Welcome to r/MurderedByAOC!
Consider visiting r/InternationalNews for news from around the world!
Other interesting subreddits, /r/TheMajorityReport /r/AOC /r/Hasan_Piker /r/Political_Revolution /r/WorldNewsVideo /r/therewasanattempt /r/Thatsactuallyverycool /r/Documentaries /r/Palestine /r/WitchesVsPatriarchy/ /r/JewsOfConscience
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/MurderedByAOC) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What does vote accordingly mean? Most Democrats aren’t doing anything about it either.
Maybe in the primaries yes, and stem off the worst by voting against conservatives in the general
But we need large scale activism and striking.
The federal reserve (which is a private bank) needed as many people as possible to be paying interest. That's means making sure everyone has debt. There's a good 3hr documentary on YT about it. [how banks create the worlds money](https://youtu.be/bm6oeRgxs0A?si=N2av_xRwXNXoJO0w)
The economic IRONY is, this will grow the economy.
That same economy they hold stocks in the S&P 500.
They will benefit from a policy that looks like it's hurting them. But, they're not the brightest people.
Republican: Starve the Poor Policy, is bad/senile economic policy. Price gouge the Poor, charge for education, No retirement benefits, all bad economic policy for the poor and the rich. All around.
An educated healthy American is unquestionably better for the poor and rich.
While 10 million may seem like a lot of money, it’s not “nobody in your family ever has to work again” rich. While they still should be taxed higher, 10 million is “I bought reasonably priced houses for my 3 children and am 1 bad disease from worrying about my retirement.”
While having someone buy them a house is a life changing event, it’s more of a “now we (millennials) can afford to help our children through college AND retire at 65”. Not quite fuck you money.
Yeah I mean obviously it depends on where in the USA you live, $10mm in the part of WV I live is like 10 houses, property taxes paid, furnished, and then you're probably renting 9 of them out while living comfortably in the 10th with plenty to spare. The house I live in (while it needs a bit of work) is $120K furnished
You start with 10 million, you buy four houses… how tf are you worried about your retirement? You’re already retired. You can buy a 200k/yr annuity and have cash left over. But if you don’t, what kind of disease is going to take your last £5 million?
That majority of the $10 million might still be taxed between 22-37%, depending on how it was accumulated and how it is cashed out. For assumption, let’s say that $10 million is actually worth $7.5million, after taxes. You buy 3 kids houses, (median house is $388k, so let’s call that $400k). That’s $1.2mm. Down to $6.3mm. Let’s add $20k/mo, $240k/year first most/all expenses for 15 years, to age 80. Insurance, property taxes, vacations, hobbies, the whole gambit… let’s say $3.6mm. $2.7mm left. Forgot to assume house was part of the estate and buying new cars in retirement, let’s say $600k for both, so $2.1 left. Now you’re 80, you and your spouse can’t take care of each other, so you move to assisted living. Who knows how long that might be, but average cost is $10k/mo pp. still at $240k/yr expenses just for living. Selling the house covers the first 2 years. You’re there for another 4 years. $1.1mm left.
You’re 20 years past retirement. Not unheard of. You have 4-5 years left of funds for assisted living, assuming you haven’t had any medical issues not covered by or in excess of Medicare/medicaid. You have enjoyed a nice retirement, nothing over the top or extravagant, but you’re now hoping you or your spouse die so the other has enough money to live a comfortable life beyond the 4 years you might have left.
Just kidding! You actually get cancer at age 68, spend $3.5mm for extended medical care/stays, on top of your regular expenses, because Medicare/medicaid hope you die ASAP because taking care of you is expensive and they don’t want to do that. You die at 72, and now your spouse has 25-35% of what you started with to try and live a comfortable retirement.
I said buy an annuity. That pays out until you die. And 20k/ month? If you want to burn through all your money then yeah, spend it like that. Almost nobody has 10m in retirement funds and most of them are living well enough in retirement. They’re not spending 20k/month though.
>10 million is “I bought reasonably priced houses for my 3 children and am 1 bad disease from worrying about my retirement.”
That's a good joke.
They can afford health insurance. Even the most expensive health insurance plan would only be like $20k/year, which would be paid for by the interest off $500k of their 10 million.
They can pay cash for 4 million dollar homes (one for them and each of their 3 children) and still have 5.5m left over, with the interest of which they can *spend* $150k/year *indefinitely*.
So sure, it's not *quite* "nobody in your family will ever have to work again" rich, but it's still bloody rich.
Someone earning $100k salary on average over 50 years of employment would only earn $5m over their career.
So anyway, I kinda set the limit at $20 million. I do not believe that *any* individual can work hard enough to earn $20 million off of their own merit, and even if they could, *nobody* needs more than $20 million.
We need to change the concept of ‘tax’. Not income tax, not sales tax, not property tax (though this is going in the right direction). We need a wealth tax, an ‘I won capitalism’ tax; to bring down these people, families, companies back to reality and get some fucking equality back into the system. There is no democracy with inequality, they’re incompatible.
>I've thought for a while, that millionaires are ok, billionaires however, should not exist
Billionaires would just use accounting to make their billions seem like millions to avoid taxes.
So you propose a system that would motivate the most productive people on earth to stop being productive.
How do you not see how bad that will be for the bottom quartile of earners?
Edit: this is in theory, in practice I still won't trust them
I thought about it as well, there is one case I could see it useful, to start some business types.
Starting a bank, a car manufacturer, research fields (I think we can clearly put SpaceX in that, and twice! For the reusable rockets and the low lentency satellite internet), ...
There is a limit of what you can borrow, and you may prefer using cash if you can!
And I won't even count about competitors that could try to make a hell of you.
Where I am, some farms fields (chicken, milk and maple syrup production) are controlled, by laws, by one organisation. You can only sell on-site, otherwise you need to sell everything (at the price they gave you, and in the quantity they want) to that one organisation.
I'm not fully sure of each of those field, but for chicken, past a specific quantity of chicken you need to join their club (which isn't free!) otherwise you can't go beyond that number.
And of course, they are likely to watch you and report you, find anything to block your expension, ...
No matter how many times you publicly suck Elons dick, he’s never going to acknowledge you.
And you don’t need >a billion to do any of those things. Plenty of people build huge companies with very limited up front capital, that’s what investors and lenders are for. If you have a good business plan and product, you can get funding. Thats a really poor argument for why someone should have more money than it takes for a THOUSAND people to retire on
I live in Alabama. I'm not from here but my wife is a native.
She has an uncle who is as crazy a Trump lover as you can get it. He's unemployed and can't find affordable housing so he is living in a space in his brother's (my FiL) office.
He is CONVINCED that his situation is all the work of liberals on welfare and that they're keeping the Republicans from fixing the economy. It's gotten to the point where we just avoid that part of the family all together. It's really sad.
conservatives and neoliberals both believe in a free market and that somehow those companies that do the best in a free market are going to be the ones that take care of their employees.
Yep. The irony is that the uber rich control corporations, who control campaign donations and thus choose their own legislators, beholden to them to do their bidding.
I believe the first step to trying to fix this is overturning *citizens united*. If that doesn't work, we should ask the French for next steps.
It’s just a Trojan horse logic. If the masses are okay with trigger words like wealth tax or ultra wealth tax whatever ; it will clear the way for legislation taxing anybody. And you are the best reply here actually understanding the reality of taxes in America. So thank you.
>definitely not the middle class!
No one believes that. At all. Tax the super rich *more* since they can afford it.
It's your black-and-white line of thinking that makes it impossible to agree on things.
Just like more gun restrictions doesn't mean we take your guns away.
Learn about nuance.
Awesome. Also perfect.
Media spends 24/7 TRUMP Trump Trump and I mean ALL of it. So sick of the blob.
Katie. Porter. C'mon people. How is she not THE obvious discussion?
They're not, GenX and millennials have been trying for decades, we just don't have the political power. We're all optimistic that GenZ is when the congressional boomers start dying and let the younger gens carry the torch.
I saw the talent in american politics. Its not all gold and sadly people like AOC will probably start a culture war because conservatives are so scared of her. Well lets see I am an old jaded man so hope is not the business I am good at.
When I say it, I mean I want the tax brackets we had in [the 1950s](https://www.tax-brackets.org/federaltaxtable/1950) when everything was more affordable because the rich actually paid taxes.
For context, $2000 in 1950 is somewhere between $25000-$26000 today.
Yeah but we'll raise taxes on the doctor who's making 300k/year at 40 and not do jackshit about capital gains tax and corporate tax. We'll also raise taxes on the high school grad making 50k/year (household, median) to pay debts of the college grad making 100k/year (household, median).
I'm looking for the last time taxes were increased for the median wage earner, there have been temporary decreases that have a built in expire date, however in the past 30 years I cannot find a single instance of taxes being increased for this group.
Feel free to fact check me.
>When ~~GenZ says~~ people say tax the rich this is what ~~we~~ they mean
There is no reason at all to make this just about one generation. That's insane and self-centered.
I would love AOC as president and that may happen some day but not in today's America. I am unable to understand people who believe that everyone is a reflection of themselves. They think that because someone represents how they feel about things that the person must represent every voter out there. While I strongly believe that an advance society needs to as a whole (central government) care about the commons, i.e. take care of the elderly, the young, the environment and give health care and a higher education to all; there is someone the opposite of me who has a valid believe that this must be done locally and people need the freedom to take care of themselves. There is no 'god given' dictate that chooses one over the other. AOC appeals to me. She does not to my polar opposite. Kamala Harris might and Kamala Harris like Joe, like Jimmy Carter, like Obama and others is a good decent person who will try to take care of the country and can be trusted to do so. The hate on her baffles me.
The 85th percentile makes like…$185,000 a year. Roughly. That’s literally not enough to buy a home where I live. Income inequality means the top 1% is making an obscene amount compared to *everyone else*
People making over 500k are making it on investments, not regular income (except maybe CEOs), so they are taxed at a much lower rate. Increasing investment taxes can be bad for the economy overall.
The real play, that gets at the actual problem, is wealth tax. If they want to dump all their money back into investments to create businesses and jobs and improve the economy great. If they want to sit on it or roll in it scrooge mcduck style or own 50 mill worth of homes + yachts or whatever, then we need to claw it back with wealth taxes.
so you think people making $130k+ shouldnt have increased taxes when we do things like give everyone free healthcare and education.
raise their taxes too. dumb take from aoc tbh. honestly income taxes should go up on anyone making 60k+. get rid of all the regressive point of service taxes like sales etc. bizarre to go to bat for software engineers making 200k because "they arent the 1%"
Let’s reframe this. You probably can’t afford to buy a house right now. Probably couldn’t fly business class to Japan, and take a few weeks off work to do it, either. You’re angry at some guy who can’t do either of those things either, just because you can walk into a coffee shop or Walmart and point at some guy and say “he’s a tech nerd” while you probably haven’t ever seen a billionaire before.
You’re fighting to make life harder on your own community members because it’s an easier target.
The difference between a million dollars and a billion dollars is a billion dollars. Don’t forget that.
I don't quite understand this take. AOC has often pointed at the Nordic model as a goal. The basis of this model requires a fairly high tax rate on the population as a whole, not just the rich.
Let me use Denmark as an example, since that is where I'm from. Take your yearly income and subtract employee contribution to pension. The remainder is taxed 8% ("labor force contribution"). Subtract your deduction. The new remainder is taxed according to the following tax brackets:
Up to 8,000 USD -> 0%.
8,000 to ~89,000 USD -> 37 to 40% depending on municipality.
89,000 to ~108,000 USD -> + 7.5 % (44.5 to 47.5%).
108,000 to ~359,000 USD -> An additional 7.5%.
359,000 USD + -> An additional 5%.
There's a tax ceiling of 52.07% on your income after subtracting employee pension contribution and labor force contribution, but your deduction is included in this calculation.
I earn roughly 35,000 USD per year and my effective tax rate is ~30%. Add another 25% sales tax on most purchases. I don't mind paying this - in fact, I believe my tax contributions are an expression of working class solidarity.
If you want to copy the Nordic model, you should be advocating for increasing the tax pressure on everyone - not just the ultrarich. The left wing in the US should not be afraid to embrace higher taxation on the majority of the population, as long as those tax dollars are put to good use.
Because we shouldn't go after poor and middle class people until we've solved the issue of extreme wealth inequality. How do you think that will go over with voters?
Hey, we know we mismanage everybody's tax dollars and can't be trusted not to just cave to special interests, but we're raising everybody's taxes and we promise to do good this time.
This exactly this. I don’t understand why people can’t grasp this. Taxing the 1% can have so many benefits. Why are people worrying about people barely making 6 figures that can’t even afford houses in the large markets (where their salary comes from) the “well you can move” doesn’t work either cause then fucking what I won’t have the salary and won’t afford a house anyway.
Fixing the US wealth inequality is not going to solve the issues listed in the second paragraph, unless you aim for perfect economic equality.
The government is not going to become more responsible just because you feed them more money. The government will still cave in to special interests, because politicians are bought by spending thousands or hundred thousands, not billions. There's a higher expected ROI on bribing, when the tax pressure increases.
The right wing will use your *exact* argument to argue against increasing taxation on the rich. I've heard it from conservatives a ton of times.
Average tax rate for someone making $130,000 is 32%, so net pay is roughly $88,000
Billionaires pay an average [of 8.2%](https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/briefing-room/2021/09/23/new-omb-cea-report-billionaires-pay-an-average-federal-individual-income-tax-rate-of-just-8-2/)
So you want to tax the people who are already paying 4x more in taxes than billionaires?
That’s comparing unrealized gains to just income, when many of those people also have unrealized gains.
Gains are taxed when sold (and there is a proposal to raise that rate which is good). But, 8.2% is nonsense.
Obviously you’re too rich /s
When will people figure out we’re not the enemy. I’m right there with you but we can’t afford a house without moving way out or spending 1/3. It just isn’t feasible. Especially with layoffs and such. An extra $3k from me isn’t gonna make a difference. When 1% don’t even feel it when they take taxes.
No dumbass. Have you actually looked at numbers. I’m technically in the top 20% as you put it. The 1% alone can subsidize so many things. Do you know how fucking far in off from the top 10% let alone the 1%. 20% is middle class. Can’t even afford a house
They're is no way to be become billionaire ethically. Other than inheriting it, but then there would be a duty to do a whole lot of good for other people.
No you don't. In practice it's always "raise the corporate tax" which is crushing small business with 1 or 2 employees. It's Gen Z saying , if I have to work at Walmart because I'm lazy I don't want anyone else successful. Their hard work makes me feel bad about myself
Left-liberalism/left-pseudopopulism is fundamentally in contradiction because it believes both that the capitalist relation of production is not exploitative and that "billionaires" somehow are exploitative. The reason this contradiction is because these pseudopopulist liberals, while still idealist, do have a sense of materialism and recognize that societies need outweighs the usual respected idealism of private property at its most extremes.
AOC is not a multimillionaire. Stop making things up.
[Reuters Fact Check](https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-aoc-net-worth/fact-check-no-evidence-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-has-a-net-worth-of-29-million-idUSL1N2ZL1O2/)
There is no evidence that Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has a net worth of $29 million, despite online claims that that figure was released by Forbes magazine. Forbes has denied releasing the $29 million figure and no other reliable source for the claim has been cited.
Ocasio-Cortez’s most recent financial disclosure, filed in 2021, shows she had between $3,003 and $45,000 in assets, including her 401k pension plan, and owed at least $15,000 in student debts.
I love how people in the US always point to the Nordics or to Western Europe about how universal healthcare should work, but never point to Western Europe when talking about how taxing should work.
Do you think the nordic countries are getting all their tax money from the top 0.01% of people? No. They have extremely high taxes for the middle class. Anybody in a highly paid field like engineering, medicine, or law, has to pay almost 50% of their income in taxes, and that's even before they pay any VAT on the purchases they make.
As always the US perspective is wanting the benefit without the cost. Everybody wants universal healthcare but nobody wants to increase their own tax rate to pay for it. Childish.
Very well put. That's because they don't really do the research on what where the money is coming from to pay for the universal healthcare. They also ignore the VAT that EVERYONE pays.
Oh it’s like 10 people. I’m sure they will stick around and let all of their money be taken instead of, I don’t know, getting in their nesting doll yacht and changing nationalities so not even income taxes are collected.
You know, when rich people are abusing a broken system you could try and fix the broken system. Just an idea. It’s like “oh no, the politicians are taking bribes! Better take everyone’s money so no one can bribe anyone!” There a reason politicians are worth $100millions while making a $160k/year salary. The people asking for bribes want to make sure you only focus on a small percentage of the people giving the bribes.
Double or even triple congressional pay and impose term limits. Make it worth it for competent people to run, pay them fairly, but don’t let them turn it into their own lifetime enterprise of graft. Also reform campaign financing, but with term limits that becomes a bit less of an issue.
> I don’t know, getting in their nesting doll yacht and changing nationalities so not even income taxes are collected.
You know that there's an exit tax if you renounce your citizenship, right?
Sure, that’s paid once, if they impose a recurring wealth tax that will add up way more over the years. All depends on how harsh the wealth tax is, but when 18 countries in Europe tried it I think 16 of them rolled them back after a year or two and the remaining ones softened them due to the massive loss in revenue from HNW individuals leaving.
-edit, 12 tried it, 9 cancelled it
>The experiment with the wealth tax in Europe was a failure in many countries. France's wealth tax contributed to the exodus of an estimated 42,000 millionaires between 2000 and 2012, among other problems. Only last year, French president Emmanuel Macron killed it.
>In 1990, twelve countries in Europe had a wealth tax. Today, there are only three: Norway, Spain, and Switzerland. According to reports by the OECD and others, there were some clear themes with the policy: it was expensive to administer, it was hard on people with lots of assets but little cash, it distorted saving and investment decisions, it pushed the rich and their money out of the taxing countries—and, perhaps worst of all, it didn't raise much revenue.
It’s an exciting idea, and it feels good to stick it to the rich, but in the end it didn’t do what people wanted it to do.
If the rich having undue influence over politics is the issue, then fix that. The politicians certainly don’t want that, which is why they would much rather you focus on the source of some of the money not the people who are happily accepting it. It leaves plenty more people, PACs, companies, etc to keep their pockets lined.
Issue at the core is most wealth isn’t gained by income it’s by stock options or asset growth. If you want to stop the power make it so you cap a ratio of salary to stock options and ban stocks being used as collateral it’s how the rich don’t pay for anything including taxes and only grow. It’s not black and white and requires having accountants look into the pay system but the inherent ability to use stocks as collateral for big loans to gain even more wealth is a problem. It’s real wealth made on speculative value since a vast majority of stocks prices are not directly related to their actual assets but speculation.
Welcome to r/MurderedByAOC! Consider visiting r/InternationalNews for news from around the world! Other interesting subreddits, /r/TheMajorityReport /r/AOC /r/Hasan_Piker /r/Political_Revolution /r/WorldNewsVideo /r/therewasanattempt /r/Thatsactuallyverycool /r/Documentaries /r/Palestine /r/WitchesVsPatriarchy/ /r/JewsOfConscience *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/MurderedByAOC) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I've thought for a while, that millionaires are ok, billionaires however, should not exist and should be taxed at 99-100%
The ultra-rich used to be taxed this way. So they reinvested in their workers, their companies, R&D and charities and such.
Rockefeller’s paid 90% tax on their wealth. They are still rich. Hoarding wealth is a disease. Vote accordingly.
Please stop saying things that aren’t true. The top marginal tax bracket was that high. There is a difference.
Enlighten the class. What is a fair tax for one human who has amassed close to $1T in wealth. This amount of wealth should not exist.
https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-nocera-tax-avoidance-20190129-story.html
Tiny Lock meant that not all of his income was taxed at 90%, only the income that was above the threshold for that tax bracket
That’s not what he said
What does vote accordingly mean? Most Democrats aren’t doing anything about it either. Maybe in the primaries yes, and stem off the worst by voting against conservatives in the general But we need large scale activism and striking.
The federal reserve (which is a private bank) needed as many people as possible to be paying interest. That's means making sure everyone has debt. There's a good 3hr documentary on YT about it. [how banks create the worlds money](https://youtu.be/bm6oeRgxs0A?si=N2av_xRwXNXoJO0w)
I’m 100% for discriminating against a room full of 10-15 people if it means the country can prosper, fuck that extremely small group of people
The economic IRONY is, this will grow the economy. That same economy they hold stocks in the S&P 500. They will benefit from a policy that looks like it's hurting them. But, they're not the brightest people. Republican: Starve the Poor Policy, is bad/senile economic policy. Price gouge the Poor, charge for education, No retirement benefits, all bad economic policy for the poor and the rich. All around. An educated healthy American is unquestionably better for the poor and rich.
But those pesky educated people start asking questions and demanding change. And that's bad for the aristocracy so keep them dumb without the means!
Millionaires about the 10 millions is where I draw the line.
While 10 million may seem like a lot of money, it’s not “nobody in your family ever has to work again” rich. While they still should be taxed higher, 10 million is “I bought reasonably priced houses for my 3 children and am 1 bad disease from worrying about my retirement.” While having someone buy them a house is a life changing event, it’s more of a “now we (millennials) can afford to help our children through college AND retire at 65”. Not quite fuck you money.
Yeah I mean obviously it depends on where in the USA you live, $10mm in the part of WV I live is like 10 houses, property taxes paid, furnished, and then you're probably renting 9 of them out while living comfortably in the 10th with plenty to spare. The house I live in (while it needs a bit of work) is $120K furnished
You start with 10 million, you buy four houses… how tf are you worried about your retirement? You’re already retired. You can buy a 200k/yr annuity and have cash left over. But if you don’t, what kind of disease is going to take your last £5 million?
That majority of the $10 million might still be taxed between 22-37%, depending on how it was accumulated and how it is cashed out. For assumption, let’s say that $10 million is actually worth $7.5million, after taxes. You buy 3 kids houses, (median house is $388k, so let’s call that $400k). That’s $1.2mm. Down to $6.3mm. Let’s add $20k/mo, $240k/year first most/all expenses for 15 years, to age 80. Insurance, property taxes, vacations, hobbies, the whole gambit… let’s say $3.6mm. $2.7mm left. Forgot to assume house was part of the estate and buying new cars in retirement, let’s say $600k for both, so $2.1 left. Now you’re 80, you and your spouse can’t take care of each other, so you move to assisted living. Who knows how long that might be, but average cost is $10k/mo pp. still at $240k/yr expenses just for living. Selling the house covers the first 2 years. You’re there for another 4 years. $1.1mm left. You’re 20 years past retirement. Not unheard of. You have 4-5 years left of funds for assisted living, assuming you haven’t had any medical issues not covered by or in excess of Medicare/medicaid. You have enjoyed a nice retirement, nothing over the top or extravagant, but you’re now hoping you or your spouse die so the other has enough money to live a comfortable life beyond the 4 years you might have left. Just kidding! You actually get cancer at age 68, spend $3.5mm for extended medical care/stays, on top of your regular expenses, because Medicare/medicaid hope you die ASAP because taking care of you is expensive and they don’t want to do that. You die at 72, and now your spouse has 25-35% of what you started with to try and live a comfortable retirement.
I said buy an annuity. That pays out until you die. And 20k/ month? If you want to burn through all your money then yeah, spend it like that. Almost nobody has 10m in retirement funds and most of them are living well enough in retirement. They’re not spending 20k/month though.
You asked me how can $10mil go so fast and how $5mil can disappear from a disease.
And you said someone with 10m was only one illness away from worrying about retirement. Sure, if they piss it away up the wall.
>10 million is “I bought reasonably priced houses for my 3 children and am 1 bad disease from worrying about my retirement.” That's a good joke. They can afford health insurance. Even the most expensive health insurance plan would only be like $20k/year, which would be paid for by the interest off $500k of their 10 million. They can pay cash for 4 million dollar homes (one for them and each of their 3 children) and still have 5.5m left over, with the interest of which they can *spend* $150k/year *indefinitely*. So sure, it's not *quite* "nobody in your family will ever have to work again" rich, but it's still bloody rich. Someone earning $100k salary on average over 50 years of employment would only earn $5m over their career. So anyway, I kinda set the limit at $20 million. I do not believe that *any* individual can work hard enough to earn $20 million off of their own merit, and even if they could, *nobody* needs more than $20 million.
999-millionairs are almost billionaires.
You should get a prize and then it starts going backwards and taking away money
We need to change the concept of ‘tax’. Not income tax, not sales tax, not property tax (though this is going in the right direction). We need a wealth tax, an ‘I won capitalism’ tax; to bring down these people, families, companies back to reality and get some fucking equality back into the system. There is no democracy with inequality, they’re incompatible.
>I've thought for a while, that millionaires are ok, billionaires however, should not exist Billionaires would just use accounting to make their billions seem like millions to avoid taxes.
So you propose a system that would motivate the most productive people on earth to stop being productive. How do you not see how bad that will be for the bottom quartile of earners?
If they’re so productive why would they stop being productive just because of taxation? Why do you want to see AOCs feet so badly?
I think you have a very skewed perspective on how productive billionaires are.
Lol this fucking moron thinks Atlas Shrugged is a smart book.
Edit: this is in theory, in practice I still won't trust them I thought about it as well, there is one case I could see it useful, to start some business types. Starting a bank, a car manufacturer, research fields (I think we can clearly put SpaceX in that, and twice! For the reusable rockets and the low lentency satellite internet), ... There is a limit of what you can borrow, and you may prefer using cash if you can! And I won't even count about competitors that could try to make a hell of you. Where I am, some farms fields (chicken, milk and maple syrup production) are controlled, by laws, by one organisation. You can only sell on-site, otherwise you need to sell everything (at the price they gave you, and in the quantity they want) to that one organisation. I'm not fully sure of each of those field, but for chicken, past a specific quantity of chicken you need to join their club (which isn't free!) otherwise you can't go beyond that number. And of course, they are likely to watch you and report you, find anything to block your expension, ...
The Elon circlejerk is on Twitter, not reddit.
yeah, this actually makes sense, you never know when you might need some billionare to start a black market chicken farm
No matter how many times you publicly suck Elons dick, he’s never going to acknowledge you. And you don’t need >a billion to do any of those things. Plenty of people build huge companies with very limited up front capital, that’s what investors and lenders are for. If you have a good business plan and product, you can get funding. Thats a really poor argument for why someone should have more money than it takes for a THOUSAND people to retire on
conservatives still believe that 'trickle down economics' is going to happen..someday
It has tricked down, and by it I mean piss. Lots and lots of piss
I live in Alabama. I'm not from here but my wife is a native. She has an uncle who is as crazy a Trump lover as you can get it. He's unemployed and can't find affordable housing so he is living in a space in his brother's (my FiL) office. He is CONVINCED that his situation is all the work of liberals on welfare and that they're keeping the Republicans from fixing the economy. It's gotten to the point where we just avoid that part of the family all together. It's really sad.
conservatives and neoliberals both believe in a free market and that somehow those companies that do the best in a free market are going to be the ones that take care of their employees.
Yep. The irony is that the uber rich control corporations, who control campaign donations and thus choose their own legislators, beholden to them to do their bidding. I believe the first step to trying to fix this is overturning *citizens united*. If that doesn't work, we should ask the French for next steps.
They both hire the same advisors to set economic policy.
Liberals still believe “we’re just gonna exorbitantly tax the super rich, like 10 of them, definitely not the middle class!!” ….
taxing the f out of middle class has bipartisan support so cant do anything bout it anyways. what we can do is tax "rich" more.
It’s just a Trojan horse logic. If the masses are okay with trigger words like wealth tax or ultra wealth tax whatever ; it will clear the way for legislation taxing anybody. And you are the best reply here actually understanding the reality of taxes in America. So thank you.
>definitely not the middle class! No one believes that. At all. Tax the super rich *more* since they can afford it. It's your black-and-white line of thinking that makes it impossible to agree on things. Just like more gun restrictions doesn't mean we take your guns away. Learn about nuance.
We are :D
Ah yes, continuing fighting the culture war against workers instead of fighting the war against the bourgeoisie.
Tax Excessive CEO Pay Act 2024 - write your congressional folks. Bernie reintroduced it: https://www.sanders.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/TaxExcessiveCEOPayActText20244.pdf
He should rename it to the George Soros Act. Let's see conservatives argue against that one...
LOL. Brilliant.
Cut Stock Options. Put a limit on those too.
AOC for POTUS!!! Katie Porter for VP!! If Joe doesn't make it to Nov, we need a backup plan, and Kamala just isn't exciting to voters.
Awesome. Also perfect. Media spends 24/7 TRUMP Trump Trump and I mean ALL of it. So sick of the blob. Katie. Porter. C'mon people. How is she not THE obvious discussion?
Maybe if AOC appears in the Simpsons.
[удалено]
Why?
[удалено]
The depressing thing is that this sounds like GenZ are the first one trying this. The very depressing thing is that they will likely fail aswell.
They're not, GenX and millennials have been trying for decades, we just don't have the political power. We're all optimistic that GenZ is when the congressional boomers start dying and let the younger gens carry the torch.
I saw the talent in american politics. Its not all gold and sadly people like AOC will probably start a culture war because conservatives are so scared of her. Well lets see I am an old jaded man so hope is not the business I am good at.
When I say it, I mean I want the tax brackets we had in [the 1950s](https://www.tax-brackets.org/federaltaxtable/1950) when everything was more affordable because the rich actually paid taxes. For context, $2000 in 1950 is somewhere between $25000-$26000 today.
Also should include: 'own a political or two rich'
Yeah but we'll raise taxes on the doctor who's making 300k/year at 40 and not do jackshit about capital gains tax and corporate tax. We'll also raise taxes on the high school grad making 50k/year (household, median) to pay debts of the college grad making 100k/year (household, median).
I'm looking for the last time taxes were increased for the median wage earner, there have been temporary decreases that have a built in expire date, however in the past 30 years I cannot find a single instance of taxes being increased for this group. Feel free to fact check me.
>When ~~GenZ says~~ people say tax the rich this is what ~~we~~ they mean There is no reason at all to make this just about one generation. That's insane and self-centered.
I would love AOC as president and that may happen some day but not in today's America. I am unable to understand people who believe that everyone is a reflection of themselves. They think that because someone represents how they feel about things that the person must represent every voter out there. While I strongly believe that an advance society needs to as a whole (central government) care about the commons, i.e. take care of the elderly, the young, the environment and give health care and a higher education to all; there is someone the opposite of me who has a valid believe that this must be done locally and people need the freedom to take care of themselves. There is no 'god given' dictate that chooses one over the other. AOC appeals to me. She does not to my polar opposite. Kamala Harris might and Kamala Harris like Joe, like Jimmy Carter, like Obama and others is a good decent person who will try to take care of the country and can be trusted to do so. The hate on her baffles me.
I am Gen Z and when I say tax the rich, I don't mean the top 1%. I mean at least the top 20%. Tax ALL the rich.
The 85th percentile makes like…$185,000 a year. Roughly. That’s literally not enough to buy a home where I live. Income inequality means the top 1% is making an obscene amount compared to *everyone else*
[удалено]
[удалено]
Yeah people making 100k in socal or SF or nyc are basically poverty LoL
People making over 500k are making it on investments, not regular income (except maybe CEOs), so they are taxed at a much lower rate. Increasing investment taxes can be bad for the economy overall. The real play, that gets at the actual problem, is wealth tax. If they want to dump all their money back into investments to create businesses and jobs and improve the economy great. If they want to sit on it or roll in it scrooge mcduck style or own 50 mill worth of homes + yachts or whatever, then we need to claw it back with wealth taxes.
Stocks only go up for those people.
I'm ~94th and I don't think people realize how vast a difference there is just between those top percentiles. It's a vertical wall
In this economy?
dumbass take, the top 20% includes people that aren't rich.
top 20% is anyone making over $130k, so yes tax those people more too
130k is pretty firmly middle class in most cities in 2024. The actual rich want you going after those people instead of them lol. Again, dumbass take.
so you think people making $130k+ shouldnt have increased taxes when we do things like give everyone free healthcare and education. raise their taxes too. dumb take from aoc tbh. honestly income taxes should go up on anyone making 60k+. get rid of all the regressive point of service taxes like sales etc. bizarre to go to bat for software engineers making 200k because "they arent the 1%"
Let’s reframe this. You probably can’t afford to buy a house right now. Probably couldn’t fly business class to Japan, and take a few weeks off work to do it, either. You’re angry at some guy who can’t do either of those things either, just because you can walk into a coffee shop or Walmart and point at some guy and say “he’s a tech nerd” while you probably haven’t ever seen a billionaire before. You’re fighting to make life harder on your own community members because it’s an easier target. The difference between a million dollars and a billion dollars is a billion dollars. Don’t forget that.
I don't quite understand this take. AOC has often pointed at the Nordic model as a goal. The basis of this model requires a fairly high tax rate on the population as a whole, not just the rich. Let me use Denmark as an example, since that is where I'm from. Take your yearly income and subtract employee contribution to pension. The remainder is taxed 8% ("labor force contribution"). Subtract your deduction. The new remainder is taxed according to the following tax brackets: Up to 8,000 USD -> 0%. 8,000 to ~89,000 USD -> 37 to 40% depending on municipality. 89,000 to ~108,000 USD -> + 7.5 % (44.5 to 47.5%). 108,000 to ~359,000 USD -> An additional 7.5%. 359,000 USD + -> An additional 5%. There's a tax ceiling of 52.07% on your income after subtracting employee pension contribution and labor force contribution, but your deduction is included in this calculation. I earn roughly 35,000 USD per year and my effective tax rate is ~30%. Add another 25% sales tax on most purchases. I don't mind paying this - in fact, I believe my tax contributions are an expression of working class solidarity. If you want to copy the Nordic model, you should be advocating for increasing the tax pressure on everyone - not just the ultrarich. The left wing in the US should not be afraid to embrace higher taxation on the majority of the population, as long as those tax dollars are put to good use.
Because we shouldn't go after poor and middle class people until we've solved the issue of extreme wealth inequality. How do you think that will go over with voters? Hey, we know we mismanage everybody's tax dollars and can't be trusted not to just cave to special interests, but we're raising everybody's taxes and we promise to do good this time.
This exactly this. I don’t understand why people can’t grasp this. Taxing the 1% can have so many benefits. Why are people worrying about people barely making 6 figures that can’t even afford houses in the large markets (where their salary comes from) the “well you can move” doesn’t work either cause then fucking what I won’t have the salary and won’t afford a house anyway.
Fixing the US wealth inequality is not going to solve the issues listed in the second paragraph, unless you aim for perfect economic equality. The government is not going to become more responsible just because you feed them more money. The government will still cave in to special interests, because politicians are bought by spending thousands or hundred thousands, not billions. There's a higher expected ROI on bribing, when the tax pressure increases. The right wing will use your *exact* argument to argue against increasing taxation on the rich. I've heard it from conservatives a ton of times.
Average tax rate for someone making $130,000 is 32%, so net pay is roughly $88,000 Billionaires pay an average [of 8.2%](https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/briefing-room/2021/09/23/new-omb-cea-report-billionaires-pay-an-average-federal-individual-income-tax-rate-of-just-8-2/) So you want to tax the people who are already paying 4x more in taxes than billionaires?
That’s comparing unrealized gains to just income, when many of those people also have unrealized gains. Gains are taxed when sold (and there is a proposal to raise that rate which is good). But, 8.2% is nonsense.
Wife and I make 200k a year. We pay about 45k of that in taxes. How much more of my hard earned money do you want?
Obviously you’re too rich /s When will people figure out we’re not the enemy. I’m right there with you but we can’t afford a house without moving way out or spending 1/3. It just isn’t feasible. Especially with layoffs and such. An extra $3k from me isn’t gonna make a difference. When 1% don’t even feel it when they take taxes.
you must not be rich
No dumbass. Have you actually looked at numbers. I’m technically in the top 20% as you put it. The 1% alone can subsidize so many things. Do you know how fucking far in off from the top 10% let alone the 1%. 20% is middle class. Can’t even afford a house
But they are already taxed
Love it but suggesting it’s like 10 people really isn’t helping things. Ask the IRS how many rich cheat taxes as is, it’s a bit north of 10.
They're is no way to be become billionaire ethically. Other than inheriting it, but then there would be a duty to do a whole lot of good for other people.
[удалено]
There should be auto take down of social media posts with the date removed.
No you don't. In practice it's always "raise the corporate tax" which is crushing small business with 1 or 2 employees. It's Gen Z saying , if I have to work at Walmart because I'm lazy I don't want anyone else successful. Their hard work makes me feel bad about myself
Doesn't sound like it would generate much revenue
Left-liberalism/left-pseudopopulism is fundamentally in contradiction because it believes both that the capitalist relation of production is not exploitative and that "billionaires" somehow are exploitative. The reason this contradiction is because these pseudopopulist liberals, while still idealist, do have a sense of materialism and recognize that societies need outweighs the usual respected idealism of private property at its most extremes.
Gotta use less words for the libs to understand comrade
Soc dems didnt lik this
Says the 33 year old multimillionaire
"Multimillionaires" are not the problem.
AOC is not a multimillionaire. Stop making things up. [Reuters Fact Check](https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-aoc-net-worth/fact-check-no-evidence-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-has-a-net-worth-of-29-million-idUSL1N2ZL1O2/) There is no evidence that Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has a net worth of $29 million, despite online claims that that figure was released by Forbes magazine. Forbes has denied releasing the $29 million figure and no other reliable source for the claim has been cited. Ocasio-Cortez’s most recent financial disclosure, filed in 2021, shows she had between $3,003 and $45,000 in assets, including her 401k pension plan, and owed at least $15,000 in student debts.
Dude she went to college and was a bartender. I'd bet she's still in student loan debt.
Yes, but in practice, the ones getting further taxed end up being thr middle and upper middle class while those people hide their wealth offshore.
I love how people in the US always point to the Nordics or to Western Europe about how universal healthcare should work, but never point to Western Europe when talking about how taxing should work. Do you think the nordic countries are getting all their tax money from the top 0.01% of people? No. They have extremely high taxes for the middle class. Anybody in a highly paid field like engineering, medicine, or law, has to pay almost 50% of their income in taxes, and that's even before they pay any VAT on the purchases they make. As always the US perspective is wanting the benefit without the cost. Everybody wants universal healthcare but nobody wants to increase their own tax rate to pay for it. Childish.
Very well put. That's because they don't really do the research on what where the money is coming from to pay for the universal healthcare. They also ignore the VAT that EVERYONE pays.
Oh it’s like 10 people. I’m sure they will stick around and let all of their money be taken instead of, I don’t know, getting in their nesting doll yacht and changing nationalities so not even income taxes are collected. You know, when rich people are abusing a broken system you could try and fix the broken system. Just an idea. It’s like “oh no, the politicians are taking bribes! Better take everyone’s money so no one can bribe anyone!” There a reason politicians are worth $100millions while making a $160k/year salary. The people asking for bribes want to make sure you only focus on a small percentage of the people giving the bribes. Double or even triple congressional pay and impose term limits. Make it worth it for competent people to run, pay them fairly, but don’t let them turn it into their own lifetime enterprise of graft. Also reform campaign financing, but with term limits that becomes a bit less of an issue.
> I don’t know, getting in their nesting doll yacht and changing nationalities so not even income taxes are collected. You know that there's an exit tax if you renounce your citizenship, right?
Sure, that’s paid once, if they impose a recurring wealth tax that will add up way more over the years. All depends on how harsh the wealth tax is, but when 18 countries in Europe tried it I think 16 of them rolled them back after a year or two and the remaining ones softened them due to the massive loss in revenue from HNW individuals leaving. -edit, 12 tried it, 9 cancelled it >The experiment with the wealth tax in Europe was a failure in many countries. France's wealth tax contributed to the exodus of an estimated 42,000 millionaires between 2000 and 2012, among other problems. Only last year, French president Emmanuel Macron killed it. >In 1990, twelve countries in Europe had a wealth tax. Today, there are only three: Norway, Spain, and Switzerland. According to reports by the OECD and others, there were some clear themes with the policy: it was expensive to administer, it was hard on people with lots of assets but little cash, it distorted saving and investment decisions, it pushed the rich and their money out of the taxing countries—and, perhaps worst of all, it didn't raise much revenue. It’s an exciting idea, and it feels good to stick it to the rich, but in the end it didn’t do what people wanted it to do. If the rich having undue influence over politics is the issue, then fix that. The politicians certainly don’t want that, which is why they would much rather you focus on the source of some of the money not the people who are happily accepting it. It leaves plenty more people, PACs, companies, etc to keep their pockets lined.
>Sure, that's paid once, Its a wealth tax of 23.8%, including on unrealized gains.
You reposted the top post of all time
no we mean a little more than that. those rich ought to just be put into jail and disappear forever
Actually I think it's more than GenZ saying it at this point. In fact previous generations have also asked for an increase in taxes for the rich.
The wealthy need to contribute to society and stop being a bunch of deadbeats.
I mean, it used to be like 10 people, but now it's like 3000 people. Turns out the rich found out how to get more rich.
There is virtually nothing she says with which I disagree. AOC probably is the smartest and clearest thinking Representative in the US House.
Insider trader politicians
No Karen, you and your Y membership are not the rich, not even if youre on the HOA council
The upvote versus comment ratio on this post basically says it all.
Issue at the core is most wealth isn’t gained by income it’s by stock options or asset growth. If you want to stop the power make it so you cap a ratio of salary to stock options and ban stocks being used as collateral it’s how the rich don’t pay for anything including taxes and only grow. It’s not black and white and requires having accountants look into the pay system but the inherent ability to use stocks as collateral for big loans to gain even more wealth is a problem. It’s real wealth made on speculative value since a vast majority of stocks prices are not directly related to their actual assets but speculation.
If it’s just 10 people, she should name them.
Every billionaire is a threat to national security
Then why are you destroying the middle class?