Yes, It's Time to Tax the Rich

It’s a classic infrastructure argument. The rich rely on public roads, a literal space program, a subsidized workforce, and a legal system to protect their assets. If they’re the primary beneficiaries of the "operating system" of the country, it only makes sense that they’d pay the highest licensing fee to keep it running.

If one looks at how much wealth the elite have accumulated compared to the middle class, it is clear that a correction needs to be made. The economy can not sustain the top 3% siphoning off so much money that the rest struggle on a day to day basis. It is undeniable that the system is rigged to help the extremely wealthy more than the average family. A total replacement of the tax system needs to happen. Close all corporate tax dodges. Eliminate the way a company or person can suffer a big loss one year and get a pass on taxes for many years after. Implement a new corporate tax on all organizations (even not for profits) where for every dollar they pay someone over $1M the company must pay $1 in taxes that can’t be offset by anything else. When the compensation hits $5M then make it $5 for every dollar paid. Continue that logic for every $5M increase. Organizations look at Return On Investment (ROI) on big spend projects every day. Apply the same principle to compensation.

Imagine being such an a****** that you benefit greatly from a system but then don’t want to pay back into it in return. “Greed is good” has destroyed this f****** country.

We also need a *lot* more regulation on what has become a load of gambling and scams that somehow value companies that produce nothing at billions of dollars. The Trashfuture podcast just did an episode on Delve, this company that claims their AI agent will file all of your complicated compliance paperwork (it doesn't) and patch all security holes in your severs (it doesn't), yet it's worth so much stupid money. People who actually *make* and *do* things are having their economic wealth hijacked by these techbro fictions.

They do contribute the most

They do. Top 1% pays more than Canada's, top 10%, same, top 20% evens out. Over half the nation doesn't get federally taxed at all and look up the per student budgets in "progressive" cities vs results. Not pretty. We also spend more per child for education, healthcare and food assistance than almost any nation on the planet, and the ones that spend more are slightly higher. This isn't a "need more money" problem, we have a need better management one. There is also an expectation w/o production issue, but that's probably an effect, not the cause.

Realistically? The bottom to fall out on the economy, another Great Depression type situation, and years of mass unemployment until the public consciousness finally wakes up to the realization that the little guy has been getting fleeced since the New Deal started getting ripped apart in the 80s, and conservative fiscal policies are almost entirely to blame for being here. But, so long as they keep the people sufficiently fed, entertained, and stupid, all of this will continue to get worse until all of the power is concentrated in the hands of fewer and fewer people. Americans have been consistently voting for a Cyberpunk/Bladerunner dystopian future for decades, whether they realize it or not. And it's looking increasingly likely that they'll get it.

Politicians not being bought by lobbyists for big companies that influence them to reject taxes on the rich. Bernie is one. AOC I think is another. I have no idea who else is for it.

To not elect republicans. Biden and democrats raised taxes on billionaires. Harris wanted to raise them even more but then we fired all the democrats.

Waiting for a government bought and paid for by them.

For egocentric oligarchs to be taken by time. But then we'll have to wait for their indoctrinated kids and friends too, and then their indoctrinated kids and friends. We'll have this conversation again next century

They'll add some new brackets that impact high earners and the wealthy and lower-middle class will cheer that as a win while the problem remains.

This is also true. Rich people don't go to jail for the most part. Chrisley and Martha Stewart being the lone exceptions. Fine, Madoff. But 99% of them just buy their way free

Taxes are the concession

Nice fantasy

Especially when rich people like Bezos and Steve Ballmer use deductions and income tax loopholes to pay nothing in taxes

I have no problem with billionaires in certain circumstances. If you started a company, it took off and your shares are worth billions now good for you. However, I do think they need taxed more in a way that doesn't just shift their ownership into the hands of institutional investors and encourages private ownership. Something along the lines of the following: 1. Change how gains are realized. For example, if you use your stock as collateral on a loan or probably certain other circumstances the gains should be realized at that point and fully taxed. If someone like Gabe Newell wants to maintain control of the company they founded that is now worth billions of dollars, great for them. If they want to use shares on that company that were originally worth $100,000 as $1,000,000,000 of collateral to buy another company then that $999,900,000 has now been realized. 2. Eliminate the step up in basis except for certain items. Ex: Allow it for a single family home per inheritor. Potentially completely eliminate the estate tax system in exchange since capital gains should now apply to the entire estate if the inheritors sell the property. If they want to keep a family owned farm with 10,000 acres in the family, great for them. If they were planning on using the step up in basis to avoid paying taxes on the land that has gone up in value 100x when they sold it then too bad. 3. This may already be a thing, but if primary residence / taxing authority is moved outside of the country then gains on stock should be realized, etc. at that point. No living in country, earning billions, then moving away so you don't have to pay capital gains tax or only have to pay it on the original value. 4. Probably other things I am missing What I don't support is taxing unrealized gains / "wealth taxes" because it seems like a very fast way to turn private ownership or individual shareholders into institutional investor ownership.

Except almost no one was paying anything close to 90% in the 50s' because the tax code was full of deductions and shelters that kept most high earners out of those brackets. What matters is the effective rate, and those ended up being much closer to today’s levels than the headline number suggests.

They're not welcome in our social club no more.

It’s common dreams so their only job is to find ways to shit on democrats

One of the most frustrating things is how MAGA seems to pine for the 1950s America while ignoring that a lot of what drove the economy back then was incredibly high tax rates. There was essentially a maximum income. In 1950 anyone earning over $200k (about $2 million in today money) was assessed a 91% tax rate. This essentially worked as a soft cap on wages, as increasing your on-paper salary from 200k to 300k would only increase your take home pay by 9k. Additionally the corporate tax rate got up to 45%. Businesses were incentivized to spend their money on their employees, on infrastructure, on growth, because otherwise it disappeared as taxes. Then in the 80s Reagan came in and fucked everything and we've been suffering ever since.

I can't tell you how many times, back in the 1990s, I heard Rush Limbaugh say "If you took all the money away from rich people and gave it all to poor people, the (formerly) rich people will just be rich again in a few years and the poor people will be poor again." The implication being that it's moral failings that are making poor people poor, and not an economy and tax system that's slanted towards rich people to the detriment of everybody else. So then... let's do it. If it would just be a speedbump in their line going up, then let's do that. Even if poor people just blow all the money on things like houses and appliances and cars and paying off student loans - their lives end up markedly better. Even if they don't have a stack of cash after a year. And if people with moral failings blow it all on drugs and gambling... well, they'll be poor again. And you can let them starve in a gutter confident that their troubles really are moral failings, and not just that we're at the end of the Monolpoly game where the five losers flip the board and set the w***** adrift on an iceberg.

100% over 1bil, and I can be convinced to go even lower than 1bil.

You sound like my fellow Wyomingites. The ones who think it's unfair to use per capita statistics to say we have crime problems because California has more total crime events. Also, BS. Half of Americans don't pay income taxes? Half of Americans make less than a couple grand a year? I don't cut a check to the IRS once a year because my withholdings cover my tax burden. So I don't pay when tax time comes. And I'm guessing you count me in that 50% because of that.

Now what about corporate taxes? Or wealth taxes?

The most narrow definition of "rich" would certainly include those who can ensure their own financial stability without having to work to earn an income. That is, they can live comfortably by simply collecting dividends, interest, and other property rents. More broad definitions may be entirely valid.

You’re not and you never will be, don’t worry about it.

Yes. You tax to pay the bills and you tax to keep everyone in the same ballpark. The divide between rich and poor keeps growing. It doesn't help anything. The tax should be incredibly progressive.

"Get out and vote like your future depends on it". Isn't that always the case?