It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ocasio-Cortez Suggests 70 Percent Tax Hike On Wealthy Americans To Pay For The Green New Deal

page: 2
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:41 PM
link   
So let me explain. The majority of people making that much money are making unearned income. In other words, they are profiting from rent, interest, and speculation. The majority of their wealth comes from a scheme that takes what others earn, without creating an actual product.

The major growth sectors in the us other than the alphabets, are finance; and finance is profit without production. In fact it’s extraction, as it takes what other people make from them. Initially these are the ONLY people who were supposed to be taxed by income tax, and it was around 90%. Hey, 10% of millions you make without creating an actual product is still pretty good, eh? And the reason it’s fair is that these industries are detrimental to the society and to the economy. They don’t add productivity or profit, they just take it away from others in ever ballooning debt that reaches a point where it can’t be paid back.

Think banks. They don’t create or do work. They get money from the fed, and loan it to you. It’s not their money, they’re just a leech between you and the fed. And the fed itself is a leech, as the treasury could print the money itself, but instead the fed prints it then charges interest on its use. And this is one of the largest parts of gdp growth the last several years.....when in reality it should be subtracted from gdp rather than added.




posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:44 PM
link   
This is also what private public partnerships are btw, and privatization. Our tax dollars build roads, or drugs or the internet, or radio, tv etc, then companies get the rights to it from the govt and get to reap all the profits for what we paid to build. Parasites.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 06:04 PM
link   
a reply to: pexx421

So maybe we are just taxing the completely wrong things. Income tax should be abolished and replaced with a tax on capital gains and other rent seeker activities. If you are simply working for a living wage, you should get to keep the entirety of your paycheck. If you do not really work for a living, but receive substance off of the backs of the working, those unearned income streams should be taxed.

I wonder if we look at the top 10% or even 5% and how they received their 'wealth', would it be through hard work and innovation or would it be through inheritance of assets. Are these rich simply parasites or do they actually contribute to society and their local community? How do they use their assets, for betterment of their fellow man or to further screw over the uneducated and naive?

Dang it Pex, you have ruined me.

Maybe as long as it isn't forced upon the rich and powerful, but setup as regulations, they would have full choice to participate or not. Will there always be that 5%-10% of our population that will never reform to morals and live justly? Maybe we are all fools. I hate controlling people and telling them what they can do with their assets, but the answer is somewhere in the middle I suspect. Could we structure the protections in such a way that full will and freedom of choice is still respected at all levels?
edit on 4-1-2019 by ClovenSky because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 06:08 PM
link   
a reply to: ClovenSky
I gotta say, with that extra 27%-38% of money back in my pocket I’d feel a hell of a lot more free, and then I’d have more leisure to exert my will societally as well! That’s part of the plan too. Keep us all so overworked we can’t participate fully in our political process.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 06:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
I'm I not getting something here that everybody else is?

From what I can see, she's simply saying that people earning 10 million dollars a year should be getting taxed 70%... Why on earth would anyone be against that!?!

!0 million minus 70%, is still like 3 million dollars clear... Or around 57 thousand a week! What's wrong with some people? Is it a case of stockholm syndrome to your ridiculously wealthy overlords or something?

Anything more than 50% tax is out of hand imo, a government should be efficient enough to exist without taking so much wealth from its citizens. It doesn't matter how much a person is earning, I see no reason the government should have an automatic right to the majority of a persons wealth, unless it was earned illegally.

We have no idea how all millionaires earn their money, it's highly naive to assume no one really deserves that much money, 10 million is child's play in the grand scheme of things, it can be spent within the blink of an eye, and when it's your 10 million being cut down to 3 million I can guarantee your perspective on it will shift.

Now I've never even earned a million dollars in case you're wondering, but I'm quite confident I can do it with enough work and effort... but why would I even try if some people were just sitting by ready to take the vast majority of my earnings, do you understand how detrimental that can be to an economy... it causes the innovators to leave the nation and go somewhere which has more respect for their individual liberty.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 06:17 PM
link   
a reply to: ClovenSky
I’d say now it’s more the top 1% or a fraction of that. Us incomes are surprisingly not as high as people would expect, and the top 10% of earners actually only make just over $100k. That actually puts me pretty close, and I sure as hell don’t feel wealthy or even close to it. But if my labor wasn’t taxed I’d feel a lot richer!



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 06:18 PM
link   
a reply to: pexx421

Yep, consume us sheep with as much debt as we can bear and sit back to collect the revenue stream. But it is still our free will to enter into those debt contracts right? Do we need to create regulations to protect the sheep from themselves and selling out our future where our kids and grandkids will need to pickup the bill?

Help me out here, where is the line? It would be a lot easier to just say FULL freedom and stop thinking about this contradiction. When so many people see the asset appreciation from their home and bank on that money like it already spent, how do you get these people on board that asset appreciation will also need to be highly taxed?



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 06:21 PM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Would it be fair to evaluate how the money was earned? Maybe look at the income stream from a standpoint of owning a factory, employing people and contributing to the local community versus just owning assets and charging rent for their use. Is there anyway to separate out the honest wealth compared to dishonest/illegal wealth?



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 06:22 PM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder
If you earned it, sure. But what if you didn’t? I guarantee you that those in the 10 million a year range are not “workers”. They are mostly financiers, bankers, monopolists, or maybe crooked politicians. They largely make their money from speculation, monopolization, economic rent, or artificial scarcity. If you work for it, you should have it. But if you extract it from others then yes, a large percentage of it should be taxed.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 06:26 PM
link   
a reply to: ClovenSky
Maybe free will, but to a lesser extent. Housing has bubbled massively because of this, but we all need to be homeowners. The only alternative is to pay ever increasing rent, and living on the street is no option. So we are forced to choose from the options they make available, similar to our elections. Without this system, inflation would only come from increased wages, rather than from artificial scarcity or market manipulation. And therefore inflation tied to wages balances itself.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 06:38 PM
link   
Do any of you advocating for taxing millionaires out of existence realize many of those millionaires who “make” millions pay out lesser millions to tens of thousands of employees? Unintended consequences anyone? Like raising unemployment to 25-50%?

Or is the rest of the coming Socialist experiment to have EVERYONE work for the government while said government plunders from the capitalists?

See Venezuela for the completion of your Socialist experiment...though I’m sure some of you don’t care as long as you can have others money and free stuff.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 06:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Lab4Us
Actually 92% of the massive tax break that went to the wealthiest corporations under this admin were used completely on stock buybacks and dividends. This is the opposite of job creation or productivity.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 06:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Lab4Us

What about the millionaires that don't employ anyone or contribute to society in any way? What if these are the people are a leech on society that takes and never contributes? With all of the fake non profits and loop holes there are in our tax structure, can you be sure they are really taxed to that extent. I agree, it is a very very slippery road to go down but asking 'what if' should still be allowed, right? I am just wondering if there is anyway to separate honest & dishonest money extraction or creation.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 06:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: pexx421
a reply to: ChaoticOrder
If you earned it, sure. But what if you didn’t? I guarantee you that those in the 10 million a year range are not “workers”. They are mostly financiers, bankers, monopolists, or maybe crooked politicians. They largely make their money from speculation, monopolization, economic rent, or artificial scarcity. If you work for it, you should have it. But if you extract it from others then yes, a large percentage of it should be taxed.

The problem is it's hard to tell who "deserves" their money, you're trying to morally judge whether a person has worked hard enough to keep what they own, and you can't just apply a blanket tax on all rich people under the reasoning most of them don't deserve to keep their money. I would agree there is some point where a person is earning so much money it becomes hard to justify, but that number is hardly 10 million, I would place it closer to half a billion per year. At that point a 70% tax rate could possibly be justified in my mind because I find it unlikely anyone would work hard enough to deserve that.

But once again it's a question of morality and I'm hesitant to make judgments on others, maybe many inventors do deserve that much money because they've radically improved the standard of living for a huge number of people. It's really not my place within a free market capitalist system to make judgments about the amount of wealth a person earns and how much effort they expended to acquire that wealth. Even speculation for example involves risk, and to make a living from it you need to do constant research and act quickly to market changes. There is also a capital gains tax for any assets which increase in value.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 06:58 PM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Lets just get rid of the govt instead.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 06:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: ClovenSky
a reply to: Lab4Us

What about the millionaires that don't employ anyone or contribute to society in any way? What if these are the people are a leech on society that takes and never contributes? With all of the fake non profits and loop holes there are in our tax structure, can you be sure they are really taxed to that extent. I agree, it is a very very slippery road to go down but asking 'what if' should still be allowed, right? I am just wondering if there is anyway to separate honest & dishonest money extraction or creation.


You mean celebs and youtuber talking heads?



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 07:00 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

LOL

"I cant make a coherent argument" so REEEEEEEEEEE!!!!

Taking the KISS principle to extremes



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 07:10 PM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder well it’s very easy to see who’s making money from interest, rent, or capital gains. Just tax that rather than labor. It’s not about morality, it’s about taxing people who are actually working vs taxing people who are sitting back while other people’s money comes to them. And yes, speculation involves risk, but it also is often ruinous to the people creating the product they are speculating on. Speculation for future shares can ruin whole industries in other countries. Also, speculation is not normally done by people researching and making quick decisions. Almost exclusively now it’s done with programs using algorithms, automatically. The average stock share is only held now for less than a minute. So why should our livelihoods and economies be tied to a computer gambling system that has nothing to do with industry or production?



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 07:12 PM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder
And let me add, 75% of all speculation and stocks are held by the top 1%.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 07:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Subaeruginosa




I don't care what anyone says... There's no one person on this earth, whose actual worth to society is more than 50k a week.


Heres where your argument breaks down. You invest everything into a venture that may not break even or make a profit for the 1st 5 years. So you're then earning $10 mill a year for your hard work and innovation. Why should you be taxed 70%?

The real problem is that Govts are encouraged to keep borrowing, compounding interest. They give out to interest groups or social programmes enough to keep them in power.



Why on earth would anyone be against that!?!


If I'm the innovator or have invested my assets on risk and creating a product or wealth where is the incentive to continue taking "risk" if I'm going to be taxed at 70%?

Where do you draw the line?

$57 k a week, $2 k a week? $2000 sounded like a lot of money awhile ago. Look at the cost of living and size of mortgages?



There's no one person on this earth, whose actual worth to society is more than 50k a week.


50K, 20K,10K? How do you define worth to society? This is how Communists sucked in the masses. Then they became the "piggies:" at the trough in George Orwell's Animal Farm. The middle class will invariably be sucked into footing the bill.

They have done the math. Boiling frog syndrome.

You're from Australia like me. Do you ever question where has all the wealth coming out of the ground really gone? Certainly not back to the people.

If you honestly believe that a Politician who advocates 70% taxation will survive let alone implement such a plan then I don't really think you've been paying attention.

A good example would be GST. Since its introduction can you honestly say other taxes have really gone down or our standard of living has improved? Look at hidden inflation or whats considered a basket of goods when they fiddle with the numbers. LOL

Your cry for higher taxation is the rallying call of the foot soldier who will be manipulated into bringing the next generation of despots into Government.




top topics



 
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join