Benzos is Giving 10 Billion Dollars to Fight Global Warming.

[devils advocato]

Not sarcasm at all. Tax the hell out of Mark Zuckerberg and I’m sure he’ll go to another country. Don’t be surprised if he starts working with artificial intelligence in that country too.

https://www.theguardian.com/inequal...eave-us-data-contradicts-millionaires-threats

https://www.courant.com/politics/hc...0181226-dy2bmxno7fdpnbeeojoowcuwyi-story.html

https://inequality.stanford.edu/sit...mer_2014/Pathways_Summer_2014_YoungVarner.pdf



TLDR: data shows the rich historically largely do not move when taxed due to being established in their careers--leading to being rooted in the community socially and economically. historically, moving is mostly driven by following job opportunities. there is a personal cost to uprooting and relocating and re-integrating into a new place.

 

[MusclesMarinara]

They should tape them together to make a giant umbrella to shield us from the sun.

 

[Goon Dog]

Thank God. I was feeling guilty about driving my pickup and 2 SUVs. Now I can continue to do so guilt-free. Hell, I may as well buy my wife hairspray cans full of CFCs and start saving up for that private jet.

 

[devils advocato]

taxing the wealthy, right now without any other govt changes, i dont think would be a good thing. it would raise federal earnings, but most people, wealthy or otherwise, do not like the idea of current or more taxes due to the inefficient nature of how public funds are spent. If we stopped literally bombing people/continuing to let the war racketeering machine dredge on, and showed some actual investment on public returns, then public perception on taxes would shift. I think most of us can all agree we feel our federal tax dollars are mostly wasted to line pockets of the revolving door of DC and big business.

make no mistake, re-organizing federal spending to be efficient is a large order. There are many levels of waste/rent seeking/predatory cronyism that will fight to justify their positions in the public service domain. This would include reforming public interaction with: healthcare (medicare/medicaid/public insurance policys), defense, wall street/banking/financial markets, social security, and all the corperate wellfare that takes place.

Lastly, one has to examine if people even want change in the first place. In terms of top earners, economic policy has never been better. The current neoliberal/cronyistic climate benefits those at the top with low taxes (corp, income, capital gains), low regulation, and too-big-to-fail esq policy in the back of their minds allowing for more reckless investments.

I think genuine discourse around this topic involves acknowledging the federal govt apparatus as a private profit driving mechanism, and discussing how to transform it into a vehicle of genuine public benefit.

 

[devils advocato]

Thank God. I was feeling guilty about driving my pickup and 2 SUVs. Now I can continue to do so guilt-free. Hell, I may as well buy my wife hairspray cans full of CFCs and start saving up for that private jet.

haha balance in all things. being conscious of your individual carbon footprint is always good, especially when you can find ways to reduce it with minimal impact to your life routine. But the media pushed idea that the onus is on the public, and not the actual culprits, to solve environmental problems falls into neoliberal agenda territory.

 

[Jack Reacheround]

taxing the wealthy, right now without any other govt changes, i dont think would be a good thing. it would raise federal earnings, but most people, wealthy or otherwise, do not like the idea of current or more taxes due to the inefficient nature of how public funds are spent.

Well that’s just too fucking bad for them. I don’t like paying any taxes, but it’s necessary. And the wealthy used to pay much more in taxes until they figured out that they can just pay politicians to rewrite the tax code so they could effectively pay less taxes. Citizens United certainly helped that cause. And before anyone starts with that Laffer Curve bullshit, that is an extremely dubious theory with little evidence to support it. And even if it were true, we are nowhere near the level of taxation that would cause all these billionaires to just denounce their citizenship so they could stop paying any taxes.

We are at a crucial moment here where we can either let income distribution get to third world levels, or we can vote in the people who may be able to reverse that trend. We will probably choose the former though.

 

[devils advocato]

Well that’s just too fucking bad for them. I don’t like paying any taxes, but it’s necessary. And the wealthy used to pay much more in taxes until they figured out that they can just pay politicians to rewrite the tax code so they could effectively pay less taxes. Citizens United certainly helped that cause. And before anyone starts with that Laffer Curve bullshit, that is an extremely dubious theory with little evidence to support it. And even if it were true, we are nowhere near the level of taxation that would cause all these billionaires to just denounce their citizenship so they could stop paying any taxes.

We are at a crucial moment here where we can either let income distribution get to third world levels, or we can vote in the people who may be able to reverse that trend. We will probably choose the former though.

Oh i agree that ultimately our tax system needs to be restored to FDR levels, and close loopholes. economic data correlates those tax rates to economic prosperity in those times.

I was mainly point out that an income tax reform, on its own, wont really bring any significant change because our current spending is wasteful, inefficient, and insider pocket lining.

Whats the point of increasing taxes if we will just continue to spend them on endless war, subsidizing oil, paying isreal and bailing out reckless financial investment markets?

 

[Jack Reacheround]

Oh i agree that ultimately our tax system needs to be restored to FDR levels, and close loopholes. economic data correlates those tax rates to economic prosperity in those times.

I was mainly point out that an income tax reform, on its own, wont really bring any significant change because our current spending is wasteful, inefficient, and insider pocket lining.

Whats the point of increasing taxes if we will just continue to spend them on endless war, subsidizing oil, paying isreal and bailing out reckless financial investment markets?

Can’t argue with that.

 

[TSO]

Good for him but people of his immense wealth really need to be taxed at a higher marginal rate. The middle class is disappearing.

Why? He should pay the same fixed tax that every citizen has to pay. People squeal equality until they want what another man earned

 

[Jack Reacheround]

Why? He should pay the same fixed tax that every citizen has to pay. People squeal equality until they want what another man earned

In he perfect world, yes I agree. But the problem we have now is in no small part because the ultra wealthy have rewritten the tax code, one law at a time, so that they effectively pay less than everyone else. They age abuses the system. They age also done what they could to destroy unionization, which is another big reason we have seen a lot of wave stagnation in recent decades, which in turn has decreased the size of the middle class.

Then there’s the argument to be made that they have benefited more from the public goods taxes pay for, like roads, schools, etc.

And then there is the practical argument. It brings in more revenue for the government. Wealthier people have a decreased marginal propensity to consume because the more money they make, the less a percentage of that they have to spend on necessities. So they save it. That is a leakage out of the economy.

Basically, Andrew Yang is correct. Automation is going to make us produce more than we have ever produced as a society (GDP per capita), while needing less labor than we currently use, which is not much as it is (that’s why lots of blue collar jobs have disappeared). Many people will be out of a job. And there will be no real need for them to work. We already produce enough to feed and clothe everyone in the US. We can either let the ultra wealthy continue to pocket that money, which they are making by using the innovations first created by the government with tax payer dollars, or we can give that money to everyone, like Alaska does with their oil money.

This sounds like a different concept than the taxation concept, but they are really both part of the same issue.

 

[TSO]

In he perfect world, yes I agree. But the problem we have now is in no small part because the ultra wealthy have rewritten the tax code, one law at a time, so that they effectively pay less than everyone else. They age abuses the system. They age also done what they could to destroy unionization, which is another big reason we have seen a lot of wave stagnation in recent decades, which in turn has decreased the size of the middle class.

Then there’s the argument to be made that they have benefited more from the public goods taxes pay for, like roads, schools, etc.

And then there is the practical argument. It brings in more revenue for the government. Wealthier people have a decreased marginal propensity to consume because the more money they make, the less a percentage of that they have to spend on necessities. So they save it. That is a leakage out of the economy.

Basically, Andrew Yang is correct. Automation is going to make us produce more than we have ever produced as a society (GDP per capita), while needing less labor than we currently use, which is not much as it is (that’s why lots of blue collar jobs have disappeared). Many people will be out of a job. And there will be no real need for them to work. We already produce enough to feed and clothe everyone in the US. We can either let the ultra wealthy continue to pocket that money, which they are making by using the innovations first created by the government with tax payer dollars, or we can give that money to everyone, like Alaska does with their oil money.

This sounds like a different concept than the taxation concept, but they are really both part of the same issue.

The super rich pay almost 100% of all income tax that's paid. So...

 

[I Am Legion]

This just in, Bezos is going to adopt every poor black orphan in America. They will all live better than the avg American and eventually drive Amazon Trucks.

 

[MaureenCretis]

Perhaps the cunt should start paying some taxes instead?

 

[Cool Hand Luke]

lol, they already pay 40% taxes.

 

[Jack Reacheround]

The super rich pay almost 100% of all income tax that's paid. So...

Yeah. That’s not really an argument against anything I said.

They need to pay more. The fact that their money is the vast majority of income tax revenue just goes to show how skewed income distribution is. And they are still often times paying less a percentage of their total income than most Americans because of loopholes, tax shelters, recent tax rate reductions including getting rid of the capital gains tax, etc.

 

[dissectingaorticaneurysm]

Why? He should pay the same fixed tax that every citizen has to pay. People squeal equality until they want what another man earned

But they are. The first 40-85k a billionaire earns gets taxed at the same rate as you. Each additional bracket he earns gets taxed at higher rates, but they're all much lower than they're supposed to be.

 

[devils advocato]

I wanted to mention that the wealthy retain their wealth also thru lack of inheritance tax and lack of capital gains tax. They almost target concentrated wealth better, as the direct nature ignores any accounting sleight of hand that gets around income tax.


Also, a main determent of weaker unionized power observed is the lack of capture of advances in technology and productivity by the working class, which have in the past 20 years mostly been captured by the CEO/board of directors. As technology and productivity go up, workers should be working less and getting paid more. Keeping CEO pay in line with avg worker pay is a big step in the right direction. Wealth accumulation is creating a divide between a landlord class with significant shares in major companys/markets, which capture economic gains from those companys through stock payouts and price increases, and a working/renter class. Rent seeking, the act of effectively accumulating wealth without producing any actual additional value to the economy (via providing goods and services), becomes a systemic problem as the CEO/share holders, who do not create the marginal good/service, capture most of the economic benefit.

"Profits are the stolen wages of the working class"

 

[devils advocato]

Also, a big key that hasn't been mentioned yet is financial transparency

We need to remove all the convoluted layers of shell companies. Investigations to legitimacy of foreign parent companies should be the standard practice.

this is assuming the govt is acting in good faith in remaining neutral and fair and protective of the public, which historically has astoundingly not been the case.

 

[TSO]

But they are. The first 40-85k a billionaire earns gets taxed at the same rate as you. Each additional bracket he earns gets taxed at higher rates, but they're all much lower than they're supposed to be.

That's not what I was arguing. I'm saying taxes should be a flat fee regardless of earnings.

 

[TSO]

Yeah. That’s not really an argument against anything I said.

They need to pay more. The fact that their money is the vast majority of income tax revenue just goes to show how skewed income distribution is. And they are still often times paying less a percentage of their total income than most Americans because of loopholes, tax shelters, recent tax rate reductions including getting rid of the capital gains tax, etc.

No, them having more does not entitled you to more of what they have. Stop being greedy