there, done that. The greatest skill fastfood workers have, is not jumping over the counter and beating condescending people to a pulp. That was a skill I had back in high school, which I no longer have. I would last maybe one day before being fired and arrested these days :P
general-heartless 6y ago
Janitors are so important. I make sure to always complement them whenever I see them working in a public washroom or mopping hallways. I just smile and say "hey this actually looks great! Good job! Thanks for keeping it clean."
[deleted]
Tie5o11 6y ago
You realize your flat tax proposal would have the janitors pay a higher rate than they are paying now, while people like you would pay a lower rate? We have a progressive tax system, meaning you pay a higer percentage as you go up in income bracket.
Your moralization and your policy prescriptions are at direct odds with each other here...
riztd 6y ago
You simply start the flat tax at 35,000+
mgtowolf 6y ago
No, it would have us pay the same rate. Janitor dude would pay a few hundred a year, I would pay several thousand. And the waltons or whatever would not enjoy their bullshit tax they pay, they would be coughing up a few hundred thousand.
wanderer779 6y ago
Walton’s pay tax on dividends, and capital gains if they sell. They avoid tax by holding an asset that appreciates and not selling it. The only way to get at that money would be with an inheritance tax or wealth tax. Personally I think a higher inheritance tax for very wealthy people would be good for society. And the Waltons definitely pay more than a few hundred k (but should pay more IMO)
The guy you’re replying to is talking about effective rates. He means you’d pay a lower effective rate than your are paying now, while the janitor would pay a higher effective ratE than what he currently pays.
maximumutility 6y ago
his point is that a flat % disproportionately impacts lower incomes.
a flat rate is definitively regressive in that it is less severe the more you earn
max_peenor 6y ago
No. It is literally and completely proportional. The problem is his 10% (or whatever % we come up with) hurts him more than my 10%.
Income tax is retarded. It was invented to punish a small set of people, just like AMT, but ended up altering the nation for everyone. Entire industries have been created to avoid it and it has created economy crush inefficiencies. The states should tax property, as most do, and the federal government should tax consumption and tariffs. I'm ok with reasonable inheritance taxes, if only to herd money into the safety and stability of trusts (most of you realize very little money from the. super rich ever gets taxes like this, right? You could make the rate 100% and you still won't get it).
Anyway.... sexual strategy. I the janitor lifts and otherwise takes care of himself, he'll get more quality poon than a ISO/RSU rich neckbeard.
maximumutility 6y ago
“No. It is literally and completely proportional. The problem is his 10% (or whatever % we come up with) hurts him more than my 10%”
we’re making the exact same point, when I say disproportionate I’m talking about the impact of the burden, not the literal rate
Tie5o11 6y ago
You realize the current tax rate is LOWER for lower income people than it is for HIGHER income people. That is called progressive taxation. Your proposal would RAISE taxes on the poor (your janitor) and LOWER taxes on the rich (you).
max_peenor 6y ago
No it isn't. There are like tranches. For the first X amount of income, both rich and poor pay the same rate. This is of course ignoring EIC which makes the first $10+k (don't remember the exact number) tax free for poor whereas the rich still pay on it.
And "my proposal?" What part of "Income tax is retarded" do you not understand?
Tie5o11 6y ago
My response should have been to "mgtowolf", not you.
liberty1127 6y ago
An old alchy I worked with said it best.
"Listen kid, ain't no pussy made of gold"
SteveMcaffee 6y ago
You guys, you're reading this wrong. If you make it 100k before you would deduct the 50k for your wife salary and then you wife would spend 50k tax free. You on the other hand had to pay taxes on 50k which would come to be some like 45k. Now you would probably have some other expenses due to taxes but you're wife wouldn't have any taxes. This new version is after tax so you're ex wife will get less money and decentive her from going through the divorce. This new change will decrease the divorce rate because women are going to be less likely to go through it if it means the children will suffer/have less resources. Honestly I didn't realize how great divorce women had it because men will able to deduct the salary from it.
kittyclaw200 6y ago
Alimony is based on the mans pre tax income. The women get the same amount of alimony they would have before this law. Men don;t get a rebate anymore so the are net poorer.
your argument is incorrect.
SteveMcaffee 6y ago
Alimony was* based on pretax. However unfair the systems it is, it still has to require the alimony payer can make enough to live and work. women overall will get less money hence why pro-women groups are fighting against see the National Organization for Women and the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers in https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/taxes/2017/12/24/exes-and-taxes-how-tax-overhaul-would-alter-alimony/976413001/
Also more concern comes from divorce lawyers who are more concerned they will lose clients. The article above points out how a divorce couple can deduct more money than a married couple. If it is more advantageous for the child to divorce what stops couples from divorcing but staying together anyway?
So again, this will resolute in your exwife receiving less money and make the divorce rate go down.
M_Justice 6y ago
This argument is wrong. Read the articles on the actual tax bill. Alimony is no longer a deduction while the alimony received is no longer considered income, hence free tax free money to the receiving spouse.
SteveMcaffee 6y ago
Yes it's free tax money but the receiver will get less because the amount is smaller.
Here is article that shows how a divorce couple can deduct more if they are separate than if they stay married.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/taxes/2017/12/24/exes-and-taxes-how-tax-overhaul-would-alter-alimony/976413001/
Also look who are fighting against it. Divorce lawyers and pro-women groups because they realize it is a negative for them.
Trpogre 6y ago
Holy shit.
That is some SERIOUS cash transfer. This is the true story of Trumps tax plan
[deleted] 6y ago
If you're unmarried, this only further reinforces you to stay unmarried.
Those who have gotten married, are fools who were weak and didn't vet their partner and didn't do their research.
This is not the time to get married. Period.
Quit looking to government to shield you from your poor choices by extending their influence into our lives. Government is not your friend!
You are not a victim, you are a grown man. Shut the fuck up and accept that.
[deleted] 6y ago
Chill the fuck out. The government fucks with you any which way they want. This is just yet another way they're fucking men. It's the government that demands you pay alimony in the first place. So they already are meddling in your personal affairs whether you like it or not.
[deleted]
general-heartless 6y ago
Thank you for stating this. Much needed.
babaner1 6y ago
Honestly, what is this ? When did the west become such a greedy and opportunistic place, what is the point of marriage anymore ? I mean seriously is this how were gonna live ? I mean there is no defender of common sense, democrats lost that title some time ago, republicans are there as well. If this continues, there won’t be any marriages anymore in the west, and if you thought that this new generation were undisciplined and lazy, then you don’t wanna be around when the next one pops up. I myself live in Sweden and even if we are notorious for feminist politics, we actually have some light divorce laws, alimony or child support doesn’t exist, as you get child support from the state, and should you divorce, both men and women get some kind of alimony, a man has actually the right to take 50% of the woman’s economy and vice versa , so if you are married to a good payed woman , you should be fine.
So honestly I feel bad for you Americans, I mean this is the problem with your political establishment, you only have two choices to pick and in this case both of them are shit. And I say to both democrats and republicans here , let go of your tribalism here , because this is a testimony that both political parties are happily fucking you over.
GreenPiller 6y ago
Fuck patriotism, I can't wait to get out of this god forsaken country. Hopefully I won't get shot by a mad man, murdered by a police officer, blown up by a muslim, divorced raped or accused of rape before the day comes
wanderer779 6y ago
There’s really no advocate for most people. In other times we’d already be shooting each other and it still might come to that.
TheDevilsAdvokaat 6y ago
I never got married in Australia. Saw too many men get fucked over because of it.
Luckylancer96 6y ago
When the west wasnt greedy?
wn36 6y ago
What he doesn’t tell you is that Sweden is one of the highest taxed countries in the WORLD. Socialism at its finest here.....alimony comes from the state....to both parties.
Where do you think that money comes from? TAXES! That everyone pays! F that.
Jfc_Manners 6y ago
Everyone pays it, it the men pay more
M_Justice 6y ago
I know it fucking sucks, but American men are taking it up the ass and accepting this new second class citizenship under some red pill swallowing or that being warriors means we should be immune to bad law and policy which directly affects red pill game theory.
Dragon_Garoo 6y ago
I agree and this is why I try and redpill dudes. Many don't want to hear it and blindly accept the leftist garbage, but if enough really started speaking up about these things, our politics would change and issues like this would be addressed under 'equal rights.'
general-heartless 6y ago
I've got to say one of the biggest mistakes I've made is trying to redpill dudes. It has never worked, in my experience. People are so fickle with their beliefs... i have not converted one person to the redpill, even guys who desperately needed it! So I just gave up, and now i keep quiet about it.
Dojolow 6y ago
This. Sometimes it takes men to be COMPLETELY fucked to want to find answers. You can't save them all, worry about saving yourself.
0kool74 6y ago
There. Fixed That For You :-)
Dragon_Garoo 6y ago
Yup. It's how I was saved. Still a bitter taste, that fucking pill. Thank god for it. lol. I knew shit just wasn't right. Had to have a low moment to realize it. Some day, I'll thank her. hahaha. (nah, hard nexted).
goadsaid 6y ago
This dude gets it. Politics is pointless. Red or Blue - you're getting the screw. The only thing you can do is engage with the system as little as possible and don't invite them into your life with righteous stupidity. For instance, you won't soon see me freezing my ass off outside in the cold with some stupid sign to do some protest which doesn't matter and just lands me on some kind of bullshit watchlist. I make money and get laid when I can. That's it. I don't volunteer with disadvantaged kids or champion cancer patients. I mind my own business and react firmly and aggressively when bothered.
[deleted] 6y ago
This is why I'm saving money and getting the hell out of here ASAP.
It's past fixing.
Dojolow 6y ago
I did the same thing. gtfo out the U.S.
GuitarHero07 6y ago
Where did you end up going? How does your new home compare to the US? In what ways is it better and is it worse in others?
goadsaid 6y ago
A lot of guys seem to like the small asian countries. Thailand, Cambodia etc. It's freer but not so violent (like hispanic countries). Of course they could be referring to anywhere - just my 2 cents.
juliusstreicher 6y ago
I'm thinking about Poland. Russia. Czechoslovakia, or wtf it's called now.
Seem to be RP, and not pressured by outsiders. THIS, to me, is a frontier.
GuitarHero07 6y ago
But would you not be an outsider in these countries? It doesn’t seem easy to obtain a visa to those countries. Also, I think learning the language in those countries could be very difficult for most English speakers. Also, how would you go about earning an income there?
juliusstreicher 6y ago
I shall go as their King! I shall be firm...yet, just!
rreot 6y ago
Maybe emperor 4d chess outplayed consercucks in GOP and instead of fighting sjw machine media he just accelerates decline just before riding off the cliff so sheeple wake up faster
/s
Entropy-7 6y ago
They did this a few years back with child support payments. The thing is that they did not alter the amount of the support payments which had two effects. First was that it put more money in the hands of the women because they didn't have to pay tax on it, so it was a so to feminists. Second was that it put more money in the tax coffers because the progressive tax system hits the higher income earner - usually the man - harder. With more money going to the tax man and the women that simply means less for the man.
This proposal is completely off the wall because it doesn't even have the fig leaf of being "for the children".
Reformed65 6y ago
This is the issue with state marriage, you sign up now and 5 years later the terms and conditions are completely different.
SgtBrutalisk 6y ago
Like fucking Hearthstone. The only winning move is not to play and tell everyone you know not to get hooked.
max_peenor 6y ago
I expect to see a strong uptick in the murder rate in 2019...
I also find it unfortunate and sad, though with a tinge of ironic humor, that most people think all the fentanyl overdoses are self-inflicted.
DO / NEVER / MARRY
My_Hot_Cousin 6y ago
I wouldn’t even get a prenup due to them being thrown out and over ruled by the feminist judges (most are). Just don’t raw dog crazy and avoid the common law marriage laws in your state. And most importantly, don’t put a ring on it. She can have the golden vagina, and you’ll still be fucked down the line.
[deleted] 6y ago
this. never get formally married. if you don't want kids, never cohabitate... just stay fit and fuck 22 year olds. if you want kids, get a surrogate or a cohabitation agreement that expressly says you're not married.
[deleted] 6y ago
Imagine how many tax dollars could be collected on alimony payments... Surprised to hear that this wasn't already happening.
M_Justice 6y ago
Was already taxed when income came from the employer.
maplemaximus 6y ago
Can't trust either side anymore. I say we drag these fuckers out of the White House guns blazing and blow their fucking brains out, US Military be damned.
Omnibrad 6y ago
I don't think taxpayers should foot the bill for your decision to marry/divorce. People who make vows should honor them or suffer the consequences. I can assure you the security around the President will honor their vows and oaths.
[deleted]
M_Justice 6y ago
Tax payers foot the bill when women claim spousal support payments tax free. That's income, so why is it not being taxed? Moreover, when you say those who break their vows should be punished, then why does the cheating wife with no income get all the benefits under the marriage tax/scheme in your opinion?
abstractplebbit 6y ago
It was taxed before being distributed to her. If that was not the case, she would be receiving more to begin with, and then it would be taxed down to that same amount.
Omnibrad 6y ago
Here you are talking about women. I was just talking about taxpayers, which are mostly men. You know the rules are different for the two.
ronmexico314 6y ago
The problem is the alimony payment, not the tax code. Just because you got screwed in a divorce doesn't mean there should be a tax benefit for you.
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
ronmexico314 6y ago
Feel free to insult me to cover for you not understanding taxes by using a deeply flawed example.
Nobody is getting an alimony payment equaling 50% of gross earnings (and certainly not that much from someone making $100,000) . You are also counting some taxes that would be charged to the business, which would be factored in outside before taking a salary from the business.
Alimony is a ridiculous concept, but disallowing tax deductions for money you lost in court isn't the problem.
grewapair 6y ago
It was already a TERRIBLE deal, but now, any man who gets married is a full-on idiot.
[deleted]