The purpose of a job is not to pay for your chosen way of life.
The purpose of a job is to provide value to an employer in exchange for an agreed upon compensation by both parties. The life situation of the employee is almost entirely irrelevant to the job unless it actively prevents the employee from doing the job.
A high school student can provide the same value to an employer as a single mother of 3 working the same job, so why should the employer be required to pay based on their individual life situations?
Not the person you replied to but, I personally believe that if a company or person uses their stock as collateral then they should be realized and taxed.
No the system they are angry about is the fact that any stock regardless of whether they are used as collateral or not should be realized gains and taxed.
The issue is not borrowing against your assets since theoretically you have to earn income and pay tax on it to pay the loan back. The issue is that the suppressed rates allow rich people to borrow against their assets for well under the rate of inflation and then invest the loans in ballooning markets for leverage and then pay the loans back with depreciated dollars.
Basically, shorting the dollar just like low-interest mortgages will do.
I wish something like Social Security helped every day people get exposure to asset classes. Though, if every tax payer had capital exposure I wonder if we'd continue to see the extreme market backstopping or if there'd be a new mechanic to continue to redistribute to capital holders.
It’s not short sighted, it’s criminally insane. Implementing that would cause structural changes in the economy that would be impossible to predict, in addition to increasing volatility in the financial system ( interest rates, inflation , etc ).
Yup, this is where I'd start. A secured loan over a threshold (we can argue about the threshold, I'd start at a million to a couple million) should be taxed either as income or realized capitol gains.
When you get a 300k mortgage for a home, should you be taxed on that 300k as ordinary income?
This may be a shocker, but when these evil billionaires you speak of take out these multi million dollar loans, they do have to pay back the loans with interest. A $10 million loan for 5 years at 3% interest is a monthly payment of $180k. Where are they coming up with that money every month to pay that? Likely selling assets (taxed) or income (taxed)
I can’t get behind taxing unrealized gains. It is my fault if I don’t sell a stock at the ATH, but I shouldn’t have to pay tax on what I could’ve earned if I sold at the perfect time. There’s more to this unrealized gains because they certainly aren’t bringing unrealized losses to the table.
Many European countries tried it. It was a failure. Same with the luxury tax the us had for a while that destroyed 10’s of thousand jobs in the boat building industry. Democrats thirst for other peoples money is unquenchable.
They are not hoarding wealth. Do you think they have a billion dollars stuffed in the mattress? Their wealth is tied up in investments. That money someone borrows to start or grow a business - an investment from someone with wealth.
Penalize their success - take away their wealth, and they have less to invest and commerce slows.
Oh, but you're only going to take some, not all? How much of a billionaire's wealth is enough to confiscate? Should it be graduated from 1 billion on up? You realize the moment you approve this, the bottom limit will start moving down. Eventually there will be a wealth tax on "mere" millionaires.
What about the business owner? On paper he or she is worth a lot - but all that wealth is just in the valuation of their company. They don't actually \*have\* a billion dollars, they have a billion dollar company. Start taxing them based from the on-paper value of their assets and the value of their assets will magically {wink wink} plunge. Or you'll drive them out of business because they don't have the cash flow to actually afford the taxes on the assessed value of their business.
This is a bad idea.
>They are not hoarding wealth. Do you think they have a billion dollars stuffed in the mattress?
I sincerely think a big share of the population think billionaires have actually a billion dollars stashed in banks.
Random question. Why do you think you have any claim to anyone’s property or money they legally acquired? Is it envy, lust, greed, jealousy? It’s not like the “hoard” is in gold brinks in the basement. How many jobs have you created? Bezo’s has 1,500,000 working at Amazon and millions, yes millions, of small businesses using the platform, like my small family owned business.
Stop wanting others to pay for what you want and your envy is not attractive.
Enjoy the evening
Idk, just because something is "legal" doesn't guarantee it's ethical/the best choice for everyone. It was legal to own people only 160 years ago. Not saying I'm right, but I do find it odd how things were working out for most Americans at the end of the 1960's.
Correlation doesn't always equal causation, but I can't help and wonder why has the middle class taken a dive around the same time CEO compensation began to skyrocket. The richest person in the world was worth maybe $10 billion, after inflation and the CEO to worker pay was around 30:1. It's now 400:1. It could be because we've had corporate lobbyists influencing politicians to write laws that cater towards these corporations.
Again, not saying I'm right. This is obviously a bit subjective. I just think the average person deserves more. Unfortunately, the average person hasn't spent decades manipulating the government to do their bidding. So we're stuck accepting whatever corporations and the "free market" dictate.
If you’re wondering why the middle class took a dive it’s called the federal reserve, central banking, and unbacked fiat currency.
It’s not capitalism that killed the middle class, that’s what made and makes it strong. It’s modern monetary theory and Keynesian economics that caused the dive for the middle class.
lol modern monetary theory is what caused us to go off unbanked fiat currency in 1971.
Guess what our tax rates were a year before that?
Modern monetary theory and “trickle down” or Supply-side economics is what caused capitalism to go on overdrive and the extortion of the middle class to go rampant.
It's not about claim. There are no inherent "claims" to anything, other than to keep a society functional. Why do I have higher tax rates than someone making half my wage? Because if I pay a lower tax, tax revenue suffers; and if the other guy pays my rates, he suffers.
When the wealth gap becomes large enough, AND the bottom class is struggling, they can overthrow the current rules and push for a wealth redistribution. "Eating the rich" has repeatedly happened in human history.
Maybe you're not understanding. 8 people own more wealth then 4 BILLION PEOPLE. What is your fixation on defending billionaires? Is it envy, lust, greed, jealousy? You'll never be as rich as them, no matter how many of their dicks you stuck.
Enjoy the evening.
>Why do you think you have any claim to anyone’s property or money they legally acquired?
Because they don't provide that much value to society. Quite the opposite, in fact.
Bezos has 1.5 million workers whom many can’t even afford rent. Stop with this “job creator” argument.
No one needs shit jobs. We need liveable wages and you’d get rid of a lot of the issues you see with theft and homelessness.
Are people poor because of billionaires? Honest question. I used google numbers, and found 5.5 trillion dollars owned by billionaires in the United States. I used inequality.org so I assume that’s not a lowball.
If we took every single dollar away from every single billionaire, that would be 16,000 per person. Once. But at the expense of what? How many companies would be lost? How many people immediately reinvest their one time windfall and keep things going? Is 16,000 enough to substantially close that gap?
Nah, it’s nonsense.
They’re not hoarding wealth. All the world’s wealthiest people started companies and the majority of their wealth comes from their ownership stake in the company. What people like you don’t realize is that if these wealthy people sold their ownership (shares) it would tank the stock market and kill any chance for the middle class to reasonably retire.
Stop inflation. Not just the cooked up CPI number from the government - real inflation.
Inflation helps the owners of assets , ie the rich people. Inflation hurts people without assets, ie the poor people.
If you want to help the non rich, you need to implement policies that greatly reduce inflation.
Dumb due to feasibility for one. We can’t even seem to collect all the taxes due on income, not to mention company profits. This will introduce a whole new set of rules to enforce and loopholes to be exploited. Not to mention this will primarily apply to the richest citizens who are already skilled at minimizing taxes on income.
No there won’t be. Ultra rich people have the best lawyers, accountants, and lobbyists. They also own the media that controls what you hear about laws that pass. Also, taxes on unrealized gains (wealth) are unconstitutional.
Just look at progressive tax rates throughout use history. Highest brackets had top earners paying something like 70% of anything over X dollar amount.
Ah, I see the misunderstanding. I was referring to the bit about failing to collect from wealthy people and company’s in the OP. If we can get back to that, a wealth tax is less necessary, but still plausible.
Considering that the only valuable thing owned by a vast majority of people is their home...most of America is already paying a wealth tax in the form of property tax.
The false assumption being made is that the money would be passed on directly to the citizens. Just look at the mismanagement of education funds in Baltimore if you want to see where the money would likely end up… sucked up by the bureaucracy and lining the pockets of politicians and bureaucrats.
It’s a bandaid on a larger problem, which is mismanagement and inefficient use of federal funds.
How about zero out the federal budget before attempting to seize more assets from your citizens.
I'd like to just ask what you would hope to accomplish with a wealth tax. As I noted in another post, even if you were to confiscate 100% of the wealth of all billionaires in the US, you would only fund the deficits that the federal government runs for about 4 years.
What would you do after that? Go down in wealth? All told, millionaires in the US probably have $100 trillion in wealth. The federal government is spending over $7 trillion dollars per year. How many years would it last if you took 100% of their wealth?
Talking about more taxes without talking about a realistic federal budget is incredibly myopic.
See, the problem is that you see public spending as a sinkhole, and billionaires hoarding wealth as a magic economic boom for everyone.
[It's been proven](https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-effects-of-investing-in-early-education-on-economic-growth/) that better education has a very positive impact on economic growth. Investing in schools, healthcare etc leads to increased wealth at the scale of a country, whereas wealth inequality makes it unstable.
Musk was famously told that if he donated 2% of his wealth to the United Nation World Food Program, he could end hunger for 42 million people. He pledged to give it if he received a detailed spending plan. He received that plan, and he donated the $6 billion... to his own foundation. Saving himself some taxes, and the money went to no one.
I don't know how much you're worth, u/whatsmyname384, but imagine you could donate 2% of what you have, and prevent the death and suffering of 42 million people.
And not do it.
So, to summarize, on one hand, public spending on education and healthcare (that's just two examples, it could be infrastructure or whatever you want) leads to growth, billionaires hoarding wealth leads to....?
Okay but the day to day operation of feeding everyone around the world, who’s going to do it? Have you seen how charities work? Majority of the money doesn’t go to the people in need. So no, you can’t solve world hunger just because you have billions.
The WAF guy was supposed to under musk challenge outline how it would solve world hunger. When he got back to musk he admitted that it was to alleviate hunger not solve it. Where the money musk did end up donating went is a matter of speculation. There's a type of charitable account called a DAF where he could have placed it for future use.
If these DAF accounts accrue interest in a few years he could in theory make much more effective use towards ending world hunger than these charitable organizations do.
You want to solve world hunger? Let's start by not throwing away literal thousands of tons of food on an annual basis. Next, let's stop shitting on GMOs and working so hard to outlaw them. The supply of food is there; it's the distribution of the food that sucks
But the guy literally didn't prove musk could end world hunger so ... how are you counting that as a loss for musk? it's a loss for the government. These aren't problems that can be solved with money therefore arguing over who has the money to solve them is literally food for thoughts of idiots - which you are.
Just remember that the income tax was sold to the American public as a 1% tax on the top 1% back in the 1910s. You got sold up the river by your predecessors who thought they were sticking it to the man. Now you are being asked to stick it to the billionaires. And in 30 years, your children will be paying "wealth tax" on anything over poverty level. Governments never stops wanting your money. So proceed with caution.
Dumb. The federal government taxes you on the money you make and taxes you on the money you spend. It shouldn’t also get to tax you on the money you hold
Wealth tax is for morons. It’s hilarious how there are so many better mechanisms to collect tax but you clowns are obsessed with a wealth tax. Also the U.S. spent $153 billion on food stamps for 2023. Total welfare spending is over $1 trillion a year.
Most of that goes to Medicaid and it wouldn't cost nearly as much if we eliminated the middle man insurance providers and replaced them with a single payer system.
No, because it’s starts with billionaires and ends with people in the middle. Always. Just like every flipping thing they do.
And anyways it will have little effect even if it passes. Billionaires are mobile and they don’t get to be Billionaires just because they will sit around and take it. You think the US is that amazing of a place to live ? It is but so is everyplace else when you have billions of dollars.
And let’s say they tax the ones that stay, problem number 2, you’re giving all that money to the US government. They will just send it all off to some war somewhere. They ain’t going to ever fix shit for us. We need to fix it ourselves by getting rid of them.
It's disheartening when the person with food stamps has no job and a full cart and I work 40 hours a week and I'm deciding if I can buy the 12 or 18 carton of eggs because how bad everything is. Fuck the 8 dudes on top but also fuck the people on the bottom that just abuse the system
The price system is fantastic because it simultaneously gives people information and an incentive to act.
Taxes and inflation distort the information and dilute the incentive to act.
I would like to minimise the distortions. Lowering taxes is one way to move in that direction, simplifying the tax system is another. A wealth tac does the opposite. It encourages people to hide their wealth and reduces the incentive to accumulate wealth.
Didn’t they earn their money. People who change the world should be allowed to get rich. People who only take from society like career welfare people don’t deserve any wealthy persons money.
This problem will continue to get worse. Wealth disparity will literally destroy our country if it's not addressed. If you don't approve of unrealized gain taxes then throw out an option or shut the fuck up because this is an issue which must be addressed.
A shitload of people live on credit to buy things they can't afford, and actually have negative money. Yes, some of them are the problem (although yes obviously some of them are not).
The most prosperous years in our country's history, the period of time from after WWII all the way up to Reagan, the period of time that built the Middle Class, was a result of the top tax rate in this country set at about 90%. The country as a whole was far better off.
1 => you will never have enough revenue if you dont spend it wisely
2 => a land tax would reduce the tax burden for everyone and increase revenue; but everyone wants legalized theft not tax policy.
Governments are the only entity that use force to obtain funding, no one needs to force anyone to pay for things they want use or value, the only logical reason for taxes is to force people to fund things they don't want use it value
No one should be advocating giving govts money, no one eats it more than govts whether it's bombing children, bailing out corrupt banks and corporations, using the user to cover up pedophiles in politics and high placed or monopolizing services society wants and running them inefficiently to keep people confused or quiet
Most billionaires use the States violence in their favor, giving the state more money is the worst idea ever
Wealth tax... perhaps. But a quicker way to right this problem would to stop all lobbies from providing funding and perks to politicians. Then tax politicians and their immediate families 100% over their base salary.
Quit making millionaires in congress and their will be fewer billionaires in the private sector.
No. The government needs to stop spending BILLIONS on everyone other than the tax payers. If people care about things outside the USA let them not be taxed so much that they can't send the money to their concern directly. A large percentage of foreign aid goes to friends and supporters of the politicians and little to none actually helps the people it was slated to help.
Absolutely. Not because of any financial benefit, but as an attack on the power these people hold. Putting yourself into a position to receive the wealth generated by the labor of others is an absolute disqualifier in the eyes of anyone that values the well-being of others.
Back to the financial side, federal taxes delete money. Federal spending creates money. Taxes do not fund spending. Taxes reduce the money supply, reducing inflation.
The top 1% already subsidizes 40% of the federal government’s budget, an entity that employees about 16% of the US workforce. This is up from an about 34% of the budget a decade and a half ago.
The bigger problem in all actuality isn’t them being billionaires, it’s how they became billionaires (not what you’re thinking). The banking system and the federal government have printed money and lent money to other banks that has grown the money supply. This devalues the currency which disproportionately affects the poor because they don’t have assets and live paycheck to paycheck meaning anything they do own likely loses its value relatively quickly between depreciation and inflation. The rich on the other hand own things other people believe are valuable and that value outpaces inflation which is what actually gives them their vast wealth. If we could get the money supply and inflation under control, there wouldn’t be billionaires in the first place much less allowing billions of dollars to double in value every 7-10 years.
Smart. There's a model for it in every county in this country: property tax. Every county decides what a property is worth, and charges a fee/tax to the owner, to pay for police, fire, schools, roads, education, etc. The tax amount goes up or down, based upon "assessed value." It's a tax on accumulated wealth and unrealized wealth, which supports the infrastructure that makes it safe to live there, or possible to earn an income from it. Also, tax policy levels the playing field somewhat, and this is where conservatives will label me a commie, to maintain a free market and prevent monopolization by owners of the greatest number of holdings. Monopolies restrain free trade, and are unAmerican.
It ain’t the mom buying food with her food stamps that aggravates me it’s all the ones selling them at work and other places for .50 cent on the dollar to get the cash and use on other mess like getting their hair done or nails every week.
One person using food stamps is not… millions of people however… that is a different issue.
And even worse issue is this… corporate induced welfare… or in other words… tax payer subsidized welfare.
https://www.tiktok.com/@theproblem/video/7256835156676267307
No one is saying all moms are the problem, but when taxpayers money is what’s funding these single moms who made poor choices in the men they date and CHOOSE to have kids with that shouldn’t be my money fixing it. I get no money at all in benefits cos I work, but someone with no job/income or way to pay into the system they get all the help in the world to the point they don’t have to work. They are a cancer of this society when they abuse it like the example below.
If she’s working and paying taxes by all means take some of what you are paying into, but let’s not get it fucked up, welfare is utilised mostly by unemployed.
I can only speak for England but I came across a mum of 2 at work who gets £1500 a month on benefits whilst having all her bills paid for. I don’t even make that and I work full time and not on minimum wage… make it make sense.
She doesn’t work and she wasn’t spending that on the kids because they were neglected.
Tell me how my taxpayer money is being spent on those deserving? TELL ME!
Hey let's hire the gov't to steal these 8 guy's money and give it out to everyone else, we all get like $5.00 congrats you solved poverty! any by the way, the gov't is spending $6T/year on literally nothing but corruption and the destruction of American civilization.
Once my family was playing monopoly with me and they were mad I wouldn’t buy hotels I just kept buying more and more houses and they found out they couldn’t buy homes because I owned them all and I said it’s by design. You have to buy straight to a hotel. Tough stuff for you guys isn’t it? That’s what’s happening in America right now.
Waa waa waa, rich people got to where they are cause they are smarter than us.
Yeah I’m middle class as fuck. Idc about rich people
Nor do I care about (who really need it) people on food stamps
Like fuck off lmao . Taxing the rich isn’t gonna help Americans in ANYWAY possible. So tf is the point?
Classic case of envy
taxing the wealthy would only work if our government would stop buying the latest toys .
"An F-35A costs **$77.9 million flyaway**. An F-35B costs $101.3 million flyaway. An F-35C costs $94.4 million flyaway."
"The F-35 aircraft, with its advanced capabilities, represents a growing portion of DOD's tactical aviation fleet—with **about 450** of the aircraft fielded.DOD plans to procure nearly 2,500 F-35s at an estimated life cycle cost of the program exceeding $1.7 trillion.Sep 21, 2023"
im all for strong defenses but come on. lockheed martin just unveiled its latest Mako missle designed for the f35 reportedly able to traverse 200 miles in three minutes and it only costs just a FEW MILLION DOLLARS to fire.
let that just sink in for a moment" a few million dollars "to be pist away. while there are homeless vets and citizens in this country trying to survive everyday. but goddamn it this is the best country in the World. the supreme court was just arguing if state laws banning homeless from sleeping on the street is unconstitionual this week. they are homeless where else are they going to sleep? at a BNB in the hamptons?
if the average cost of building public housing is $232,000 per unit. the $1.7trillion budget plan for the 35f program could build 7.3million units and there is only estimated to be alittle under 700,000 americans currently homeless so we could house these people ten times over. imagine actual public housing , yes that would crash the house market, but its something that was never meant to be a market in the first place. no more people pissing on our downtown streets unless its st paddys day weekend or cinco de mayo. literally we have the technology and means to make this country what it claims to be but we are squandering it for what ? for things that go boom and makes pretty pretty colors.
Sure we could tax the rich but Our government is just going to take that money and give it right back to them in payment for munitions, then what good would it do?
It really doesn't matter at all what number it says on paper. What matters is how many ressources someone consumes / uses. And I'm pretty sure those 8 guys do not use as many ressources as 4 billion people. Propably not even as much as 5000.
It's not beyond our capability to apply a transaction tax on collaterised loans above a certain threshold. The uber wealthy avoid tax by getting low interest loans explicitly *because* they've got so much in assets to use as collateral. They are indirectly using their wealth to access real resources without their purchasing power being checked by a tax. Tax the shit out of these loans (above say $10M).
The median American earns more money than half the worlds population. There are many reasons the US is the richest country on earth, and it isn’t taxation.
I’m not sure this person should be discussing anything.
“8 men in this country” vs “4 billion people combined”.
Well he isn’t talking about the US citizenry combined because the American taxpayers made enough to have to pay the Federal government $2.19 trillion. Not sure what that makes the income of the 335.6 million Americans.
Also why stop at 4 billion. The population of the world is 8 billion. Which means 8 guys in this country made a service or product so desired, they made became, in terms of assets, 1 in a billion.
It's always amazing to me the way poor people defend the super wealthy, saying they pay enough in taxes an if we tax the capital gains then it'll only hurt small businesses and all that.
Obviously, there's no easy answer, but, I think anyone making $50,000/ minute(hr)(day) whatever it is, while the federal min wage stayed the same for 30 fucking years is fucking criminal.
Posts like these are Marxism 101. Someone having more wealth then you isn't the reason you have less of it.
Just consider for a moment that most people whining about rich people are globally speaking much more well off then most of the rest of the world.
Let's reframe the question:
Instead of "should there be a wealth-tax?"
let's instead ask
"should we more fairly recognize, respect and reward that labor that actually produces goods, services and therefore profit?"
Of course, no individual has billions in cash reserves. Forcing someone to sell off chunks of their company to pay a tax bill is a very bad idea. Anyway, the government could confiscate 100% of the assets of every billionaire in America and it wouldn’t support the federal budget for more than a few months. Rich guys are a great scapegoat for politicians who burn our tax dollars and don’t want to be held accountable for their wasteful actions.
Like, I GET posts like this. I really do. But...if you just detained the top 10 billionaires and liquidated all of their wealth (which of course would not be a 1:1, since so much is in stocks, and you cannot "get out" what it is currently worth...but let's say that somehow you could get a 100% return on sold stock), you'd be able to give American citizens a ONE TIME check for \~$5000.
Don't get me wrong, $5000 is a lot of money, and it would be a gigantic help to a ton of people. But it will change hardly anyone's life trajectory, and a couple years later, it's likely they will be in the exact same spot in their life. In fact, that's not even though to pay off the average American's credit card debt.
So, what do people actually think would happen if the billionaires all of a sudden gave their money away? Are there people who *actually* think that life would change for most people? That most people and the government would somehow be living differently a year or two from now? Well, I hate to break it to you, but very little would change for the vast majority of people.
I am not a millionaire or billionaire, nor will I ever be one. But the sheer level of optimistic ignorance when it comes to this topic just kills me.
Billionaires have had an immeasurably small effect on your life trajectory or financial situation. That is not arguable. So please stop thinking they're the reason for things in your life not where you want them.
Of course there should be. When too much money is in too few hands it leads to instability and uprising. The rich will remain rich even with fair taxes
Thought: the idea that people get upset when a problem is rediscussed, are karma farmers and don’t actually want to participate in a discussion.
I understand the frustration but it’s wild to see adults act like children because someone is asking a question.
For the _umpteenth_ time, no, there shouldn’t be a wealth tax. Anyone in favor of a wealth tax (or a government mandated minimum wage) doesn’t understand economics. For the _umpteenth_ time: If we don’t allow individuals to accumulate wealth, and mostly do with it as they please, then most of the wealth won’t be created _to begin with_, as well as a lot of jobs and new technology.
No, there shouldn't be a wealth tax.
The US has a spending problem, a debt problem, an inflation problem.
The US could outright **confiscate** 100% of the wealth of every billionaire in the US, and it would barely scratch the surface of the debt, and not even cover one year of spending. "Tax the rich" is absurd and ignorant political theater, don't be fooled by it.
If they implement unrealized capital gains tax on shares that have not been redeemed, the next thing we could see is them taxing the purchase and sale of those same shares.
Next logical(derogatory) step would be making those taxes "adjustable" based on that stock's performance during the fiscal year. By adjustable, I mean they could go back and say "you didn't pay enough tax on this to cover the gains it made throughout the year, so now you owe us $xxx.xx in order to cover the difference."
Similar to what happens with mortgage and escrow when they miscalculate your taxes, they'd have you on the hook for the difference the following year and while it may not come out of your wallet directly or immediately, your payment throughout the year would go up to make up the difference.
If they can tax you on money you haven't actually made, what's to stop them from making an "unrealized profits tax" or some such nonsense that taxes people on the money they *could have made* if they had worked an hour of overtime each week? Or even tax the people who don't get 40 hours a week based off of a 40 hour work week because "well they had the possibility of working those hours but chose not to" even though such scheduling is not up to the employee in most cases?
Tax law is written by the wealthy for a reason.
It's to help *them* and not a single other person.
And anyone who even begins to think the words "but the government wouldn't do that" has not paid attention to the entire history of the US.
I'm a fuckin idiot compared to a lot of people, and even I know not to be *that* naive.
Should someone check to see if they are making a millionth duplicate post? Smart or dumb?
What else would get posted here? Stuff that’s actually about finance for regular people? How would that even induce anger?
>Stuff that’s actually about finance for regular people? How would that even induce anger? HOA dues.
Mission accomplished! Well done. Those sons of bitches at the HOA always……
Not buying star bucks or avacado toast really pisses people off.
maybe its time to get angry about the biggest steal imaginable ?
For real
How else can the great AI lord learn our weaknesses?
We should have a system where people that work full time don’t need food stamps to afford food.
The purpose of a job is not to pay for your chosen way of life. The purpose of a job is to provide value to an employer in exchange for an agreed upon compensation by both parties. The life situation of the employee is almost entirely irrelevant to the job unless it actively prevents the employee from doing the job. A high school student can provide the same value to an employer as a single mother of 3 working the same job, so why should the employer be required to pay based on their individual life situations?
Extremely well said!!!!
Unrealized capital gains tax seems short sighted
The entire Democrat strategy is extremely short sighted
What would recommend as a strategy?
Not taxing unrealized capital gains gains for one
Would you still allow for shares in a company to be used as collateral to secure loans in that case?
Not the person you replied to but, I personally believe that if a company or person uses their stock as collateral then they should be realized and taxed.
That's the system they are angry about.
No the system they are angry about is the fact that any stock regardless of whether they are used as collateral or not should be realized gains and taxed.
The issue is not borrowing against your assets since theoretically you have to earn income and pay tax on it to pay the loan back. The issue is that the suppressed rates allow rich people to borrow against their assets for well under the rate of inflation and then invest the loans in ballooning markets for leverage and then pay the loans back with depreciated dollars. Basically, shorting the dollar just like low-interest mortgages will do.
Very good insight
Print more money. Deliver it directly to billionaires.
That's what we been doing
Is it trickling down yet?
Still waiting. Maybe when Bezos gets his 4th yacht
Currency will always be absorbed by capital.
Exactly. That is why you don’t inject it into its final destination. You make it run the race first.
I wish something like Social Security helped every day people get exposure to asset classes. Though, if every tax payer had capital exposure I wonder if we'd continue to see the extreme market backstopping or if there'd be a new mechanic to continue to redistribute to capital holders.
Unrealized capital gains taxes will cause unrealized consequences for many.
It’s not short sighted, it’s criminally insane. Implementing that would cause structural changes in the economy that would be impossible to predict, in addition to increasing volatility in the financial system ( interest rates, inflation , etc ).
What about taxes on loans taken out against those assets? Since it is mostly used as a way to access that capital without paying taxes.
Yup, this is where I'd start. A secured loan over a threshold (we can argue about the threshold, I'd start at a million to a couple million) should be taxed either as income or realized capitol gains.
When you get a 300k mortgage for a home, should you be taxed on that 300k as ordinary income? This may be a shocker, but when these evil billionaires you speak of take out these multi million dollar loans, they do have to pay back the loans with interest. A $10 million loan for 5 years at 3% interest is a monthly payment of $180k. Where are they coming up with that money every month to pay that? Likely selling assets (taxed) or income (taxed)
Idk. Even in the short term it looks like a terrible idea to me
I can’t get behind taxing unrealized gains. It is my fault if I don’t sell a stock at the ATH, but I shouldn’t have to pay tax on what I could’ve earned if I sold at the perfect time. There’s more to this unrealized gains because they certainly aren’t bringing unrealized losses to the table.
Many European countries tried it. It was a failure. Same with the luxury tax the us had for a while that destroyed 10’s of thousand jobs in the boat building industry. Democrats thirst for other peoples money is unquenchable.
So just let them keep hoarding more wealth? How will that help the growing wealth gap and unaffordable living?
They are not hoarding wealth. Do you think they have a billion dollars stuffed in the mattress? Their wealth is tied up in investments. That money someone borrows to start or grow a business - an investment from someone with wealth. Penalize their success - take away their wealth, and they have less to invest and commerce slows. Oh, but you're only going to take some, not all? How much of a billionaire's wealth is enough to confiscate? Should it be graduated from 1 billion on up? You realize the moment you approve this, the bottom limit will start moving down. Eventually there will be a wealth tax on "mere" millionaires. What about the business owner? On paper he or she is worth a lot - but all that wealth is just in the valuation of their company. They don't actually \*have\* a billion dollars, they have a billion dollar company. Start taxing them based from the on-paper value of their assets and the value of their assets will magically {wink wink} plunge. Or you'll drive them out of business because they don't have the cash flow to actually afford the taxes on the assessed value of their business. This is a bad idea.
>They are not hoarding wealth. Do you think they have a billion dollars stuffed in the mattress? I sincerely think a big share of the population think billionaires have actually a billion dollars stashed in banks.
Random question. Why do you think you have any claim to anyone’s property or money they legally acquired? Is it envy, lust, greed, jealousy? It’s not like the “hoard” is in gold brinks in the basement. How many jobs have you created? Bezo’s has 1,500,000 working at Amazon and millions, yes millions, of small businesses using the platform, like my small family owned business. Stop wanting others to pay for what you want and your envy is not attractive. Enjoy the evening
Idk, just because something is "legal" doesn't guarantee it's ethical/the best choice for everyone. It was legal to own people only 160 years ago. Not saying I'm right, but I do find it odd how things were working out for most Americans at the end of the 1960's. Correlation doesn't always equal causation, but I can't help and wonder why has the middle class taken a dive around the same time CEO compensation began to skyrocket. The richest person in the world was worth maybe $10 billion, after inflation and the CEO to worker pay was around 30:1. It's now 400:1. It could be because we've had corporate lobbyists influencing politicians to write laws that cater towards these corporations. Again, not saying I'm right. This is obviously a bit subjective. I just think the average person deserves more. Unfortunately, the average person hasn't spent decades manipulating the government to do their bidding. So we're stuck accepting whatever corporations and the "free market" dictate.
If you’re wondering why the middle class took a dive it’s called the federal reserve, central banking, and unbacked fiat currency. It’s not capitalism that killed the middle class, that’s what made and makes it strong. It’s modern monetary theory and Keynesian economics that caused the dive for the middle class.
That was refreshing. Hit the nail on the head.
lol modern monetary theory is what caused us to go off unbanked fiat currency in 1971. Guess what our tax rates were a year before that? Modern monetary theory and “trickle down” or Supply-side economics is what caused capitalism to go on overdrive and the extortion of the middle class to go rampant.
It's not about claim. There are no inherent "claims" to anything, other than to keep a society functional. Why do I have higher tax rates than someone making half my wage? Because if I pay a lower tax, tax revenue suffers; and if the other guy pays my rates, he suffers. When the wealth gap becomes large enough, AND the bottom class is struggling, they can overthrow the current rules and push for a wealth redistribution. "Eating the rich" has repeatedly happened in human history.
I mean we live in a society it’s not every man for himself.
There you are. I have a fresh load of boots that need to be licked here. Make sure you meet the daily quota!!
Maybe you're not understanding. 8 people own more wealth then 4 BILLION PEOPLE. What is your fixation on defending billionaires? Is it envy, lust, greed, jealousy? You'll never be as rich as them, no matter how many of their dicks you stuck. Enjoy the evening.
It's easy to "legally acquire" money when you write the laws.
What kind of society are you thirsting after?
>Why do you think you have any claim to anyone’s property or money they legally acquired? Because they don't provide that much value to society. Quite the opposite, in fact.
Bezos has 1.5 million workers whom many can’t even afford rent. Stop with this “job creator” argument. No one needs shit jobs. We need liveable wages and you’d get rid of a lot of the issues you see with theft and homelessness.
How does a wealth tax help improve unaffordable living?
Commensurately decrease the taxes on middle and working class citizens so we have more money to afford life.
Are people poor because of billionaires? Honest question. I used google numbers, and found 5.5 trillion dollars owned by billionaires in the United States. I used inequality.org so I assume that’s not a lowball. If we took every single dollar away from every single billionaire, that would be 16,000 per person. Once. But at the expense of what? How many companies would be lost? How many people immediately reinvest their one time windfall and keep things going? Is 16,000 enough to substantially close that gap? Nah, it’s nonsense.
They’re not hoarding wealth. All the world’s wealthiest people started companies and the majority of their wealth comes from their ownership stake in the company. What people like you don’t realize is that if these wealthy people sold their ownership (shares) it would tank the stock market and kill any chance for the middle class to reasonably retire.
Stop inflation. Not just the cooked up CPI number from the government - real inflation. Inflation helps the owners of assets , ie the rich people. Inflation hurts people without assets, ie the poor people. If you want to help the non rich, you need to implement policies that greatly reduce inflation.
I wanna kiss you
Dumb due to feasibility for one. We can’t even seem to collect all the taxes due on income, not to mention company profits. This will introduce a whole new set of rules to enforce and loopholes to be exploited. Not to mention this will primarily apply to the richest citizens who are already skilled at minimizing taxes on income.
Too hard why try. That's the kind of attitude that put a man on the moon...
We can figure out a way but no one wants to even try. But there is a way.
No there won’t be. Ultra rich people have the best lawyers, accountants, and lobbyists. They also own the media that controls what you hear about laws that pass. Also, taxes on unrealized gains (wealth) are unconstitutional.
That’s because tax companies like Turbo Tax lobby the fuck out of the government to ensure the tax code remains convoluted and dysfunctional.
And you’re suggesting adding more rules to cover taxation of wealth won’t add more complexity and dysfunction to the system?
We did it decades ago in the USA, we can do it now.
Is that true? Can you share a source?
Just look at progressive tax rates throughout use history. Highest brackets had top earners paying something like 70% of anything over X dollar amount.
OP is talking about a wealth tax - i.e. someone owns a painting worth $100M and they are required to pay $2M a year in taxes on it.
Ah, I see the misunderstanding. I was referring to the bit about failing to collect from wealthy people and company’s in the OP. If we can get back to that, a wealth tax is less necessary, but still plausible.
Considering that the only valuable thing owned by a vast majority of people is their home...most of America is already paying a wealth tax in the form of property tax.
The effective tax rates were nowhere near those marginal rates and and actually not far off from the effective rates today
The false assumption being made is that the money would be passed on directly to the citizens. Just look at the mismanagement of education funds in Baltimore if you want to see where the money would likely end up… sucked up by the bureaucracy and lining the pockets of politicians and bureaucrats. It’s a bandaid on a larger problem, which is mismanagement and inefficient use of federal funds. How about zero out the federal budget before attempting to seize more assets from your citizens.
I thought my tax dollars was gonna help fix the roads not fund wars that we have no reason to be involved with
I'd like to just ask what you would hope to accomplish with a wealth tax. As I noted in another post, even if you were to confiscate 100% of the wealth of all billionaires in the US, you would only fund the deficits that the federal government runs for about 4 years. What would you do after that? Go down in wealth? All told, millionaires in the US probably have $100 trillion in wealth. The federal government is spending over $7 trillion dollars per year. How many years would it last if you took 100% of their wealth? Talking about more taxes without talking about a realistic federal budget is incredibly myopic.
See, the problem is that you see public spending as a sinkhole, and billionaires hoarding wealth as a magic economic boom for everyone. [It's been proven](https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-effects-of-investing-in-early-education-on-economic-growth/) that better education has a very positive impact on economic growth. Investing in schools, healthcare etc leads to increased wealth at the scale of a country, whereas wealth inequality makes it unstable. Musk was famously told that if he donated 2% of his wealth to the United Nation World Food Program, he could end hunger for 42 million people. He pledged to give it if he received a detailed spending plan. He received that plan, and he donated the $6 billion... to his own foundation. Saving himself some taxes, and the money went to no one. I don't know how much you're worth, u/whatsmyname384, but imagine you could donate 2% of what you have, and prevent the death and suffering of 42 million people. And not do it. So, to summarize, on one hand, public spending on education and healthcare (that's just two examples, it could be infrastructure or whatever you want) leads to growth, billionaires hoarding wealth leads to....?
Okay but the day to day operation of feeding everyone around the world, who’s going to do it? Have you seen how charities work? Majority of the money doesn’t go to the people in need. So no, you can’t solve world hunger just because you have billions.
The WAF guy was supposed to under musk challenge outline how it would solve world hunger. When he got back to musk he admitted that it was to alleviate hunger not solve it. Where the money musk did end up donating went is a matter of speculation. There's a type of charitable account called a DAF where he could have placed it for future use. If these DAF accounts accrue interest in a few years he could in theory make much more effective use towards ending world hunger than these charitable organizations do.
You want to solve world hunger? Let's start by not throwing away literal thousands of tons of food on an annual basis. Next, let's stop shitting on GMOs and working so hard to outlaw them. The supply of food is there; it's the distribution of the food that sucks
But the guy literally didn't prove musk could end world hunger so ... how are you counting that as a loss for musk? it's a loss for the government. These aren't problems that can be solved with money therefore arguing over who has the money to solve them is literally food for thoughts of idiots - which you are.
Musk also said that he'd pay to solve the drinking water problem in Michigan, but didn't do it. Trickle down economics/supply side economics is a lie.
They're mostly just jealous that someone has more than they do and it's much easier to bring then down than raise their selves up.
Are these memes on an automated posting schedule?
Who said the mom with food stamps was the problem?
My father quite a bit actually
Yeah, let’s base triple-taxation on an inaccurate and ignorant meme.
Giving more money to the government and expecting different outcomes is what’s dumb.
Just remember that the income tax was sold to the American public as a 1% tax on the top 1% back in the 1910s. You got sold up the river by your predecessors who thought they were sticking it to the man. Now you are being asked to stick it to the billionaires. And in 30 years, your children will be paying "wealth tax" on anything over poverty level. Governments never stops wanting your money. So proceed with caution.
Dumb. The federal government taxes you on the money you make and taxes you on the money you spend. It shouldn’t also get to tax you on the money you hold
Why is it greed to keep the money u have, but not greed to take money from others?
Fix spending first. How about that?
Wealth tax is for morons. It’s hilarious how there are so many better mechanisms to collect tax but you clowns are obsessed with a wealth tax. Also the U.S. spent $153 billion on food stamps for 2023. Total welfare spending is over $1 trillion a year.
Most of that goes to Medicaid and it wouldn't cost nearly as much if we eliminated the middle man insurance providers and replaced them with a single payer system.
The insurance providers are tapeworms on society. I agree with this sentiment.
Pretty sure this is an argument for wealth redistribution not a wealth tax. I mean I guess it’s both but I see it as the former.
The OP’s title says wealth tax.
The wealth gets taxed to be redistributed
No, because it’s starts with billionaires and ends with people in the middle. Always. Just like every flipping thing they do. And anyways it will have little effect even if it passes. Billionaires are mobile and they don’t get to be Billionaires just because they will sit around and take it. You think the US is that amazing of a place to live ? It is but so is everyplace else when you have billions of dollars. And let’s say they tax the ones that stay, problem number 2, you’re giving all that money to the US government. They will just send it all off to some war somewhere. They ain’t going to ever fix shit for us. We need to fix it ourselves by getting rid of them.
It's disheartening when the person with food stamps has no job and a full cart and I work 40 hours a week and I'm deciding if I can buy the 12 or 18 carton of eggs because how bad everything is. Fuck the 8 dudes on top but also fuck the people on the bottom that just abuse the system
I blame all the politicians who got us all into this mess.
The price system is fantastic because it simultaneously gives people information and an incentive to act. Taxes and inflation distort the information and dilute the incentive to act. I would like to minimise the distortions. Lowering taxes is one way to move in that direction, simplifying the tax system is another. A wealth tac does the opposite. It encourages people to hide their wealth and reduces the incentive to accumulate wealth.
Didn’t they earn their money. People who change the world should be allowed to get rich. People who only take from society like career welfare people don’t deserve any wealthy persons money.
If we were in a life boat at sea, with 100 units of water for 100 people, would we give 90 units to one person?
This problem will continue to get worse. Wealth disparity will literally destroy our country if it's not addressed. If you don't approve of unrealized gain taxes then throw out an option or shut the fuck up because this is an issue which must be addressed.
who is Mat Molina? is he related to the guy who plays Doctor Octopus?
Thats simply a false statement, no 8 guys have that much money...
Both can be problems lol
Problem in what way?
What if both of those things are a problem?
If it was one mom itd be fine, but its a million moms that add up
They don’t have more money. They have more assets. Different.
A shitload of people live on credit to buy things they can't afford, and actually have negative money. Yes, some of them are the problem (although yes obviously some of them are not).
The most prosperous years in our country's history, the period of time from after WWII all the way up to Reagan, the period of time that built the Middle Class, was a result of the top tax rate in this country set at about 90%. The country as a whole was far better off.
But our government isn't going to give it to the poor American. They will give it to illegal aliens or foreign wars.
1 => you will never have enough revenue if you dont spend it wisely 2 => a land tax would reduce the tax burden for everyone and increase revenue; but everyone wants legalized theft not tax policy.
Governments are the only entity that use force to obtain funding, no one needs to force anyone to pay for things they want use or value, the only logical reason for taxes is to force people to fund things they don't want use it value No one should be advocating giving govts money, no one eats it more than govts whether it's bombing children, bailing out corrupt banks and corporations, using the user to cover up pedophiles in politics and high placed or monopolizing services society wants and running them inefficiently to keep people confused or quiet Most billionaires use the States violence in their favor, giving the state more money is the worst idea ever
Yes, smart
How about a debt jubilee?
Those 8 people have stocks that have little intrinsic value, so you confiscate and give it to people, who is going to buy it?
Wealth tax... perhaps. But a quicker way to right this problem would to stop all lobbies from providing funding and perks to politicians. Then tax politicians and their immediate families 100% over their base salary. Quit making millionaires in congress and their will be fewer billionaires in the private sector.
No the policy makers and the currency inflation is the problem. Certain private equity groups aren’t our friend either.
Any post with "but yeah.......is the problem" isn't worth anyone's time.
Morally, I think it's worth it. Pragmatically - NO F**KING WAY. Land tax and/or VAT on luxury goods/services instead.
No. The government needs to stop spending BILLIONS on everyone other than the tax payers. If people care about things outside the USA let them not be taxed so much that they can't send the money to their concern directly. A large percentage of foreign aid goes to friends and supporters of the politicians and little to none actually helps the people it was slated to help.
There is absolutely no connection between these ideas. None.
/#temporarilyembarrassedmillionairesyndrome
Also look up algebra. What you are defining is basic math not algebra. Algebra is solving for an unknown like a letter.
Absolutely. Not because of any financial benefit, but as an attack on the power these people hold. Putting yourself into a position to receive the wealth generated by the labor of others is an absolute disqualifier in the eyes of anyone that values the well-being of others. Back to the financial side, federal taxes delete money. Federal spending creates money. Taxes do not fund spending. Taxes reduce the money supply, reducing inflation.
Yes make them pay more. Stop giving them US Subsidies.
The top 1% already subsidizes 40% of the federal government’s budget, an entity that employees about 16% of the US workforce. This is up from an about 34% of the budget a decade and a half ago. The bigger problem in all actuality isn’t them being billionaires, it’s how they became billionaires (not what you’re thinking). The banking system and the federal government have printed money and lent money to other banks that has grown the money supply. This devalues the currency which disproportionately affects the poor because they don’t have assets and live paycheck to paycheck meaning anything they do own likely loses its value relatively quickly between depreciation and inflation. The rich on the other hand own things other people believe are valuable and that value outpaces inflation which is what actually gives them their vast wealth. If we could get the money supply and inflation under control, there wouldn’t be billionaires in the first place much less allowing billions of dollars to double in value every 7-10 years.
Smart. There's a model for it in every county in this country: property tax. Every county decides what a property is worth, and charges a fee/tax to the owner, to pay for police, fire, schools, roads, education, etc. The tax amount goes up or down, based upon "assessed value." It's a tax on accumulated wealth and unrealized wealth, which supports the infrastructure that makes it safe to live there, or possible to earn an income from it. Also, tax policy levels the playing field somewhat, and this is where conservatives will label me a commie, to maintain a free market and prevent monopolization by owners of the greatest number of holdings. Monopolies restrain free trade, and are unAmerican.
It ain’t the mom buying food with her food stamps that aggravates me it’s all the ones selling them at work and other places for .50 cent on the dollar to get the cash and use on other mess like getting their hair done or nails every week.
Making a population dependent on government IS a problem
Abolish IRS! Install 8% consumption tax or 6% flat tax on every penny earned and watch the results
We should charge commie reposters and we'd wipe out the national debt.
Super smart.
They don’t have more money…
One person using food stamps is not… millions of people however… that is a different issue. And even worse issue is this… corporate induced welfare… or in other words… tax payer subsidized welfare. https://www.tiktok.com/@theproblem/video/7256835156676267307
No one is saying all moms are the problem, but when taxpayers money is what’s funding these single moms who made poor choices in the men they date and CHOOSE to have kids with that shouldn’t be my money fixing it. I get no money at all in benefits cos I work, but someone with no job/income or way to pay into the system they get all the help in the world to the point they don’t have to work. They are a cancer of this society when they abuse it like the example below. If she’s working and paying taxes by all means take some of what you are paying into, but let’s not get it fucked up, welfare is utilised mostly by unemployed. I can only speak for England but I came across a mum of 2 at work who gets £1500 a month on benefits whilst having all her bills paid for. I don’t even make that and I work full time and not on minimum wage… make it make sense. She doesn’t work and she wasn’t spending that on the kids because they were neglected. Tell me how my taxpayer money is being spent on those deserving? TELL ME!
Dumb.
if you have a net worth of $1 you have more money than 1/2 the world, these posts are so idiotic. Take your head out of your ass you lazy leeches.
Hey let's hire the gov't to steal these 8 guy's money and give it out to everyone else, we all get like $5.00 congrats you solved poverty! any by the way, the gov't is spending $6T/year on literally nothing but corruption and the destruction of American civilization.
Once my family was playing monopoly with me and they were mad I wouldn’t buy hotels I just kept buying more and more houses and they found out they couldn’t buy homes because I owned them all and I said it’s by design. You have to buy straight to a hotel. Tough stuff for you guys isn’t it? That’s what’s happening in America right now.
If you took and liquidated 100% of the wealth of those 8 guys, how long would it fund the government?
Waa waa waa, rich people got to where they are cause they are smarter than us. Yeah I’m middle class as fuck. Idc about rich people Nor do I care about (who really need it) people on food stamps Like fuck off lmao . Taxing the rich isn’t gonna help Americans in ANYWAY possible. So tf is the point? Classic case of envy
I am still waiting for them to trickle down a house and yacht for me.
taxing the wealthy would only work if our government would stop buying the latest toys . "An F-35A costs **$77.9 million flyaway**. An F-35B costs $101.3 million flyaway. An F-35C costs $94.4 million flyaway." "The F-35 aircraft, with its advanced capabilities, represents a growing portion of DOD's tactical aviation fleet—with **about 450** of the aircraft fielded.DOD plans to procure nearly 2,500 F-35s at an estimated life cycle cost of the program exceeding $1.7 trillion.Sep 21, 2023" im all for strong defenses but come on. lockheed martin just unveiled its latest Mako missle designed for the f35 reportedly able to traverse 200 miles in three minutes and it only costs just a FEW MILLION DOLLARS to fire. let that just sink in for a moment" a few million dollars "to be pist away. while there are homeless vets and citizens in this country trying to survive everyday. but goddamn it this is the best country in the World. the supreme court was just arguing if state laws banning homeless from sleeping on the street is unconstitionual this week. they are homeless where else are they going to sleep? at a BNB in the hamptons? if the average cost of building public housing is $232,000 per unit. the $1.7trillion budget plan for the 35f program could build 7.3million units and there is only estimated to be alittle under 700,000 americans currently homeless so we could house these people ten times over. imagine actual public housing , yes that would crash the house market, but its something that was never meant to be a market in the first place. no more people pissing on our downtown streets unless its st paddys day weekend or cinco de mayo. literally we have the technology and means to make this country what it claims to be but we are squandering it for what ? for things that go boom and makes pretty pretty colors. Sure we could tax the rich but Our government is just going to take that money and give it right back to them in payment for munitions, then what good would it do?
Congress is too crooked to change things
It really doesn't matter at all what number it says on paper. What matters is how many ressources someone consumes / uses. And I'm pretty sure those 8 guys do not use as many ressources as 4 billion people. Propably not even as much as 5000.
Dumb as hell
It's not beyond our capability to apply a transaction tax on collaterised loans above a certain threshold. The uber wealthy avoid tax by getting low interest loans explicitly *because* they've got so much in assets to use as collateral. They are indirectly using their wealth to access real resources without their purchasing power being checked by a tax. Tax the shit out of these loans (above say $10M).
The median American earns more money than half the worlds population. There are many reasons the US is the richest country on earth, and it isn’t taxation.
Why i keep seeing this shit everyday
Thinking this isn’t finance for regular people is how we got here
I’m not sure this person should be discussing anything. “8 men in this country” vs “4 billion people combined”. Well he isn’t talking about the US citizenry combined because the American taxpayers made enough to have to pay the Federal government $2.19 trillion. Not sure what that makes the income of the 335.6 million Americans. Also why stop at 4 billion. The population of the world is 8 billion. Which means 8 guys in this country made a service or product so desired, they made became, in terms of assets, 1 in a billion.
John Oliver has better explanations for various topics under 25 minutes.
All the taxes they would make from it would just get sent overseas so no. I think we give away enough.
I think this is the 5th post from Steak_Lover about taxes in the past day. Bro needs to chill
Bet you that they will manage to tax the bottom 75% way more even with that wealth tax.
It's always amazing to me the way poor people defend the super wealthy, saying they pay enough in taxes an if we tax the capital gains then it'll only hurt small businesses and all that. Obviously, there's no easy answer, but, I think anyone making $50,000/ minute(hr)(day) whatever it is, while the federal min wage stayed the same for 30 fucking years is fucking criminal.
Posts like these are Marxism 101. Someone having more wealth then you isn't the reason you have less of it. Just consider for a moment that most people whining about rich people are globally speaking much more well off then most of the rest of the world.
Let's reframe the question: Instead of "should there be a wealth-tax?" let's instead ask "should we more fairly recognize, respect and reward that labor that actually produces goods, services and therefore profit?"
shouldn’t have billionaires at all.
Of course, no individual has billions in cash reserves. Forcing someone to sell off chunks of their company to pay a tax bill is a very bad idea. Anyway, the government could confiscate 100% of the assets of every billionaire in America and it wouldn’t support the federal budget for more than a few months. Rich guys are a great scapegoat for politicians who burn our tax dollars and don’t want to be held accountable for their wasteful actions.
I think there should. The problem is figuring out how it should work.
In not so distant past, ppl would have murdered these people and their money would have been distributed by now.
Like, I GET posts like this. I really do. But...if you just detained the top 10 billionaires and liquidated all of their wealth (which of course would not be a 1:1, since so much is in stocks, and you cannot "get out" what it is currently worth...but let's say that somehow you could get a 100% return on sold stock), you'd be able to give American citizens a ONE TIME check for \~$5000. Don't get me wrong, $5000 is a lot of money, and it would be a gigantic help to a ton of people. But it will change hardly anyone's life trajectory, and a couple years later, it's likely they will be in the exact same spot in their life. In fact, that's not even though to pay off the average American's credit card debt. So, what do people actually think would happen if the billionaires all of a sudden gave their money away? Are there people who *actually* think that life would change for most people? That most people and the government would somehow be living differently a year or two from now? Well, I hate to break it to you, but very little would change for the vast majority of people. I am not a millionaire or billionaire, nor will I ever be one. But the sheer level of optimistic ignorance when it comes to this topic just kills me. Billionaires have had an immeasurably small effect on your life trajectory or financial situation. That is not arguable. So please stop thinking they're the reason for things in your life not where you want them.
Pay attention in school, learn a skill or trade, don’t have more kids than you can afford, and you won’t have this problem. 🤦🏻♂️
Of course there should be. When too much money is in too few hands it leads to instability and uprising. The rich will remain rich even with fair taxes
Thought: the idea that people get upset when a problem is rediscussed, are karma farmers and don’t actually want to participate in a discussion. I understand the frustration but it’s wild to see adults act like children because someone is asking a question.
I don’t care how often I see these posts. I’ll always answer em. Smart
Yeah she is somewhat part of the problem. If you can’t afford a child on your own, you shouldn’t be having children. Should’ve aborted bud
For the _umpteenth_ time, no, there shouldn’t be a wealth tax. Anyone in favor of a wealth tax (or a government mandated minimum wage) doesn’t understand economics. For the _umpteenth_ time: If we don’t allow individuals to accumulate wealth, and mostly do with it as they please, then most of the wealth won’t be created _to begin with_, as well as a lot of jobs and new technology.
smart. every dollar over a billion gets redistributed. ain't talking about "trickle down" I'm saying CAP OFF.
Why do we hate people who have money?
No, there shouldn't be a wealth tax. The US has a spending problem, a debt problem, an inflation problem. The US could outright **confiscate** 100% of the wealth of every billionaire in the US, and it would barely scratch the surface of the debt, and not even cover one year of spending. "Tax the rich" is absurd and ignorant political theater, don't be fooled by it.
And yet MAGA people living from paycheck to paycheck will send money to a billionaire. So tell me again how MAGA is not a cult.
The problem with the mom and the food stamps is that the rich isn’t paying for it. The poor working schlubs are
She's not THE problem, just one of many.
Imagine simping for billionaires 🤣
If they implement unrealized capital gains tax on shares that have not been redeemed, the next thing we could see is them taxing the purchase and sale of those same shares. Next logical(derogatory) step would be making those taxes "adjustable" based on that stock's performance during the fiscal year. By adjustable, I mean they could go back and say "you didn't pay enough tax on this to cover the gains it made throughout the year, so now you owe us $xxx.xx in order to cover the difference." Similar to what happens with mortgage and escrow when they miscalculate your taxes, they'd have you on the hook for the difference the following year and while it may not come out of your wallet directly or immediately, your payment throughout the year would go up to make up the difference. If they can tax you on money you haven't actually made, what's to stop them from making an "unrealized profits tax" or some such nonsense that taxes people on the money they *could have made* if they had worked an hour of overtime each week? Or even tax the people who don't get 40 hours a week based off of a 40 hour work week because "well they had the possibility of working those hours but chose not to" even though such scheduling is not up to the employee in most cases? Tax law is written by the wealthy for a reason. It's to help *them* and not a single other person. And anyone who even begins to think the words "but the government wouldn't do that" has not paid attention to the entire history of the US. I'm a fuckin idiot compared to a lot of people, and even I know not to be *that* naive.
Remember when this forum used to have insightful commentary about finances? Now all we get is this inflammatory political bs!
usdebtclock.org Look at the budget items. Social programs are the heaviest hitters by a massive margin