• soba@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    They used to push for a flat tax where everyone, billionaires and minimum wage workers alike, would pay the same rate. They did one better and now billionaires pay a lower rate than everyone else. Steve Forbes was an idiot. They managed to do it far better than he could have ever imagined when he ran for President in the 90’s. Fucking nepo babies…

    • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Flat tax is an awful idea.

      Say they make it 10%

      When you make $30k a year, $3,000 has a much higer impact on your finances than someone who makes $3,000,000 and pays $300,000 in taxes. You keep $27,000, they keep $2,700,000. You lose a mortgage payment and a car payment. They have to buy a slightly smaller yacht.

      On top of that, as already mentioned, their wealth comes from stocks and other non-wages income. Bezos famously only took $81,000 (I think?) in actual pay for many years, yet he’s one of the richest people on the planet. You think $8,100 in taxes is good enough for one of the richest people while you pay $3k out of your $30k?

      Flat tax is a bad idea, and the only ones who want it are the wealthy and those who don’t understand that the wealthy could take whatever salary they want to pay as little tax as possible and just live off stocks, loans, which is how they already avoid paying taxes.

      • Vandals_handle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I agree that flat tax is unfair, but flat tax with no deductions would be better than current inverted scale where rich pay smaller percentage.

          • Vandals_handle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            If flat tax would apply evenly to all sources, investment sales taxed at same rate as wages. No deductions. How would this not be fairer than the US current tax scheme?

            • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              You didn’t read what I said?

              If a billionaire can take a salary of $80k at the hypothetical 10% tax and pay $8k tax while an IT professional making $200k has to pay $20k how is that fair? The billionaire takes money from capital gains (lower taxes) because they pay themselves in stock and funds, and/or uses loans (zero tax on loans- you know that, right?), puts his yacht under a shell company so no personal taxes on that, probably uses it for business trips so it’s use can be written off partially…and buys whatever the hell he/she wants. But pays less tax than the IT professional.

              So you’re saying that’s just fine. That’s exactly how a flat tax works. That’s how rich people pay less than regular people.

              • Vandals_handle@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                No I do not think it’s fine. I did read what you said, but from your reply it’s obvious you didn’t read what I said.

                I said if “apply evenly to all sources, investment sales taxed at same rate as wages” From your reply “billionaire takes money from capital gains (lower taxes)”. That’s not the same rate is it.

                I said "No deductions."From your reply “so its use can be written off partially” That’s a deduction isn’t it.

                The current system where rich pay a lower tax rate because they can take advantage of things like capital gains and deductions is not fair or equitable. A flat rate system that eliminated things like capital gains and deductions would not be fair, but it would be fairer because it keep the millionaire mfrom paying a lower rate than the poor (or the software engineer).

                Graduated tax that eliminated things like capital gains and deductions would be fairer still. Also gift exemption, inheritance exemption and other carveouts that unduly favor the wealthy should at least be be adjusted if not outright eliminated.

                • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Because a business use of a yacht (hypothetically) is not income. You get your yacht but no worries about it being taxed as income. You also completely skipped loans, loans are not income and therefore not taxable under your scheme, and portfolio loans are a huge part of how the wealthy get spending money. Now before you reiterate yet again you said all sources I want you to think a minute that these taxes are going to be applied to you, too. Your 401k. That’s investment. Your home loan. You want to tax that? How about your car and student loans. More taxes? Still sound right? Do you want to make carve outs for those things? That sounds suspiciously like writeoffs or “deductions”.

                  We could sit here all day and quibble over what is and isn’t income, but at the end of the day you’re going to end up with exceptions, or “deductions”, and if you’re going to say “well, nobody making under ‘x’ amount should be taxed on a 401k…” and now we’re right back where we started with a rich person making less than ‘x’.

                  Flat taxes are not going to work.

                  They are not fair.

                  You need a wealth tax and you need a tax that attaches itself to the vehicles used by the wealthy to get money that is under- or not taxed. Tax personal or portfolio loans over 100,000 not used for housing, medical care, or education. Stock options issued in lieu of or along with salary as compensation should be taxed as income when sold. Do not tax individual personal retirement accounts that deliver less than “x” income or payout to persons of retirement age. This is how you tax wealth and protect the normal persons. Not 10% of the $81k salary the billionaire gives himself.

      • breetai@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Have a flat tax based on brackets.

        5% for x income 10% for x income Top out at 30-40%

        Problem solved

        • lewdian69@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I think you forgot the /s or some people won’t get it. Also it should go back to topping out at 90%

          • breetai@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            A 30% flax tax is higher than the mythical 90%.

            The 90% range had so many deductions only 1 person hit it and even then it’s only on the income that exceeds that limit.

            A 30% flat tax with no deductions is much more brutal to income but it’s fair.

            • lewdian69@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              Ahhh you aren’t using the current definition of “flat tax”. Flat tax is a single rate across all incomes. It still includes deductions, exemptions, credits etc.

              I don’t know the correct term for “no deductions tax”. No exceptions? Non adjustable?

              Your bracket concept is how it works now.

              • breetai@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                Flat means no deductions and an equal pay. It can still be done against brackets and be a flat tax.

                No brackets work with credits and deductions. Someone with 100k in income could pay zero in taxes. A flat tax makes them pay taxes by removing deductions.

                Personally I’d rather see a consumption tax but that freaks most people out.

                • lewdian69@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  “A flat tax is a tax with a single rate on the taxable amount, after accounting for any deductions or exemptions from the tax base. It is not necessarily a fully proportional tax.” Wikipedia

  • Eol@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    What the MSM considers normal regular American I consider upperclass. What they consider poor I consider normal. What they consider homeless is actually the new poor.

    • Regrettable_incident@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah, a whole lot of working folks are one missed paycheck from homelessness. I’m old enough to remember that it wasn’t always like this, if you were working you didn’t have nearly so much anxiety and exhaustion, you could afford to look after a kid or have the occasional holiday, maybe own a home. Not anymore. The rich are getting richer though.

      • Fire Witch@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’ve watched some of my friends struggle with homelessness. They are amazing people with brilliant minds, but just got unlucky while working a dead end job. It’s fucking terrible.

        • Regrettable_incident@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yeah, it’s really messed up. And getting worse. I’m just not sure how we change it without violence though. Voting doesn’t fucking help. And, like me, most of the people who are hurting don’t want violent change. Rightly, because like capitalism, revolution hurts a lot of people. But it feels like society is a balloon and the rich are squeezing it and wondering when it’ll pop. It’s hard to predict what’s gonna happen but based on the way things have been I’d say worse.

          • twelve20two @slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            A general, mass strike would probably never happen. But it should. More strikes in general. I feel like there are still things to try before going full Joker

      • tearsintherain@leminal.space
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Do not forget Bill Clinton, he played a huge role. Essentially fulfilling republican dreams of deregulation by joining hands with them. It’s when the Democratic party embraced corporate interests and neoliberalism. Clinton deregulated banking (see Glass-Steagall) which led to the financial crisis and banking/finance today.

      • madcaesar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Biden didn’t fix 40 years of Republican corruption in 3 years therefore he’s just as guilty, and I’m voting Republican!!! - Average American moron voter

        • Cataphract@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          commenter wasn’t even mentioning time frames involving Biden, but way to play the victim card average democrat playbook

      • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        This is something Warren Buffet has been complaining about for years. It’s not exactly a new development.

        • jeffw@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          He’s talked about not paying his fair share. I don’t recall him ever saying “billionaires literally pay a lower effective tax rate”.

            • jeffw@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              Idk, I’m not seeing anything there that he acknowledged he paid a lower rate than the average American. He was just contrasting himself with one person. He didn’t say “rich people have a lower effective tax rate than everyone else”. He just says “I have a lower tax rate than this one other person”.

    • Son_of_dad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I wish people would say this and mean it. I’m waiting. I think we should actually eat one billionaire to make a point. I’m vegetarian but I’ll take a bite to prove my commitment.

      • Eol@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        It’s kind of a naive idea though. I used to think it was possible. They will literally just kill us or actively make us poor/homeless/antisocial and make some sort of loophole to make it legal and justified. I wish I didn’t think it was game over for the nation but I think it’s actually a lost cause. And any time I try to talk to someone in hopes they can influence me otherwise they just prove my point and make me want to give up more. It’s like they create a division on purpose, or the benefit of the doubt is that they are too naive or emotional to understand what they are actually doing which is creating more of the people they claim to oppose.

        It’s like a natural force that keeps war in constant motion. Nobody is allowed to just “be”. Doesn’t matter if they contribute to society or not. People are disposable to groups and nations. It’s an industry. Probably the one that maintains the backbone or foundation of each group/nation/force.

        • UNY0N@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          This is exactly what they want you to think. But the republican party is almost at the point where they can’t win a national election even WITH all thier gerrymandering and misinformation. 2024 may be the last election where they even stand a chance.

          The ultra-rich want you to believe that it’s hopeless, but it is far from it. Their only options now are to create a dictatorship or give up political power to the left, who (however flawed) actually represent the people.

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          When I watched the movie “V for Vendetta” as a kid, I thought it was inspiring and dramatic.

          Now I see it as ridiculous. At the end, when the protesters are facing the armed soldiers? And they just stand down? Yeah, that would not happen. There would be a bunch of bullet-riddled corpses in masks. And then the next day, the executions would begin.

      • NJSpradlin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s the principle of the matter. I’m not a cannibal, but gods damn it. I’d take a fucking slice of Musk, Bezos, or Zuckerberg bacon just out of spite. Also, redistribute their wealth for good measure.

  • jaemo@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Not even our closest cousins would tolerate a member that hoarded bananas so. No, it would be fangs, and ripping and all sorts of face-eating, and a whole bunch of other stuff we should be taking inspiration from.

  • streetfestival@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Great article. Nice to see an economist doing such important work. I don’t really understand finances. I snipped the parts of the article that helped me understand the finding/headling. There’s a great chart in the article of taxation differences since the 1960s too - staggering! Plutocracy in action!

    Published in The New York Times with the headline “It’s Time to Tax the Billionaires,” Zucman’s analysis notes that billionaires pay so little in taxes relative to their vast fortunes because they “live off their wealth”—mostly in the form of stock holdings—rather than wages and salaries.

    Stock gains aren’t currently taxed in the U.S. until the underlying asset is sold, leaving billionaires like Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and Tesla CEO Elon Musk—a pair frequently competing to be the single richest man on the planet—with very little taxable income.

    “But they can still make eye-popping purchases by borrowing against their assets,” Zucman noted. “Mr. Musk, for example, used his shares in Tesla as collateral to rustle up around $13 billion in tax-free loans to put toward his acquisition of Twitter.”

    • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      We can tax registered securities. Stock holdings. We can take 5% or 50% of all outstanding shares, each and every year, and transfer them to IRS liquidators to be resold in small lots over time. We can exempt the first $10 million held by a natural person, and establish a progressive tax schedule that causes the tax rate to exceed average gains when holding more than $100 million.

  • Cowbee@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Taxing billionaires will just get rolled back, the problem is Capitalism itself.

    Collectivize the Means of Production.