- Joined
- 20 Oct 06
- Moves
- 11003
Warren Buffett once noted that he pays less in taxes than his own secretary, whic is morally wrong. Here's how it should work:
Let the engine of capitalism roar and then have the winners compensate the losers. By taking care of those who lose out in the free-market melee, the winners ensure the losers won’t want to destroy the system. What’s more, taxing the wealthy is popular, with a majority of Americans telling pollsters that they think the wealthy don’t pay their fair share. And economists have endorsed it, pointing out that the wealthy have benefited disproportionately from the economic growth of the last several decades, that taxes on the wealthy prevent unproductive dynasties from forming, and that the things those tax revenues are spent on, from child care to clean energy, can benefit the economy.
Why can't we be better?
Because rich people have power and influence. They own the media and donate lots of money to influence politicians and lobby congress. Members of congress and the president are themselves rich and therefore easily susceptible to these arguments.
The answer? Vote them all out. The 1% are... well... 1%. They command almost all the power of influence but they still only get one vote.
RAISE TAXES ON THE RICH!
@wildgrass saidIt's hard because we have politicians with no balls, elected by voters with no brains.
Warren Buffett once noted that he pays less in taxes than his own secretary, whic is morally wrong. Here's how it should work:
[quote]Let the engine of capitalism roar and then have the winners compensate the losers. By taking care of those who lose out in the free-market melee, the winners ensure the losers won’t want to destroy the system. What’s more, taxing the wealthy ...[text shortened]... mand almost all the power of influence but they still only get one vote.
RAISE TAXES ON THE RICH!
@wildgrass saidIt's hard to get any candidates who aren't rich. Campaigns cost a lot money and time that regular people don't have.
The answer? Vote them all out. The 1% are... well... 1%. They command almost all the power of influence but they still only get one vote.
@wildgrass saidThe politicians would ruin that good idea in a heartbeat. Tax the rich for the poor and they'll use the money to blow up Izbicistan.
Warren Buffett once noted that he pays less in taxes than his own secretary, whic is morally wrong. Here's how it should work:
[quote]Let the engine of capitalism roar and then have the winners compensate the losers. By taking care of those who lose out in the free-market melee, the winners ensure the losers won’t want to destroy the system. What’s more, taxing the wealthy ...[text shortened]... mand almost all the power of influence but they still only get one vote.
RAISE TAXES ON THE RICH!
Another major problem is the theft of government funds by the people who run these funded agencies.
corruption to the nth degree.
@wildgrass
The 18th century ushered in the separation of Church and state. People said it would never work, that civilization would collapse. People died to make it work. France needed five republics to make it work.
The 21st century must work a similarly difficult paradigm shift. Money must be separated from power. People will say it will never work, that the economy will collapse. People will probably die making it work. It may require more than one revolution.
Here's how bad it was in 2024:
https://www.tpr.org/news/2024-02-25/three-west-texas-billionaires-are-pushing-texas-to-the-far-right
It's getting worse. Fewer and fewer people are dominating more and more of the levers of power. Voting ain't nearly enough to get this under control. Money controls far more than politicians. Money controls television and print media, money controls social media, money controls data, money controls the voting machines and vote districting. The 1% will do literally anything--including burn democracy to the ground--to stay in power.
@Suzianne saidIn the UK the argument goes that if you tax the rich they up - sticks and move to another country, and pay no UK taxes at all, and this is indeed happening. In an 'advanced' capitalist society, wealth becomes a compound thing; the richer you are, the richer you will become, never more so than now. The disparity between rich and poor becomes greater. The UK now has a Prime Minister who is trying to return the country to a more egalitarian state, which bucks the trend of most of Europe, which is moving rightwards, as the countries disappear down a rabbit - hole of national debt, which is costing a hell of a lot of money to service.
It's hard because we have politicians with no balls, elected by voters with no brains.
The capitalist system is failing, but the momentum is it seems unstoppable, meanwhile the world order is changing, in a way that is dangerous to all, and I'm staying in Indonesia....
I could go on, but that is not in the nature of public forums, so quick and dirty will have to do, but right now taxing the rich is anathema to many countries, it's every person for themselves and the devil take the hindmost, and the way things are going, he/she (however one may see the devil) could end up taking us all.
- Joined
- 20 Oct 06
- Moves
- 11003
@Earl-of-Trumps saidTaxing the rich isn't going to give the government any more money. It will shift the tax burden to those who can actually afford it.
The politicians would ruin that good idea in a heartbeat. Tax the rich for the poor and they'll use the money to blow up Izbicistan.
Another major problem is the theft of government funds by the people who run these funded agencies.
corruption to the nth degree.
Government spending SHOULD be linked directly to taxation, but modern times has the two things completely decoupled.
- Joined
- 20 Oct 06
- Moves
- 11003
@moonbus saidThe founding fathers of America also talked and wrote A LOT about the extreme dangers to government if the wealthy get to make all the decisions. They saw that play out with monarchical societies, and this was one of the key things they tried to prevent when setting up our government.
@wildgrass
The 18th century ushered in the separation of Church and state. People said it would never work, that civilization would collapse. People died to make it work. France needed five republics to make it work.
The 21st century must work a similarly difficult paradigm shift. Money must be separated from power. People will say it will never work, that the economy w ...[text shortened]... icting. The 1% will do literally anything--including burn democracy to the ground--to stay in power.
So, why then, are the constitutionalists in favor of lowering taxes on the rich?
@wildgrass saidPunish the successful!!!
Warren Buffett once noted that he pays less in taxes than his own secretary, whic is morally wrong. Here's how it should work:
[quote]Let the engine of capitalism roar and then have the winners compensate the losers. By taking care of those who lose out in the free-market melee, the winners ensure the losers won’t want to destroy the system. What’s more, taxing the wealthy ...[text shortened]... mand almost all the power of influence but they still only get one vote.
RAISE TAXES ON THE RICH!
However, we are all waiting on your explaining how being successful and making more money than the next guy is immoral.
@wildgrass saidI agree that we should take care of the 50M people who are struggling, but I think there’s more to this conversation than simply saying the wealthy should pay more in taxes. What really matters is whether the system is fair, whether people have a genuine opportunity to succeed, and whether the money collected is actually being used wisely.
Warren Buffett once noted that he pays less in taxes than his own secretary, whic is morally wrong. Here's how it should work:
[quote]Let the engine of capitalism roar and then have the winners compensate the losers. By taking care of those who lose out in the free-market melee, the winners ensure the losers won’t want to destroy the system. What’s more, taxing the wealthy ...[text shortened]... mand almost all the power of influence but they still only get one vote.
RAISE TAXES ON THE RICH!
But I have a question for you: When you say, “Why can’t we be better?” what exactly do you mean by that? If you believe the wealthy should pay more, whatspecifically do you think we should do, and how do you propose we do it in a way that actuallly solves the problem rather than just sounding good in theory?
I’m genuinely curious how you see that working, because I think it’s easy to identify what’s wrong. The harder part is coming up with real solutions that are fair, effective, and accountable.
You want more taxes, but these 1% are already paying half of the taxes of the entire country. How about everyone be a literal taxpayer and pay taxes in this country. The fair Tax would do that.. but wait, if we adopt that program, you will not be able to punish the Rich!!!!!!
@moonbus said“. People will say it will never work, that the economy will collapse.”
@wildgrass
The 18th century ushered in the separation of Church and state. People said it would never work, that civilization would collapse. People died to make it work. France needed five republics to make it work.
The 21st century must work a similarly difficult paradigm shift. Money must be separated from power. People will say it will never work, that the economy w ...[text shortened]... icting. The 1% will do literally anything--including burn democracy to the ground--to stay in power.
Why don’t you avoid being disingenuous one time. It NEVER HAS WORKED!!!!
Ask our UK friends , the UK is sinking into bankruptcy as we speak.
@Earl-of-Trumps saidHelp me out here, I think you used to be UK, and Iwent to Palestine apparently because you’re losing your shirt in the UK. Would you tell him how wrong he is?
The politicians would ruin that good idea in a heartbeat. Tax the rich for the poor and they'll use the money to blow up Izbicistan.
Another major problem is the theft of government funds by the people who run these funded agencies.
corruption to the nth degree.
@wildgrass saidIunderstand what you’re saying, and I agree that the tax burden should be fair and that people who can afford to contribute more should be part of that conversation. But I’m curious about what you mean when you say government spending and taxation should be directly linked. How would you see that working in practice?
Taxing the rich isn't going to give the government any more money. It will shift the tax burden to those who can actually afford it.
Government spending SHOULD be linked directly to taxation, but modern times has the two things completely decoupled.
My concern is that it’s not just about whopays, but also about how the government spends the money and how accountable it is for the results. If we’re asking people to contribute more, shouldn’t we also expect greater transparency and responsibility in how those dollars are used? I think those things need to go hand in hand.
And it is so laughable that you trust what the government would do with that money. Have you seen what Gavin Newson has done with the Money in California, like the $50 billion hole in the ground that was supposed to be a train? And he wants to be president.!!!!!!!!!!!
You are about to get laughed off the forum!!!!!!
@wildgrass saidThe founding father George Washington owned about 4000 acres and a Mount Vernon Mansion , and no one ever asked him for any money, but look what the world of America has done in the last 250 years…………………………… they did not need his money..
The founding fathers of America also talked and wrote A LOT about the extreme dangers to government if the wealthy get to make all the decisions. They saw that play out with monarchical societies, and this was one of the key things they tried to prevent when setting up our government.
So, why then, are the constitutionalists in favor of lowering taxes on the rich?
Looks like they had Rich guys back there, but nobody was beating them to death for their success. Actually, they left them alone so they could run the country. That is what your little fellows should do. I do not know why it is important to you how much money someone else makes . you certainly have never told us.
@wildgrass said“Money must be separated from power” ???
The founding fathers of America also talked and wrote A LOT about the extreme dangers to government if the wealthy get to make all the decisions. They saw that play out with monarchical societies, and this was one of the key things they tried to prevent when setting up our government.
So, why then, are the constitutionalists in favor of lowering taxes on the rich?
You are so naïve about Power, the definition of power, the importance of power
Yesterday Trump announced using that horrible ‘power” to open a MAJOR pipeline deal , 800 miles from the north slope to the coast to sell oil to Asia.
It will be OUR way to make money, to get money, which money we will use to reinvest in this country and be even bigger and better than we are. You are such a fairy..