International Oligarchy is not just a Russian phenomenon. It exists right here in the USA.

[deviake]

Too bad you don't get to decide who gets to exist then, I guess.

You'll have to just work harder and stop eyeing other people's money.

Licking the ultra wealthy's nuts just makes you look like a giant cuck. It's almost the most emasculating thing you could do.

And by billionaires not existing, I mean taxing them to the point where they're not billionaires not what you seem to be suggesting. There is no case for someone needing that kind of money nor "earning" it.

 

[ColemanwastheGOAT]

Licking the ultra wealthy's nuts just makes you look like a giant cuck. It's almost the most emasculating thing you could do.

And by billionaires not existing, I mean taxing them to the point where they're not billionaires not what you seem to be suggesting. There is no case for someone needing that kind of money nor "earning" it.

Sitting around all day crying because someone else has more money than you makes you look super cool though lmao

 

[Sinister]

Licking the ultra wealthy's nuts just makes you look like a giant cuck. It's almost the most emasculating thing you could do.

And by billionaires not existing, I mean taxing them to the point where they're not billionaires not what you seem to be suggesting. There is no case for someone needing that kind of money nor "earning" it.

I dont think anyone has a billion physical dollars. Their net worth is all speculative. Based on perceived value. And yet we give them loans, status, and influence based on that perceived valuation, while most of them live off of loans and rarely every sell off stock to generate actual cash. And if they do, that's usually for like half a second to move it back into shares in another corporation.

The notion that one person can lose $50b of their net worth in a day and still be one of the wealthiest people on the planet is comically absurd.

 

[deviake]

Sitting around all day crying because someone else has more money than you makes you look super cool though lmao

One of my managers told me that in one of the last few years (2021 I think?), I worked about 3700 hours. That's not a joke or exaggeration. I stopped doing heavy OT about midway through last year. Don't fuckin' talk to me about hard work.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Basically the voice of the centralist liberal establishment here and surprise surprise he's sticking up for interests of the very wealthy.

OK, but bizarre, irrelevant and dishonest personal attack aside, it is true that we barely tax the middle class in America, and that's why we have fewer spending programs than other developed countries. And it's also true that the wealthy do pay a lot of taxes.

That's true but the same can be said of billionaires. Someone worth $2 billion who loses 99% of their net worth is still in the top .5% but might experience that as deeply stressful.

That's not the kind of stress policy should be worried about unless there's a systemic issue causing that. To the extent that it exists the "might skip a meal" concern is something policy makers should be taking seriously,

Sure. I think policy should be about taking care of material well-being and safety, and stress management and meaning aren't really the scope of gov't.

 

[Sinister]

Licking the ultra wealthy's nuts just makes you look like a giant cuck. It's almost the most emasculating thing you could do.

And by billionaires not existing, I mean taxing them to the point where they're not billionaires not what you seem to be suggesting. There is no case for someone needing that kind of money nor "earning" it.

You see how that clown addresses your points of contention? Its hierarchical brain rot. If you levy literally any criticism of the system, if you speak negatively about the oligarchs (except ya know, the woke ones), the rhetoric automatically becomes:

"Lolz ur mad cuz ur poor."

And if a person with money criticizes the system its becomes:

"What a hypocrite, he can't say nothing cuz he rich lolz!"

They just straight up think wealthy people are inherently more awesome (as long as they're not woke) and poor people should suffer and be grateful for whatever scraps the wealthy toss them.

 

[Jack V Savage]

@Sinister, kind of disappointing you "liked" that guy's troll post. How does it make sense based on what I said (acknowledging the low tax rate of the middle class in America is "sticking up for the interests of the very wealthy"?).

 

[deviake]

I dont think anyone has a billion physical dollars. Their net worth is all speculative. Based on perceived value. And yet we give them loans, status, and influence based on that perceived valuation, while most of them live off of loans and rarely every sell off stock to generate actual cash. And if they do, that's usually for like half a second to move it back into shares in another corporation.

The notion that one person can lose $50b of their net worth in a day and still be one of the wealthiest people on the planet is comically absurd.

They don't, it's mostly shares and other assets, but as you say, they can do a lot with that.

Yeah, that is wild. I don't know if people really fully comprehend how much money even a solitary billion is. People defending stuff like this is wild to me.

 

[Sinister]

OK, but bizarre, irrelevant and dishonest personal attack aside, it is true that we barely tax the middle class in America, and that's why we have fewer spending programs than other developed countries. And it's also true that the wealthy do pay a lot of taxes.

Sure. I think policy should be about taking care of material well-being and safety, and stress management and meaning aren't really the scope of gov't.

The tax rates that effect the wealthy are a fraction of what they were in our most prosperous period. You're talking about percentages, and percentages have changed. Talk about percentages in an honest manner and the working class pays more of a percentage of their income on taxes that effect them.

There's a reason its right wingers that want a heavier tax burden on the working class, to subsidize the actions of the wealthy. All while cutting the benefits that help the middle class, but not corporate subsidies.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Licking the ultra wealthy's nuts just makes you look like a giant cuck. It's almost the most emasculating thing you could do.

And by billionaires not existing, I mean taxing them to the point where they're not billionaires not what you seem to be suggesting. There is no case for someone needing that kind of money nor "earning" it.

The issue is your approach comes off as vindictive.

The point of tax policy is to balance the need for gov't revenue with the drag taxation imposes on the economy, not to punish greed.

 

[Sinister]

@Sinister, kind of disappointing you "liked" that guy's troll post. How does it make sense based on what I said (acknowledging the low tax rate of the middle class in America is "sticking up for the interests of the very wealthy"?).

I answered that above. But I've never been shy about the most vehement disagreement between us being that you seem to put the rose colored glasses on really definitively when discussing capitalism.

 

[Jack V Savage]

The tax rates that effect the wealthy are a fraction of what they were in our most prosperous period.

Well, kind of. But that doesn't have anything to do with what I said. I said that the U.S. barely taxes the middle class, and that's a big part of why we can't afford the kinds of services that a lot of other developed countries have. What I said is true and an important thing for the left to think about (to get programs that leftists want, they have to break that resistance to taxing the middle class rather than playing into it). Why should that subject me to personal attacks?

You're talking about percentages, and percentages have changed. Talk about percentages in an honest manner and the working class pays more of a percentage of their income on taxes that effect them.

That's just not true, though. Look at ETRs up and down the income scale in America. That's very obviously true if we're just talking about income taxes, but it's also still true including all taxation. Maybe the one kernel of truth there is that high earners (top 10%) who aren't at the tippy top have a total burden that is relatively higher than people who are at the top.

There's a reason its right wingers that want a heavier tax burden on the working class, to subsidize the actions of the wealthy. All while cutting the benefits that help the middle class, but not corporate subsidies.

Rightists want to cut income taxes, especially the top rate, because they know that rich people pay most of them. And, yeah, they want to offset that someone with stuff like sales taxes and tariffs. But you're not seeing rightists pushing for higher income taxes on anyone.

 

[deviake]

The issue is your approach comes off as vindictive.

The point of tax policy is to balance the need for gov't revenue with the drag taxation imposes on the economy, not to punish greed.

To be honest I don't care.

It's not even about punishing greed although yes, I've no respect for robber barons, it's that we could get a lot of shit done with wealth redistribution and we have before. Taxing the wealthy, redistribution, more unionization, a universal single payer healthcare system - these are not fantasy.

More wealth inequality than the Guilded Age is not good for society nor the world. It is what it is.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I answered that above. But I've never been shy about the most vehement disagreement between us being that you seem to put the rose colored glasses on really definitively when discussing capitalism.

Sure, vehement disagreement is great. But backslapping toxic trolls like moreorless because of disagreement is out of bounds, IMO.

 

[kflo]

That's true but the same can be said of billionaires. Someone worth $2 billion who loses 99% of their net worth is still in the top .5% but might experience that as deeply stressful.

That's not the kind of stress policy should be worried about unless there's a systemic issue causing that. To the extent that it exists the "might skip a meal" concern is something policy makers should be taking seriously,

A person making $1 million annually is almost certainly able to afford more than that

Point being it’s expensive to live in NY. And making $1m a year means you can afford a $2m apartment, which is still only 2br.

Why? If we can't even tax the top 1% who should we tax?

What does that mean? We DO tax the top 1% at a much higher tax rate.

I'd bet they are a tiny % but could be convinced otherwise with some quality data.

They are not at all a tiny %.

A millionaire in the sense of just barely being worth $1 million sure but if your salary is $1 million/yr then not really. Both can easily afford high end homes, cars, and education for their children in addition to standard luxuries like vacations and high end consumer goods.

Again, it’s an enormous difference. Making $1m does not mean you live in a mansion, drive a Ferrari and shop only at Hermes, gucci and LV. I know this for a fact.

 

[deviake]

Well, kind of. But that doesn't have anything to do with what I said. I said that the U.S. barely taxes the middle class,

I typed, "how much does the us tax the middle class compared to other nations" into my browser and this is what I got:

US Tax on Middle Class Compared to Others​

According to various studies and data, the United States has a relatively high tax burden on its middle-class households compared to other developed nations. Here are some key findings:

• OECD Average: The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) reports that, on average, middle-income households in its member countries (including the US) pay around 23-25% of their income in taxes. In the US, this translates to a tax burden of around 24-26%.
• European Comparison: A study by the Tax Foundation (2020) found that, among 37 OECD countries, the US has the 4th highest tax burden on middle-income households (25.4%), behind only Denmark (27.4%), Sweden (26.4%), and Belgium (25.6%). Countries like Germany, France, and the UK have lower tax burdens on their middle classes.
• Canada and Australia: In contrast, Canada and Australia, both considered economically similar to the US, have lower tax burdens on their middle classes. According to the OECD, Canada’s middle-income households pay around 21.5% of their income in taxes, while Australia’s pay around 20.5%.
• Effective Tax Rates: A study by the Economic Policy Institute (2020) analyzed effective tax rates (taxes as a percentage of income) for middle-income households in the US and other developed economies. The results showed that the US has one of the highest effective tax rates among these countries, with a median effective tax rate of 24.4%. Only Denmark (27.4%) and Sweden (26.4%) had higher effective tax rates.

Key Factors Contributing to the US’s High Tax Burden​

1. Progressive Income Tax: The US has a progressive income tax system, with higher tax rates applying to higher income brackets. This means that middle-class households with higher incomes face higher tax rates.
2. Social Security and Medicare Taxes: The US has a unique system of payroll taxes (Social Security and Medicare) that applies to all earned income, including that of middle-class households.
3. State and Local Taxes: The US has a decentralized tax system, with significant responsibilities for state and local governments. This can lead to higher overall tax burdens, particularly for middle-class households.

In summary, while the exact tax burden on middle-class households varies across nations, the US tends to have a higher tax burden compared to many other developed economies. Factors such as progressive income taxation, Social Security and Medicare taxes, and state and local taxes contribute to this higher burden.

Here's the sources:

Tax Payments by Undocumented Immigrants

Undocumented immigrants paid $96.7 billion in federal, state, and local taxes in 2022. Providing access to work authorization for undocumented immigrants would increase their tax contributions both because their wages would rise and because their rates of tax compliance would increase.

itep.org

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, 2024 Update

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) made many significant, but temporary, changes to the individual income tax code to lower tax rates, widen brackets, increase the standard deduction and child tax credit, and more.

taxfoundation.org

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, 2025 Update

New IRS data shows the US federal income tax system continues to be progressive as high-income taxpayers pay the highest average income tax rates. Average tax rates for all income groups remain lower after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA).

taxfoundation.org

How the American middle class has changed in the past five decades

The share of adults who live in middle-class households fell from 61% in 1971 to 50% in 2021, according to a new analysis.

www.pewresearch.org

I do remember reading that Denmark's citizens pay a lot in taxes, over 40% if I recall correctly, but their social welfare is FAR more robust than ours from my understanding.

 

[Sinister]

The issue is your approach comes off as vindictive.

The point of tax policy is to balance the need for gov't revenue with the drag taxation imposes on the economy, not to punish greed.

We're in a thread discussing oligarchy, something which many Americans are in direct threat of the detrimental effects of...if not all of us.

There's going to be some vindictiveness. It's pretty vindictive when people who amass wealth multiple generations could never finish spending duck taxes, or outright leverage the Government to not require them of their socioeconomic class.

 

[deviake]

I'll note that I already posted a video of Warren Buffet saying he pays less taxes than his staff, about 50% less as a percentage. And yes, I know that's because of how capital gains are taxed.

Elon Musk contributed $277 million to Trump's campaign. Yes, this is a problem.

 

[Islam Imamate]

To be honest I don't care.

It's not even about punishing greed although yes, I've no respect for robber barons, it's that we could get a lot of shit done with wealth redistribution and we have before. Taxing the wealthy, redistribution, more unionization, a universal single payer healthcare system - these are not fantasy.

More wealth inequality than the Guilded Age is not good for society nor the world. It is what it is.

A lot of the ambitious programs proposed would require taxing the middle class. Not saying I'm necessarily against that but we have to be honest about it.

Point being it’s expensive to live in NY. And making $1m a year means you can afford a $2m apartment, which is still only 2br.

It's expensive because it's the greatest city in the world, living there is itself a luxury.

To say that someone who makes $1m/yr can barely afford to live in NYC strikes me as ludicrous.

What does that mean? We DO tax the top 1% at a much higher tax rate.

Yes and that's good. You disagree and think that's bad.

They are not at all a tiny %.

What makes you say that?

Again, it’s an enormous difference. Making $1m does not mean you live in a mansion, drive a Ferrari and shop only at Hermes, gucci and LV. I know this for a fact.

It's not really an enormous difference. The more money you make, the less each additional dollar contributes to your material well being. A person making $1m/yr has achieved more or less the ceiling of material well being and safety.

 

[Fox by the Sea]

I dont think anyone has a billion physical dollars.

physical dollars are a very bad investment. i'd be shocked if guys like elon or zuckerberg or bezos have even a few tens of millions of physical cash. you only find shit like that in the russian world or china or the middle east where i am sure there are billionaires in actual physical cash.