@averagejoe1 saidYes that's exactly what I'm suggesting.
And what does this mean? You imply, anyway, that hard-earned income should not be taxed? That, only money earned by people who do not earn it by 'hard' work should be taxed?
This is interesting.
@wildgrass saidTo respond to the last sentence......
Wealth is a weird thing. I've never had it, but when you look at the stock market and real estate making 30% gains year over year you can have a modest inheritance that came from your plantation-owning great-grandfather of $200,000 that makes more in income than a minimum wage job.
While I disagree with taxation of hard-earned income (you know, working for a living) the ...[text shortened]... abor still exists in our country and should be taxed accordingly.
Tax the wealth, not the income.
That tends to demonize wealth.
We have a left wing party here in Canada that thinks that people should not be wealthy.
That leads to a culture of taxation where a government becomes very good at collecting taxes but is lacking in ideas on what to do with the money.
As a child, I loved watching those old Robin Hood TV shows.
I recall scenes where Robin opened a bag of gold coins he had stolen from the Sheriff of Nottingham and tossed them in to the adoring crowd in the village square.
This was usually where the show faded to black.
To add my own bit of humor.........
If they had run the cameras for another 10-15 minutes, one would see that 80% of the coins would have been picked up by 20% of the people.
Such is the nature of humanity.
(Of course I'm making that part up)
Humanity works that way. Wealth concentrates by nature.
@mghrn55 saidElon Musk has zero income and so paid zero federal income taxes yet he is the richest man on the planet. His wealth is based on his ownership of Tesla stock. He goes to a bank and leverages that nontaxable wealth to get loans to buy whatever he wants to personally own. The not so rich do the same think with equity lines of credit on based on the increased value of their home. Yes, Elon must pay interest to the bank. It seems to me when nontaxable wealth reaches a certain level, it should be taxed. Amazon, the company Musk founded which is worth billions, paid no federal taxes in 2020, probably its best year due to the pandemic. Should this be legal? I think not. If you do not like the way those you elect spend your taxes, you are free to vote them out of office in a democracy. You cannot vote Elon out of his position. It's wonderful when people donate to charitable causes. Countries should not depend on the kindness of the rich to provide essential services and opportunities for its tax paying citizens.
@mghrn55
As a side note...... Elon Musk was recently coaxed by someone in the UN to donate 2% of his wealth to eradicate hunger.
His response ???
Sure I'll do it !!
Open your books. Let's see your accounting.
@kevcvs57 saidYou fellers are unbelievable. Do y'all dream about rich people?
Very easy to do with some corps and companies that thrived out of and during the slave trade. I don’t see why there shouldn’t be an extra corporate tax on them. The profits from the slave trade and the sectors that utilised slavery are still sloshing about the economy of all western nations today.
1 edit
@phranny saidYes, more evidence, by this post, that you do dwell on the rich. Not to sound callous, but if Musk gives charitables or not, what in the WORLD does that have to do with you, or me? He takes his money, provides products, services, jobs, hopefully charitables, and then minds his own business. Builds more business. His success makes him more successful, and makes the nation successful. Why the hyena mode?
Elon Musk has zero income and so paid zero federal income taxes yet he is the richest man on the planet. His wealth is based on his ownership of Tesla stock. He goes to a bank and leverages that nontaxable wealth to get loans to buy whatever he wants to personally own. The not so rich do the same think with equity lines of credit on based on the increased value of their home ...[text shortened]... he kindness of the rich to provide essential services and opportunities for its tax paying citizens.
If I punish my child for building the best 2-room treehouse, beating out his friends' treehouses, {Son!! You should not get way ahead of these boys, Tear It Down!}, I suspect that he will just have a hang-down sadness, and just stop building treehouses.........or building anything. He will end up a loser. He will quit. He could have been a leader of the neighbor boys, teach them how to get ahead....
Am I boring you fellers.....I fear that I am.
Can you all,, with a straight face, say that you do NOT want to punish the successful?
@averagejoe1 saidI'm having a hard enough time trying to read your posts with a straight face. 🤣🤣
Yes, more evidence, by this post, that you do dwell on the rich. Not to sound callous, but if Musk gives charitables or not, what in the WORLD does that have to do with you, or me? He takes his money, provides products, services, jobs, hopefully charitables, and then minds his own business. Builds more business. His success makes him more successful, and makes the nation ...[text shortened]... t I am.
Can you all,, with a straight face, say that you do NOT want to punish the successful?
1 edit
@mghrn55 saidAre you having a hard enough time saying that the rich should be punished for their success. And, if we get as strong as, say, AOC, would get, say 90%, do you think that would all dovetail into our economic society.....assuming the Musks of the world are still here? Scotland would love to have him.
I'm having a hard enough time trying to read your posts with a straight face. 🤣🤣
This paragraph has so much in it that you can not likely answer, so, take a pass.
1 edit
@AverageJoe1 asking Musk and others who are wealthy but pay zero taxes to pay some taxes is not tearing them down. I do not see how it is unfair or anti the wealthy to expect them to pay taxes. The not so rich are paying for the infrastructure that enables Musk and others to create great wealth.
1 edit
@phranny saidYou are correct, I of course know the tax law is screwed up. I know trump is screwed up. I am not so far off course. But, we conservatives keep hearing 'fair share', or 'tax the rich', but no one ever says how much. That is all we are asking.
@AverageJoe1 asking Musk and others who are wealthy but pay zero taxes to pay some taxes is not tearing them down. I do not see how it is unfair or anti the wealthy to expect them to pay taxes. The not so rich are paying for the infrastructure that enables Musk and others to create great wealth.
Problem is, if you hit them for 95%, which you certainly would do, the return would cover about 29 hours of running this country. So we are asking for a reasonable answer instead of alll the lib screaming about tax the rich. How much? Would it do any good? Or would it better to let them succeed, so that our society will have real (not govt...brrrrrrr) jobs created? Does it not stand to reason,'''''For want of a horseshoe, the battle was lost'? Kill off one billionaire, and forsake everyone who was working for him??? He takes his Remington Arms plant to Canada, whatever? Do you think he will just sit there? This is realism of which I speak, not idealism, of which you speak.
Give the successful billionaire (thanks, Bezos, I just got a pkg) his due, leave him alone, and let us raise up our society. Do we not need Jeff Bezos? (Speaking hypothetically or course, he does not 'own' Amazon.)
@mghrn55 saidWe tax income but don't demonize it. We tax property but don't demonize it. Taxation is not demonization. If anything I feel like tax dollars for property going to local schools and infrastructure is contributing to a collective interest in where your taxes are going and funding.
To respond to the last sentence......
That tends to demonize wealth.
We have a left wing party here in Canada that thinks that people should not be wealthy.
That leads to a culture of taxation where a government becomes very good at collecting taxes but is lacking in ideas on what to do with the money.
As a child, I loved watching those old Robin Hood TV shows.
I recal ...[text shortened]... ity.
(Of course I'm making that part up)
Humanity works that way. Wealth concentrates by nature.
Here you have a laborer with a great work ethic building retaining walls in the 100 degree heat for $400 (with 10% going to Uncle Sam) and the person who owned that property and swam in the pool all day made $4,000 untaxed income from his plantation-derived inheritance in the stock market.
The idea that income is taxed but wealth isn't taxed is contributing to wealth demonization. There's no reason why wealth can't be taxed analogous to property as a contribution to social programs and safety nets that keep folks out of extreme poverty.
@averagejoe1 saidWhy is property taxed but not wealth?
Are you having a hard enough time saying that the rich should be punished for their success. And, if we get as strong as, say, AOC, would get, say 90%, do you think that would all dovetail into our economic society.....assuming the Musks of the world are still here? Scotland would love to have him.
This paragraph has so much in it that you can not likely answer, so, take a pass.
@averagejoe1 saidI'm not suggesting that at all. I'm suggesting that we tax wealth.
Interesting, Wildgrass. To do some research, discover all monies that were/are derived from the wealth of plantation owners who owned slaves. And, then, set up a commission to tax the present heirs on their present wealth from such inheritance.
Yes, let us set aside other projects and get on this. Geez 'O Petey. How many auditors should be hired?
Wealth contributes absolutely nothing to the economy. It's only when that wealth is spent that it has an impact. Then what? Sales tax. We tax it.
The current tax system encourages wealth hoarding, discourages work and property investment. Taxing wealth would flip the equation, and rather than income tax that affects everyone it would only affect a few individuals. Not a punishment, as you seem to enjoy saying, because those individuals would still have benefitted from a lower income tax rate along their rise to super-yacht status.
@averagejoe1 saidYou're saying our current system that punishes (taxes) the working class and small business but rewards (does not tax) those that already have a ton of money is a good one?
Yes, more evidence, by this post, that you do dwell on the rich. Not to sound callous, but if Musk gives charitables or not, what in the WORLD does that have to do with you, or me? He takes his money, provides products, services, jobs, hopefully charitables, and then minds his own business. Builds more business. His success makes him more successful, and makes the nation ...[text shortened]... t I am.
Can you all,, with a straight face, say that you do NOT want to punish the successful?