Lots of American universities are named after the dudes who paid for them initially. I'm not saying I'd be proud to go to Bezos U (go fighting bald eagles!) but if it were free then you could hold your nose.
Strangely, I guess, if I try to imagine myself having one billion dollars, it's just an amount of money that the only way I'd even make a dent in it is if I either was specifically making bad purchases or if I had lost my mind. (For example, just gambling it all away.)
Even if you simply threw it in a normal index fund that isn't focused on dividends, but growth, you might still make 1%, or 10 million a year in dividends. So just the dividends you accidentally make would let you live a very luxurious lifestyle.
I could imagine having one billion dollars if it was just the worth of my private company that I didn't want to split up or something like that, but otherwise, it's really just too much money. I'd be donating to charities just to keep my net worth at a level that I could look myself in the mirror and not feel like a villain, and so I'd actually be in favor of things like wealth taxes. It would just make my life easier.
I think people who imagine themselves as billionaires and are still stingy with money are either not accurately imagining that amount of money, or they're too stupid to have any amount of money, or they're villains, just like every billionaire today is a villain.
Someone once suggested that if you become worth $1 billion, we declare that you win capitalism. We confiscate 99% of it and name a dog park in your honor.
Financial obesity is an existential threat to any society that tolerates it, and needs to cease being celebrated, rewarded, and positioned as an aspirational goal.
Corporations are the only ‘persons’ which should be subjected to capital punishment, but trillionaires should be forced to transition into billionaires, and billionaires should be euthanised through taxation.
Obesity is a technically accurate classification of excessive resource accumulation.
Medical obesity typically doesn’t have an easy, meaningful, or effective path to address the application of the term, levelling blame at those affected is rarely justified.
Financial obesity is an entirely self imposed status, and those affected are entirely responsible for their continued classification.
The inability to identify or comprehend this nuance speaks volumes.
ignoring all the evil shit, Christianity was created with prohibitions on greed and pride and such.
Then in the early 20th century, rich assholes paid for a radio "preacher" to basically say that greed and pride and shit were fine and dandy. And thus was born Prosperity Gospel.
Economics is the social control mechanism that filled the void vacated by religion after the enlightenment. A bunch of accounting rules cherry picked by the ruling class, protected from scrutiny, arbitrarily and inconsistently imposed on the masses, enforced by threat of violence.
Finance is its mythology.
Banks are its cathedrals.
Financial institutions its churches.
Economists its clergy.
GDP its God.
If religion is the opium of the masses, economics is their fentanyl.
"All the evil shit" basically comes around when somebody inevitably shows up and says:
"Look, those books are a lot of words. You're too stupid to handle such responsibility. You need me/us to interpret it for your busy, feeble little minds. Don't worry God gave us special authority for some indiscernible reason so you have to listen to us. 😉"
"Wide is the path to destruction" definitely comes to mind when it comes to people choosing the path of least intellectual resistance. (In the modern era, with reasonable literacy rates and unparalleled access to scripture.)
Sorry I'm more trying to signal boost you here because you're so right:
Christianity practiced in earnest was a big time obstacle for the wealthy and powerful. They couldn't stamp it out by force, so they do what they do with any culture: They stole it and sold it back in a way that glorifies themselves.
Nothing is more opposed to Christ than the disgusting greed and nationalism displayed today. Everyone of any belief and creed needs to keep calling out and shining light the blatant lies and hypocrisy.
Yeah, now it's too late. Taxing the billionaires will only be undone by them as they use their vast riches to influence elections and control governments. Today's ultra wealthy has more wealth and political power than they have at any time in human history, and they are set on world domination (and enslaving the worker class until they can all be replaced with automation).
We're going to have to find a way to take all their ill-gotten gains. And rest assured, they will not relinquish it unless forced to do so. We'll probably have to pry their lucre from their cold dead hands, and that of their heirs (and their heirs).
Hasan Piker is currently on the front page of twitch.tv, a website owned by Jeff Bezos.
Yeah, now it’s too late.
You feel this way because the influencers the billionaires recommend you watch have made you feel this way. You're told by Jeff Bezos' boy Hasan that liberals are the enemy so you will never vote for taxing billionaires. It's only "too late" because you've been made to believe it's too late. You need to stop listening to millionaires that are being promoted by billionaires.
That's why they're working so hard on militarizing AI. As they become more and more obscene, the risk of getting killed by their own private security gets higher.
They want killing machines protecting them instead.
Take back what is rightfully the American peoples' money from Elon, Trump, and the rest of his lackies. Use it to subsidize college, housing, and healthcare.
Imagine all the JOBS that would "create" with so many public projects to handle all at once! Public transport! Healthcare! Education! USAID! Roads without potholes! Bridges not on the verge of collapse? Think of the dams!!
Wow. Seizing the ill gotten gains of like 3 to 5 people would fix almost everything, and yet here we are. I truly can't comprehend it...
According to this site, he makes about $9.8B/year, so even a 100% tax wouldn't do it.
The problem is how do you calculate his taxes? He's already doing that and paying his $800 or whatever it is. So you have to make assumptions about how much you would tax at 4.7%.
I therefore assumed this meant if his entire net worth were taxed at 4.7%.
Yup and that's probably the biggest injustice the world has ever seen. But that doesn't erase the fact that Bezos, does not have an income or even a net worth of $1.5T, which is what it would take at 4.7% to make $70B.
This meme could just as easily have said, for instance, that "just Bezos alone could personally fund this program for three years and he'd still be a billionaire. Imagine if we forced that on every billionaire." It would still make a powerful point without spreading a lie to do it. Because if you think a whole bunch of people who saw this and didn't fact check it AREN'T going to repeat it to other people, your kidding yourself.
Plus it didn't explain were the money comes from. Bazos makes 80k a year, and his stocks go up in value which is why good net worth goes up. If we taxes his unrealized gains where the money come from?
We need a way to tax when stock valuation is used as collateral for loans and revolving credit, enabling people from Bezos to have paper income of 80K and realizing gains without actually realizing gains. A general wealth tax, especially on unrealized gains, is obviously dumb, but the ghost gains loophole needs to be closed.
Bottom line is that stock valuation shouldn't be allowed to be use for collateral. If it doesn't exist for tax purposes, then it doesn't exist for collateral purposes. You want billions of dollars to play with? Liquidate your assets, pay your taxes, and have fun.
The system was obviously created as a tax dodge. We don't have to act like it's all over, they won, and there is nothing to be done. We can change it, and take away their tax dodge that is painfully parasitic on our society.
Just come up with a variable and if your total loans for the year (using speculative assets as collateral) are above that amount, the assets are taxed as realized gains. And the loan as income.
My thought is the limit should be 100x the annual take home pay of the bottom 20% of workers. Currently that's about $1.6m. It has the bonus of needing to increase worker pay for cheaper loans.
So every billionaire is going to selling stocks. You do realize the owners is these stocks are going to either be china or Black Rock if that happens. They are the only ones that would be able to afford to buy them. It would be a massive transfer of weath to big corporations or even worse a foreign country.
An idea I've come across is to tax the shares directly into a fund held by the IRS to be sold over time on the market. I haven't extensively thought through it myself, but that could help spread the buying period allowing more people/orgs to afford to buy it. Also helps the market not crash every year when everyone is forced to sell.
So basically lower the stock returns by devaluing the gains and giving Black Rock all our stocks. The only thing i see happening with that is it's people are not going to be able to retire and they will need to work more because the returns in the market will vaporize their chance to retire.
When the rich move to inventing in hard assets instead of the market, housing will go up as investors buy up the market. Meaning taxing the unraised gains will cause more people to be priced out of housing as well.
So they you expect them to keep acting as parasite and you mean the law can reign them ? That doomerisme buddy, don't loose hope. And action need to be pushed at many level, you need to spread the idea if so much people start speaking about taxing billionaires constantly the subject will have to be treated.
Tbf 4.7% would still take is a long way, especially if colleges stopped being a "company" and didn't inflate their prices in spite of student loan companies.
I don't believe that vehemently disagreeing with the other side gives you a license to spread misinformation. It is my belief that if you have to lie to make your point, maybe you should reconsider your point. This is my belief whether it's MAGA doing the lying or their opponents.
AND just because I've pointed out that this meme is demonstrably incorrect doesn't mean that I don't agree with the sentiment. I just believe this administration and it's followers are doing plenty of factually horrible things, there's plenty of factually good points to make on that topic without having to resort to making shit up. Period.
Funny enough I feel like presidents and other officials would be shockingly cheap, monetarily.
Like you'd probably see a literal "Bribe to destroy most potable water in a major city to build another data center" or something and go "Wait for real? Just for like 5 million?!"
Like they're already so rich they'll sell us all out in a heartbeat to toss 2 more gold coins into their gold coin swimming pool.
I bet they get a lot further simply with promises of access to their network of other wealthy a-holes who are influential simply because they're wealthy, and wealthy because they're influential.
There's a reason Epstein's island was a common factor to so many of the wealthy international global elite.
Part of the issue here is that the damage has already been done. The taxes should have been in place a LOOOOOONG time ago to at least partially prevent getting where we are now. This is the equivalent strategy of running out the clock while you're ahead. They've done that already. Focusing on the worst of the worst is a fool's errand.
Doesn't mean we can't update the rules moving forward, of course, but you're going to find that your ideas are not as popular as you think if and when people realize they have to voluntarily make compromises. Amazon could be harmed, perhaps mortally, quite easily if everyone would stop buying from their e-commerce site and businesses would stop using their web services. Good luck with that. Walmart would cease to be a thing if everybody stopped shopping there. You know the song and the dance, but that shit's not happening.
THIS math may not work, but there is math that will work.
A good start is the America First Fund (irony intended), which is what we will use as seed money for the social programs that this country desperately needs to be able to compete with ever other industrialized nation.
The American First Fund is where we will collect things like the tariff repayments. Why should those go to the government, when they were stolen from the Citizens? That money should go into the America First Fund. Any corporate fines collected because of their crimes against Citizens, should go into the AFF.
And fines against corporations and Sociopathic Oligarchs should be increased enormously. The minimum fine for ANY infraction should start at $1 billion. Fines should hurt them, just like a $200 "rolling through a stop sign" ticket hurts Citizens.
And confiscation should be on the table. Corporations are to be operated to benefit the American economy, and the Citizens. If you continue to operate your business to your personal benefit alone, at the detriment of society, your entire corporation will be confiscated, and operated as a non-profit to benefit society, with any excess revenues going to the AFF. And Oligarch families who find themselves destitute because their entire estate was confiscated due to their sociopathic behavior toward their fellow Citizens, will NOT be eligible for the AAF benefits funded by those confiscations. In the future, the only homeless people will be former oligarchs who have EARNED their homelessness.
The America First Fund's level will be mentioned nightly on the evening news. When the wealthy tune in to see what the Dow/ NASDAQ/ S&P were for the day, the rest of the Citizens can see where the America First Fund stands, and the wealthy will also see it, and know that their money could be removed, and added to it at any time.
American Citizens should benefit by fines against corporations for abusing us, they shouldn't go to the government to build more bombs or golden monuments, while we're told there is no money for food or healthcare or education. Those fines belong to US, and the America First Fund makes sure those funds are spent on US, and not the Sociopathic Oligarchs who caused the fines in the first place.
I'm assuming this is about taxing his Net Worth and not his Income? Because most years they have negative income, and on some years they have like $30Bn which won't be enough for free college.
If the countries that are a nice place to love all came round to rising taxes, then there would be nowhere for these billionaires to run too. If things get bad enough it might happen...
probably has more to do with people not wanting to see 'lessers' get ahead--those who put in less effort and minorities, etc.
you can't fight this with memes. it's something that's fundamental to american programming and not everyone sits on the internet all day reading this shit.
look at the underlying messages in films, tv shows and popular media, and it's the same ambition and personal responsibility driven nonsense that has always been there. it's always putting out the message that only the most deserving should succeed.
the conversation about wokeness and representation is just a distraction.
I believe the 2nd part of the post is satire but i agree. The issue is that the more educated you are the more """ woke brainwashed""" (read: educated) you become, so conservatives naturally dont like colleges
One of the things that 'Muricans don't seem to understand is that the most awful, the worst most humiliating and the most absurd reason that the civilised world sneers at them is because they chose stupidity and ignorance
Lmao. Just ignore every poll that says a majority of US Americans want universal healthcare, higher taxes on billionaires, legal weed, green energy, EVs, and stronger labor laws and you're absolutely correct!
if its really majority then things would improve, no? Politcans would get elected that make these things happen?
Or if that majority is powerless to do anything, then they should cry out that america is not democracy so loudly that other countrys couldnt ignore it, provided that this majority actually cares and doesnt just wish things were better but conform with the regime and choose ignorance.
Or if that majority is powerless to do anything, then they should cry out that america is not democracy so loudly that other countrys couldnt ignore it,
I wish i knew, peaceful ways dont seem to do anything and violent ways can easily give the oppressors more excuses to make things worse, at least if you dont have good plans. At least it might lessen americas grip on the rest of the world.
Though then again, has any non-demoratic country succesfully turned things around? I dont really know if this is uncharted territory.
Lol right? Like seeing a kid getting beat up by a bully with an obvious born-with advantage and being like "I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR THIS THO! YOU'RE SO STUPID AND AWFUL, KID!"
this is just an uninformed take. the reason why "taxing billionaires doesn't work" is said by some people, is because there's free trade and billionaires could just move their stuff abroad where it isn't taxed. we need an end to free trade first before taxing wealth becomes feasible.
it has nothing to do with "taxing my feelings of becoming a billionaire" or such
then let them leave and let them take their money with them. they don't contribute to the society anyway.
you are mistaking money for real resources. houses are built with cement, bricks, gravel, plaster, and labour. you cannot build a house with money. billionaire cannot take real resources with them. in fact if they leave they will stop hoarding resources and that will make our lives better, not worse.
If billionaires will relocate to reduce their taxes, why are all the tech CEOs still US citizens and not, say, Bermuda, with 0% income tax & 0% corporate tax?
The US doesn't have a wealth tax... Yet
I don't know if China does. But property tax is a thing. And property tax is a wealth tax on a specific form of wealth.
The point is, not taxing people who live outside the country, or aren't even citizens, isn't a fixed law of the universe like the speed of light. It's a policy choice. Different choices can be made. There's no reason tax law can't be written to account for it.
This tax may be imposed on real estate or personal property. The tax is nearly always computed as the fair market value of the property, multiplied by an assessment ratio, multiplied by a tax rate.
ok i'm currently reading up on property tax in the US. it's actually much more interesting topic than i thought. here's an interesting infographic:
i'm still interpreting what this means. so the US does have a wealth tax but it mostly affects non-movable property (as i said in my original comment) and that is why billionaires don't actually pay x% of their total wealth under it.
to explain the colors in the diagram: yellow + orange + light blue are the taxes that are paid on the state level, i assume? meanwhile dark blue + pink + dark red are the taxes paid on the federal level. green is the stuff you keep.
most of these taxes seem to be income-based (payroll taxes means wage-based taxes i assume, then state income tax, then payroll taxes again, then federal income taxes). income-based taxes seem to make about 2/3 of the total taxes. meanwhile property taxes (wealth taxes) make 1/4 and sales taxes makes the small remainder. (rough estimate from looking at the diagram).
so to introduce a "wealth tax" would mean to create a new category ("Federal Wealth Tax") that taxes all net wealth except real estate (which is already taxed on the state level), am i seeing this correctly?
also:
Local officials determine values [of houses] and may be disputed by property owners.
The question is, how do you assess the total wealth of a person, once they have moved their stuff abroad? How do you even begin to measure it? If there's no local cooperation from the local government to actually check and estimate the total wealth, is there any way to even find out about it?
so to introduce a "wealth tax" would mean to create a new category ("Federal Wealth Tax") that taxes all net wealth except real estate (which is already taxed on the state level), am i seeing this correctly?
The details haven't been worked out. It may or not include locally taxed properties. California's one time billionaire tax I don't think cares if it's been taxed or not already.
how do you assess the total wealth of a person, once they have moved their stuff abroad?
They can't move a lot of it. It's mostly shares in companies, bonds, commodities, all traded on public markets. Some is in private markets. But that's still all managed by banks. Banks all around the world started sharing data in 2016. So governments now have access to people's international holdings.
Things like cars, boats, paintings, various high value sundries, they have insurance values that could be used.
In short, very carefully. Some things may be missed, but the vast majority of their wealth can be found and calculated.
They can’t move a lot of it. It’s mostly shares in companies, bonds, commodities, all traded on public markets. Some is in private markets. But that’s still all managed by banks. Banks all around the world started sharing data in 2016. So governments now have access to people’s international holdings.
oh that's interesting. i would like to know whether somebody has actually written a detailed step-by-step guide to assess people's net worth, because i haven't seen any so far. so i'm interested in seeing it practically done.
Honestly, to me this is a bad take because only a handful of nations in the world consider to tax their nationals when living outside of their borders.
I think taxes should be meant as a contribution to the services to are getting (pension, roads, schools). If you are not living in a country, you shouldn’t pay taxes there. In the other hand, a company that ID physically on US soil should pay taxes there
If you make a fortune from your connections to an economy, people, and society; wherever you may live personally, it makes sense for you to contribute back to that society. You may not directly benefit from its roads, but you make money from the people who do. Money you wouldn't be able to have without those roads.
That becomes very faint as a connection. If you live abroad and have no economic connection to my country of origin. Why should you pay? And how can you legally determine or versus the other?
If I were born and raised abroad, held no assets in your country, was never paid by anyone in your country, I wouldn't have anything for them to tax. I'd just be some random foreigner. I'm not sure what you're getting at.
I think the one example of this actually happening was in London, and the billionaires who did leave did not actually contribute anything to the local economy: as many of the workers they employed as possible were migrants brought in or outsourced and they kept skimming profits off the top to hoard. The businesses they ran continued operating as normal even if some got sold off.
EDIT: and they've been movng back because the place they fled to was Dubai lmfao
In an ideal scenario, other countries would see our prosperous age after taxing our billionaires, and they'd want some of that sweet stuff so they'd do the same.
All the billionaires would have to fairly pay back for the value people provided to make them so rich, or retreat to some uninhabited island somewhere.
Either way we'd totally win lol.
Then again, as an aside, did you know if you're a U.S citizen and leave the U.S you're still subject to income tax abroad? Isn't that interesting? (Edit: other people mentioned this a lot haha)
I seriously wonder if all these asshats would actually revoke their citizenship en masse to avoid taxes.
...and then even if they did, we'd still be rid of them so society would start to balance out again...
116 Comments
jdr@lemmy.ml · 39 pts · 5d
Lots of American universities are named after the dudes who paid for them initially. I'm not saying I'd be proud to go to Bezos U (go fighting bald eagles!) but if it were free then you could hold your nose.
ChicoSuave@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 5d
There isn't a university named after a rich dude that's free. Most are very expensive to maintain the brand value of the family name.
Darkaga@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 5d
Harvard, Princeton, Yale, MIT, and Penn are all free if your family makes less than $200k/yr. A bunch more are free at $150k and $100k cutoffs.
Vorticity@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 4d
Which of those is named after a rich dude? Penn, is kind of but only because Pennsylvania is named after a person. I don't think any of the rest are.
Darkaga@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d
John Harvard, Prince William III of Orange, Elihu Yale…
Vorticity@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d
Well, I'm a dumbass. Thanks!
wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 4d
MY BRAND
curbstickle@anarchist.nexus · 2 pts · 5d
Those are all private.
BillyClark@piefed.social · 28 pts · 5d
Strangely, I guess, if I try to imagine myself having one billion dollars, it's just an amount of money that the only way I'd even make a dent in it is if I either was specifically making bad purchases or if I had lost my mind. (For example, just gambling it all away.)
Even if you simply threw it in a normal index fund that isn't focused on dividends, but growth, you might still make 1%, or 10 million a year in dividends. So just the dividends you accidentally make would let you live a very luxurious lifestyle.
I could imagine having one billion dollars if it was just the worth of my private company that I didn't want to split up or something like that, but otherwise, it's really just too much money. I'd be donating to charities just to keep my net worth at a level that I could look myself in the mirror and not feel like a villain, and so I'd actually be in favor of things like wealth taxes. It would just make my life easier.
I think people who imagine themselves as billionaires and are still stingy with money are either not accurately imagining that amount of money, or they're too stupid to have any amount of money, or they're villains, just like every billionaire today is a villain.
PattyMcB@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 5d
The reason you can't be a billionaire (not saying it's a bad thing) is because you think this way. You're not greedy enough.
NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 5d
Maybe I should get my brains scrambled, could help with the greed issue.
Tehhund@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 5d
Someone once suggested that if you become worth $1 billion, we declare that you win capitalism. We confiscate 99% of it and name a dog park in your honor.
nonentity@sh.itjust.works · 24 pts · 5d
Financial obesity is an existential threat to any society that tolerates it, and needs to cease being celebrated, rewarded, and positioned as an aspirational goal.
Corporations are the only ‘persons’ which should be subjected to capital punishment, but trillionaires should be forced to transition into billionaires, and billionaires should be euthanised through taxation.
Steve@communick.news · 12 pts · 5d
I prefer "Financial Hoarding"
It literally is a hording mentality. But because it's money, people give it a pass.
PattyMcB@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 5d
Hoarding*
Steve@communick.news · 1 pts · 5d
Fixd
nonentity@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 5d
A distinction sans difference, it’s neurotoxic however it’s labelled.
Steve@communick.news · 2 pts · 5d
Now you're literally fat shaming
nonentity@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 4d
Obesity is a technically accurate classification of excessive resource accumulation.
Medical obesity typically doesn’t have an easy, meaningful, or effective path to address the application of the term, levelling blame at those affected is rarely justified.
Financial obesity is an entirely self imposed status, and those affected are entirely responsible for their continued classification.
The inability to identify or comprehend this nuance speaks volumes.
Steve@communick.news · 0 pts · 4d
So does your ability to post-hoc rationalize
chaogomu@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 5d
ignoring all the evil shit, Christianity was created with prohibitions on greed and pride and such.
Then in the early 20th century, rich assholes paid for a radio "preacher" to basically say that greed and pride and shit were fine and dandy. And thus was born Prosperity Gospel.
nonentity@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 5d
Economics is the social control mechanism that filled the void vacated by religion after the enlightenment. A bunch of accounting rules cherry picked by the ruling class, protected from scrutiny, arbitrarily and inconsistently imposed on the masses, enforced by threat of violence.
Finance is its mythology. Banks are its cathedrals. Financial institutions its churches. Economists its clergy. GDP its God.
If religion is the opium of the masses, economics is their fentanyl.
MonkeMischief@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 5d
"All the evil shit" basically comes around when somebody inevitably shows up and says:
"Look, those books are a lot of words. You're too stupid to handle such responsibility. You need me/us to interpret it for your busy, feeble little minds. Don't worry God gave us special authority for some indiscernible reason so you have to listen to us. 😉"
"Wide is the path to destruction" definitely comes to mind when it comes to people choosing the path of least intellectual resistance. (In the modern era, with reasonable literacy rates and unparalleled access to scripture.)
Sorry I'm more trying to signal boost you here because you're so right:
Christianity practiced in earnest was a big time obstacle for the wealthy and powerful. They couldn't stamp it out by force, so they do what they do with any culture: They stole it and sold it back in a way that glorifies themselves.
Nothing is more opposed to Christ than the disgusting greed and nationalism displayed today. Everyone of any belief and creed needs to keep calling out and shining light the blatant lies and hypocrisy.
uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 17 pts · 5d
Yeah, now it's too late. Taxing the billionaires will only be undone by them as they use their vast riches to influence elections and control governments. Today's ultra wealthy has more wealth and political power than they have at any time in human history, and they are set on world domination (and enslaving the worker class until they can all be replaced with automation).
We're going to have to find a way to take all their ill-gotten gains. And rest assured, they will not relinquish it unless forced to do so. We'll probably have to pry their lucre from their cold dead hands, and that of their heirs (and their heirs).
SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca · 6 pts · 4d
Not to mention their influence on you.
Hasan Piker is currently on the front page of twitch.tv, a website owned by Jeff Bezos.
You feel this way because the influencers the billionaires recommend you watch have made you feel this way. You're told by Jeff Bezos' boy Hasan that liberals are the enemy so you will never vote for taxing billionaires. It's only "too late" because you've been made to believe it's too late. You need to stop listening to millionaires that are being promoted by billionaires.
Jax@sh.itjust.works · 0 pts · 4d
Whoa whoa whoa there Space Cowboy - you're speaking too much sense. This is Lemmy, we just shit ourselves petulantly here.
Diurnambule@jlai.lu · 0 pts · 4d
OK doomer
chiliedogg@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 4d
That's why they're working so hard on militarizing AI. As they become more and more obscene, the risk of getting killed by their own private security gets higher.
They want killing machines protecting them instead.
Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 pts · 4d
Slaves that can’t rebel is the fucking dream for them
postmateDumbass@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 5d
Elon's treason and corruption would be an easier case to prosecute and confiscate his ill gotten wealth.
Especially with ICE and national security involved.
Funkt4st1c@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 5d
Take back what is rightfully the American peoples' money from Elon, Trump, and the rest of his lackies. Use it to subsidize college, housing, and healthcare.
MonkeMischief@lemmy.today · 8 pts · 5d
Seriously, would be near-utopia in like a year.
Imagine all the JOBS that would "create" with so many public projects to handle all at once! Public transport! Healthcare! Education! USAID! Roads without potholes! Bridges not on the verge of collapse? Think of the dams!!
Wow. Seizing the ill gotten gains of like 3 to 5 people would fix almost everything, and yet here we are. I truly can't comprehend it...
Professorozone@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 5d
Here we go again. No sources.
According to his site:
https://www.sanders.senate.gov/press-releases/sanders-make-college-tuition-free/
It would cost $70B/year.
According to this site, he makes about $9.8B/year, so even a 100% tax wouldn't do it.
The problem is how do you calculate his taxes? He's already doing that and paying his $800 or whatever it is. So you have to make assumptions about how much you would tax at 4.7%.
I therefore assumed this meant if his entire net worth were taxed at 4.7%.
According to here which tracks it real time: https://www.forbes.com/profile/jeff-bezos/
It's currently $270B.
$270B x 0.047 = $12.7B.
So no, you couldn't fund it just by taxing him 4.7%. I think we'll need to create a special tax on billionaires to cover the rest.
LodeMike@lemmy.today · 8 pts · 5d
Wealth tax... It is extremely obvious that this would be a wealth tax.
Professorozone@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 4d
And?
uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 7 pts · 5d
Currently, we're subsidizing Bezos. US taxpayers are paying Amazon
And currently, a few people, including Bezos, own more than does half of the US.
Professorozone@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 4d
Yup and that's probably the biggest injustice the world has ever seen. But that doesn't erase the fact that Bezos, does not have an income or even a net worth of $1.5T, which is what it would take at 4.7% to make $70B.
This meme could just as easily have said, for instance, that "just Bezos alone could personally fund this program for three years and he'd still be a billionaire. Imagine if we forced that on every billionaire." It would still make a powerful point without spreading a lie to do it. Because if you think a whole bunch of people who saw this and didn't fact check it AREN'T going to repeat it to other people, your kidding yourself.
ProfessorProteus@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 5d
Let's do it anyway.
Professorozone@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 4d
Fuck yeah!
krisevol@lemmus.org · 3 pts · 4d
Plus it didn't explain were the money comes from. Bazos makes 80k a year, and his stocks go up in value which is why good net worth goes up. If we taxes his unrealized gains where the money come from?
Narauko@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 4d
We need a way to tax when stock valuation is used as collateral for loans and revolving credit, enabling people from Bezos to have paper income of 80K and realizing gains without actually realizing gains. A general wealth tax, especially on unrealized gains, is obviously dumb, but the ghost gains loophole needs to be closed.
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 4d
Bottom line is that stock valuation shouldn't be allowed to be use for collateral. If it doesn't exist for tax purposes, then it doesn't exist for collateral purposes. You want billions of dollars to play with? Liquidate your assets, pay your taxes, and have fun.
The system was obviously created as a tax dodge. We don't have to act like it's all over, they won, and there is nothing to be done. We can change it, and take away their tax dodge that is painfully parasitic on our society.
village604@adultswim.fan · 1 pts · 4d
Just come up with a variable and if your total loans for the year (using speculative assets as collateral) are above that amount, the assets are taxed as realized gains. And the loan as income.
My thought is the limit should be 100x the annual take home pay of the bottom 20% of workers. Currently that's about $1.6m. It has the bonus of needing to increase worker pay for cheaper loans.
Diurnambule@jlai.lu · 1 pts · 4d
They have to sell part of there action. If I can't pay a debt, can i tell them you can't smake me sell my actions to reimburse my debt...
krisevol@lemmus.org · 1 pts · 4d
So every billionaire is going to selling stocks. You do realize the owners is these stocks are going to either be china or Black Rock if that happens. They are the only ones that would be able to afford to buy them. It would be a massive transfer of weath to big corporations or even worse a foreign country.
Corgwn@programming.dev · 1 pts · 4d
An idea I've come across is to tax the shares directly into a fund held by the IRS to be sold over time on the market. I haven't extensively thought through it myself, but that could help spread the buying period allowing more people/orgs to afford to buy it. Also helps the market not crash every year when everyone is forced to sell.
krisevol@lemmus.org · 1 pts · 4d
So basically lower the stock returns by devaluing the gains and giving Black Rock all our stocks. The only thing i see happening with that is it's people are not going to be able to retire and they will need to work more because the returns in the market will vaporize their chance to retire.
When the rich move to inventing in hard assets instead of the market, housing will go up as investors buy up the market. Meaning taxing the unraised gains will cause more people to be priced out of housing as well.
Diurnambule@jlai.lu · 1 pts · 4d
Ypu can end discussion about funding something or something getting defended by wouldn't have to close it if billionaires paid fair taxes.
Diurnambule@jlai.lu · 1 pts · 4d
So they you expect them to keep acting as parasite and you mean the law can reign them ? That doomerisme buddy, don't loose hope. And action need to be pushed at many level, you need to spread the idea if so much people start speaking about taxing billionaires constantly the subject will have to be treated.
Diurnambule@jlai.lu · 1 pts · 4d
They did it for a bitcoin hack or scam too. They sell it by small amount and reimburse the scammed.
Jankatarch@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 5d
Tbf 4.7% would still take is a long way, especially if colleges stopped being a "company" and didn't inflate their prices in spite of student loan companies.
Professorozone@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 4d
No disagreement there.
My disagreement is with the meme and anyone who spreads it thinking it's ok to lie to make a point.
WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 4d
So, 370 million Americans would need about only 181 dollars a year each to have a good education?
Professorozone@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 4d
You think 370 million Americans are all going to go to college?
WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 4d
I hope so.
Professorozone@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 4d
I'm guessing it would cost more then for all the 90 year olds and toddlers to go to college with the rest of America.
WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 4d
If I were the president of the USA, making EVERYONE do a biannual exam, alongside with learning disability checks, would be my first term promise.
Cheebus@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 4d
look man i’m all for math, and yep a lot of these social problems can math out pessimistically if we use our current economic model as the basis
but the reality here is shits fucked, trillionaires should exist, and eat the fucking rich for once
let’s do that for a change
Professorozone@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 4d
I don't believe that vehemently disagreeing with the other side gives you a license to spread misinformation. It is my belief that if you have to lie to make your point, maybe you should reconsider your point. This is my belief whether it's MAGA doing the lying or their opponents.
AND just because I've pointed out that this meme is demonstrably incorrect doesn't mean that I don't agree with the sentiment. I just believe this administration and it's followers are doing plenty of factually horrible things, there's plenty of factually good points to make on that topic without having to resort to making shit up. Period.
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today · 11 pts · 4d
But then they'll get smart, and when AI has led to a permanent 65% unemployment rate, they will demand UBI, and take it from the Trillionaires.
chiliedogg@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 4d
AI is already keeping them from becoming smart. The majority of college students are having gen "AI" write their essays now.
DagwoodIII@piefed.social · 11 pts · 5d
I was at work, talking to someone my own income.
I asked him to name some things that he'd buy with a billion dollars that he couldn't get with $100 million.
He couldn't actually name one thing, but kept insisting that billionaires 'needed' the money.
Natanael@infosec.pub · 7 pts · 5d
Presidents (bribes).
MonkeMischief@lemmy.today · 5 pts · 5d
Funny enough I feel like presidents and other officials would be shockingly cheap, monetarily.
Like you'd probably see a literal "Bribe to destroy most potable water in a major city to build another data center" or something and go "Wait for real? Just for like 5 million?!"
Like they're already so rich they'll sell us all out in a heartbeat to toss 2 more gold coins into their gold coin swimming pool.
I bet they get a lot further simply with promises of access to their network of other wealthy a-holes who are influential simply because they're wealthy, and wealthy because they're influential.
There's a reason Epstein's island was a common factor to so many of the wealthy international global elite.
Ugh. 🤢
porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 5d
Haha, 5 million? They would do that for 50k, a fancy dinner and a first class plane ticket.
NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 5d
I mean... he couldn't come up with mega yacht?
That gets you into the hundreds of millions. Bezos is estimated at 500 million. Its not even the most expensive.
He's gotta work on his money spending skills.
A hundred million doesn't even cover its yearly operating costs at a safe 4% withdrawal. You need 750 million for that.
InvalidName2@lemmy.zip · 10 pts · 5d
Part of the issue here is that the damage has already been done. The taxes should have been in place a LOOOOOONG time ago to at least partially prevent getting where we are now. This is the equivalent strategy of running out the clock while you're ahead. They've done that already. Focusing on the worst of the worst is a fool's errand.
Doesn't mean we can't update the rules moving forward, of course, but you're going to find that your ideas are not as popular as you think if and when people realize they have to voluntarily make compromises. Amazon could be harmed, perhaps mortally, quite easily if everyone would stop buying from their e-commerce site and businesses would stop using their web services. Good luck with that. Walmart would cease to be a thing if everybody stopped shopping there. You know the song and the dance, but that shit's not happening.
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today · 4 pts · 4d
THIS math may not work, but there is math that will work.
A good start is the America First Fund (irony intended), which is what we will use as seed money for the social programs that this country desperately needs to be able to compete with ever other industrialized nation.
The American First Fund is where we will collect things like the tariff repayments. Why should those go to the government, when they were stolen from the Citizens? That money should go into the America First Fund. Any corporate fines collected because of their crimes against Citizens, should go into the AFF.
And fines against corporations and Sociopathic Oligarchs should be increased enormously. The minimum fine for ANY infraction should start at $1 billion. Fines should hurt them, just like a $200 "rolling through a stop sign" ticket hurts Citizens.
And confiscation should be on the table. Corporations are to be operated to benefit the American economy, and the Citizens. If you continue to operate your business to your personal benefit alone, at the detriment of society, your entire corporation will be confiscated, and operated as a non-profit to benefit society, with any excess revenues going to the AFF. And Oligarch families who find themselves destitute because their entire estate was confiscated due to their sociopathic behavior toward their fellow Citizens, will NOT be eligible for the AAF benefits funded by those confiscations. In the future, the only homeless people will be former oligarchs who have EARNED their homelessness.
The America First Fund's level will be mentioned nightly on the evening news. When the wealthy tune in to see what the Dow/ NASDAQ/ S&P were for the day, the rest of the Citizens can see where the America First Fund stands, and the wealthy will also see it, and know that their money could be removed, and added to it at any time.
American Citizens should benefit by fines against corporations for abusing us, they shouldn't go to the government to build more bombs or golden monuments, while we're told there is no money for food or healthcare or education. Those fines belong to US, and the America First Fund makes sure those funds are spent on US, and not the Sociopathic Oligarchs who caused the fines in the first place.
CascadianGiraffe@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 4d
Nationalize corporate America. It's really that simple.
FiniteBanjo@feddit.online · 3 pts · 5d
I'm assuming this is about taxing his Net Worth and not his Income? Because most years they have negative income, and on some years they have like $30Bn which won't be enough for free college.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 4d
they account for unpaid trillions in tax avoidance schemes. plus reigning in the DEFENSE budget is a good start.
Sirdubdee@piefed.social · 2 pts · 5d
Tax the billionaires now so we all can be billionaires later.
grimpy@lemmy.myserv.one · 1 pts · 5d
fight them here so we won’t have to fight them over there
Prior_Industry@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 4d
If the countries that are a nice place to love all came round to rising taxes, then there would be nowhere for these billionaires to run too. If things get bad enough it might happen...
Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 5d
It's okay we're only gonna tax trillionaires, so the billionaires are okay
whereitsat@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 4d
probably has more to do with people not wanting to see 'lessers' get ahead--those who put in less effort and minorities, etc.
you can't fight this with memes. it's something that's fundamental to american programming and not everyone sits on the internet all day reading this shit.
look at the underlying messages in films, tv shows and popular media, and it's the same ambition and personal responsibility driven nonsense that has always been there. it's always putting out the message that only the most deserving should succeed.
the conversation about wokeness and representation is just a distraction.
queueBenSis@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 5d
because more education definitely would not increase someone’s chances of making more money
Funkt4st1c@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 5d
I believe the 2nd part of the post is satire but i agree. The issue is that the more educated you are the more """ woke brainwashed""" (read: educated) you become, so conservatives naturally dont like colleges
FistingEnthusiast@lemmy.world · -8 pts · 5d
One of the things that 'Muricans don't seem to understand is that the most awful, the worst most humiliating and the most absurd reason that the civilised world sneers at them is because they chose stupidity and ignorance
Dookieman12@piefed.social · 5 pts · 5d
Lmao. Just ignore every poll that says a majority of US Americans want universal healthcare, higher taxes on billionaires, legal weed, green energy, EVs, and stronger labor laws and you're absolutely correct!
reksas@sopuli.xyz · 3 pts · 5d
if its really majority then things would improve, no? Politcans would get elected that make these things happen?
Or if that majority is powerless to do anything, then they should cry out that america is not democracy so loudly that other countrys couldnt ignore it, provided that this majority actually cares and doesnt just wish things were better but conform with the regime and choose ignorance.
Talk is cheap, actions are what matter.
MonkeMischief@lemmy.today · 3 pts · 5d
Ok. And then what?
reksas@sopuli.xyz · 2 pts · 5d
I wish i knew, peaceful ways dont seem to do anything and violent ways can easily give the oppressors more excuses to make things worse, at least if you dont have good plans. At least it might lessen americas grip on the rest of the world.
Though then again, has any non-demoratic country succesfully turned things around? I dont really know if this is uncharted territory.
MonkeMischief@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 5d
Lol right? Like seeing a kid getting beat up by a bully with an obvious born-with advantage and being like "I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR THIS THO! YOU'RE SO STUPID AND AWFUL, KID!"
gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org · -16 pts · 5d
this is just an uninformed take. the reason why "taxing billionaires doesn't work" is said by some people, is because there's free trade and billionaires could just move their stuff abroad where it isn't taxed. we need an end to free trade first before taxing wealth becomes feasible.
it has nothing to do with "taxing my feelings of becoming a billionaire" or such
nialv7@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 5d
then let them leave and let them take their money with them. they don't contribute to the society anyway.
you are mistaking money for real resources. houses are built with cement, bricks, gravel, plaster, and labour. you cannot build a house with money. billionaire cannot take real resources with them. in fact if they leave they will stop hoarding resources and that will make our lives better, not worse.
tburkhol@slrpnk.net · 22 pts · 5d
If billionaires will relocate to reduce their taxes, why are all the tech CEOs still US citizens and not, say, Bermuda, with 0% income tax & 0% corporate tax?
Steve@communick.news · 15 pts · 5d
US citizens pay US income tax, no matter where in the world they live.
China makes foreign nationals pay taxes on any revenue that comes from China.
You don't need to end free trade.
gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org · 3 pts · 5d
yeah this is income tax. what about wealth tax?
Steve@communick.news · 8 pts · 5d
The US doesn't have a wealth tax... Yet
I don't know if China does. But property tax is a thing. And property tax is a wealth tax on a specific form of wealth.
The point is, not taxing people who live outside the country, or aren't even citizens, isn't a fixed law of the universe like the speed of light. It's a policy choice. Different choices can be made. There's no reason tax law can't be written to account for it.
gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org · 1 pts · 5d
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_tax_in_the_United_States
ok i'm currently reading up on property tax in the US. it's actually much more interesting topic than i thought. here's an interesting infographic:
i'm still interpreting what this means. so the US does have a wealth tax but it mostly affects non-movable property (as i said in my original comment) and that is why billionaires don't actually pay x% of their total wealth under it.
to explain the colors in the diagram: yellow + orange + light blue are the taxes that are paid on the state level, i assume? meanwhile dark blue + pink + dark red are the taxes paid on the federal level. green is the stuff you keep.
most of these taxes seem to be income-based (payroll taxes means wage-based taxes i assume, then state income tax, then payroll taxes again, then federal income taxes). income-based taxes seem to make about 2/3 of the total taxes. meanwhile property taxes (wealth taxes) make 1/4 and sales taxes makes the small remainder. (rough estimate from looking at the diagram).
so to introduce a "wealth tax" would mean to create a new category ("Federal Wealth Tax") that taxes all net wealth except real estate (which is already taxed on the state level), am i seeing this correctly?
also:
The question is, how do you assess the total wealth of a person, once they have moved their stuff abroad? How do you even begin to measure it? If there's no local cooperation from the local government to actually check and estimate the total wealth, is there any way to even find out about it?
Steve@communick.news · 2 pts · 5d
The details haven't been worked out. It may or not include locally taxed properties. California's one time billionaire tax I don't think cares if it's been taxed or not already.
They can't move a lot of it. It's mostly shares in companies, bonds, commodities, all traded on public markets. Some is in private markets. But that's still all managed by banks. Banks all around the world started sharing data in 2016. So governments now have access to people's international holdings.
Things like cars, boats, paintings, various high value sundries, they have insurance values that could be used.
In short, very carefully. Some things may be missed, but the vast majority of their wealth can be found and calculated.
gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org · 1 pts · 5d
oh that's interesting. i would like to know whether somebody has actually written a detailed step-by-step guide to assess people's net worth, because i haven't seen any so far. so i'm interested in seeing it practically done.
Steve@communick.news · 2 pts · 5d
You could ask Bezos' ex-wife. It's common in divorces.
FiniteBanjo@feddit.online · 1 pts · 5d
China is 2nd place for number of billionaires so if they do it isn't universal or just doesn't work.
gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org · 1 pts · 5d
iirc china does have a wealth tax (and it is effective), just that it isn't 100% thorough, so some people still become billionaires.
VOwOxel@discuss.tchncs.de · 4 pts · 5d
US citizens pay US wealth tax... I don't get what the difference might be.
FiniteBanjo@feddit.online · 2 pts · 5d
They pay property taxes, but Bezos' wealth is in stock and bonds so no he doesn't currently pay taxes on those.
gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org · 1 pts · 5d
the question is, how do you assess net wealth? is there any kind of way of knowing how much net wealth a person has?
there might be, i'd just like to see it.
Eq0@literature.cafe · -4 pts · 5d
Honestly, to me this is a bad take because only a handful of nations in the world consider to tax their nationals when living outside of their borders.
Steve@communick.news · 7 pts · 5d
What does that matter?
The point is that it's absolutely possible. There is no technical reason it can't be done, it just isn't often.
Eq0@literature.cafe · 1 pts · 4d
I think taxes should be meant as a contribution to the services to are getting (pension, roads, schools). If you are not living in a country, you shouldn’t pay taxes there. In the other hand, a company that ID physically on US soil should pay taxes there
Steve@communick.news · 1 pts · 4d
If you make a fortune from your connections to an economy, people, and society; wherever you may live personally, it makes sense for you to contribute back to that society. You may not directly benefit from its roads, but you make money from the people who do. Money you wouldn't be able to have without those roads.
Eq0@literature.cafe · 1 pts · 4d
That becomes very faint as a connection. If you live abroad and have no economic connection to my country of origin. Why should you pay? And how can you legally determine or versus the other?
Steve@communick.news · 1 pts · 4d
If I were born and raised abroad, held no assets in your country, was never paid by anyone in your country, I wouldn't have anything for them to tax. I'd just be some random foreigner. I'm not sure what you're getting at.
FiniteBanjo@feddit.online · -1 pts · 5d
Is this a bot? It responded to itself. EDIT: Nope was just visually bugged
Steve@communick.news · 3 pts · 5d
I responded to eq0.
Don't know what you're seeing
FiniteBanjo@feddit.online · 1 pts · 5d
Ah you're right must have been a graphical error
luokaton@lemmy.zip · 9 pts · 5d
no they won’t. they can relocate their asses, i guess, but the assets they actually make money on are not easy (often impossible) to move.
tax the corporations.
here’s how: https://youtu.be/f-oDDojrTcg?
gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org · -4 pts · 5d
companies have been moved to china en masse since 1970 though
edit: but i agree with you about houses that are rented out
luokaton@lemmy.zip · 9 pts · 5d
socialist china sounds like a perfect place to move your assets to! they would never tax it 😉
FiniteBanjo@feddit.online · 2 pts · 5d
I think the one example of this actually happening was in London, and the billionaires who did leave did not actually contribute anything to the local economy: as many of the workers they employed as possible were migrants brought in or outsourced and they kept skimming profits off the top to hoard. The businesses they ran continued operating as normal even if some got sold off.
EDIT: and they've been movng back because the place they fled to was Dubai lmfao
MonkeMischief@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 5d
In an ideal scenario, other countries would see our prosperous age after taxing our billionaires, and they'd want some of that sweet stuff so they'd do the same.
All the billionaires would have to fairly pay back for the value people provided to make them so rich, or retreat to some uninhabited island somewhere.
Either way we'd totally win lol.
Then again, as an aside, did you know if you're a U.S citizen and leave the U.S you're still subject to income tax abroad? Isn't that interesting? (Edit: other people mentioned this a lot haha)
I seriously wonder if all these asshats would actually revoke their citizenship en masse to avoid taxes.
...and then even if they did, we'd still be rid of them so society would start to balance out again...