It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 5
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 6 2019 @ 06:58 PM

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

originally posted by: M5xaz
The NERDS WON at life, NOT YOU!

Suck it up cupcake or get off your ass in mom's basement and I dare you to do 1/10th of what I do.


WTF dude!?!

Just settle down, like seriously... lol.

Anyway, it's kind of funny how back in the 50's and 70's when there was a high tax rate on the filthy rich, that a family could live comfortably on a single blue-collar wage... in a big house, with all the perks and 2 big gas guzzling cars.

But then you get to the 80's and 90's, when they start lowering the tax rate on the filthy rich... then all of a sudden, you need 2 bread earners in a family working at least 40 hours a week, just to break even.

Explain that?

Google EFFECTIVE tax rate after deduction for the highest brackets always was in the 30% range when including deductions.
No ONE ever paid the rates the Bimbo proposes. She should know this or is outright LYING.

Tell me, would you trust a cocktail waitress to do YOUR income tax return ?
THAT is exactly what that BIMBO is !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If you need brain surgery, would you hire a plumber ???????

Think FFS!!!!

And yes, rising TAXES ARE killing the middle class.
TRUMP just gave a tax CUT that the DEMOCRATS opposed.


How can you possibly trust that ignorant bitch - Socialism one day, but Manolo Blahnik shoes the next day .
# HER!

edit on 6-1-2019 by M5xaz because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-1-2019 by M5xaz because: (no reason given)

edit on Sun Jan 6 2019 by DontTreadOnMe because: Mod Note: Do Not Evade the Automatic Censors

posted on Jan, 6 2019 @ 10:08 PM
a reply to: M5xaz

I'm not going to continue this discussion with you because you're not willing to discuss anything. I'm just going to keep working to get liberal, progressive Democrats elected and you can stay here and all-caps-rage all you want.

posted on Jan, 7 2019 @ 05:12 AM
a reply to: shawmanfromny

She doing this because she wants to be next obummo you remember the junior senator who decided senator was not enough so then ran for president . She is trying to rinse and repeat she is young ,she is a minority, she is a woman . Yep Mark my words they gonna see her run in 2020 if she over 35.

posted on Jan, 7 2019 @ 06:43 AM
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Her tax policy is more generous to the rich than Jimmy Carter’s was, and the 1 percent wasn’t nearly as well-off in the 1970s as it is now,” Eric Levitz wrote in New York Magazine.

Some economists, including Emmanuel Saez and Thomas Piketty, have also argued in favor of a higher tax rate on the super-rich.

“Until the 1970s, policy-makers and public opinion probably considered—rightly or wrongly—that at the very top of the income ladder, pay increases reflected mostly greed rather than productive work effort,” Saez and Piketty wrote in 2013, arguing that a top tax rate could be set as high as 83 percent. Since the 1970s, they wrote, countries that made large tax cuts for top earners did not grow faster than countries that continued large taxes for the very rich.

When Sanders proposed a 90 percent tax on the rich in 2015, Josh Bivens, of the Economic Policy Institute, said: “It’s not that radical, unless you’re calling Eisenhower’s America a radical place, and given that no one would propose a high rate like that on anything like an ordinary income, it would basically be irrelevant to the tax burden of the vast majority of Americans.”

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Proposes Perfectly American Tax on Ultra-Rich

In April 2017, Tucker had a "socialist" professor, who advocated for a 80% tax hike on the rich. Tucker, as usual, raised some interesting questions and made this professor look stupid...

Right. Murdoch's mouthpiece Tucker is a truth warrior! Right?
And... and... and... Eisenhower was a Commie!!!oneoneeleven

posted on Jan, 7 2019 @ 12:24 PM
a reply to: M5xaz
Again, I’m sure that US ngo’s funding insurgents and economic espionage, sanctions, US backed coups, attempted assassinations, ie US economic warfare, had nothing to do with Venezuela’s current situation. Socialism, not even socialism, just any 3rd world nation implementing policies that benefit its people rather than western banks and corporations..... this never exists in a vacuum. It always comes with US economic warfare, espionage, insurgencies, sanctions, and lastly bombs. Just wait, I expect we will soon be seeing us bombs in Venezuela ala Brazil and Columbia.

posted on Jan, 7 2019 @ 12:26 PM
a reply to: PublicOpinion

I still stand by the idea that taxes should be shifted from labor and businesses that produce a product to capital gains, rents, and interest.

posted on Jan, 7 2019 @ 12:30 PM
All you’re economic theories are junk! .......

posted on Jan, 7 2019 @ 12:30 PM
double post
edit on 7-1-2019 by pexx421 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 7 2019 @ 12:35 PM
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says, Facts Don't Matter, Because I'm Morally Right.

posted on Jan, 7 2019 @ 12:45 PM
a reply to: M5xaz

The top marginal tax rate in 1960 was 91%, which applied to income over $200,000 (for single filers) or $400,000 (for married filers) – thresholds which correspond to approximately $1.5 million and $3 million, respectively, in today’s dollars. Approximately 0.00235% of households had income taxed at the top rate.


posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 06:06 AM
a reply to: ClovenSky

Do you just go pure capitalism and remove all constraints

Well as we have seen pure capitalism isn't really at fault. The system is run like a plutocracy. In the real world all economic theory is just that, an inexact "science"; the real movers have the ear of the Policy makers. After all the snip of the last 10 years why would Governments allow "bail-in" provisions to protect the Banks. Another haircut for the masses.

How much debt have we created since 2008? Wouldn't that possibly swamp the old rules of inflation?

True, but inflation was never really about the "too much money chasing too few goods". Inflation happens by the creation of new money by the Government, inflation is the Govts friend, it pays you in tomorrows $'s.

I really dont have any answers as to what a better system would be. Somewhere along the line they will manipulate it with useless "scrip", that can be cancelled or inflated away. Why should they allow a system where they lose control?

At the most base level I think we're hardwired through the "id" part of the brain, survival/greed.

posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 06:45 AM
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

if a person can't work out a way for them and their family to be extremely comfortable for the rest of their lives off 30 million dollars, then they never deserved to be rich in the first place!

Why should they have to work out how to live their life when they have already worked hard to make that money and employed people along the way?

then they never deserved to be rich in the first place!

So you would be the moral arbiter - even going so far as to determine who is worthy?

posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 06:55 AM
a reply to: M5xaz

And stop being so GD gullible- socialism NEVER works. Read a book sometime.

They should start with some Ayn Rand - her favourite word was the "moochers" who could justify sending other peoples money

Ayn Rand:

The question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop me.
We can evade reality, but we cannot evade the consequences of evading reality
A creative man is motivated by the desire to achieve, not by the desire to beat others.

Achievement of your happiness is the only moral purpose of your life, and that happiness, not pain or mindless self-indulgence, is the proof of your moral integrity, since it is the proof and the result of your loyalty to the achievement of your values.

We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force.

Wealth is the product of man's capacity to think.

I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.

Potentially, a government is the most dangerous threat to man's rights: it holds a legal monopoly on the use of physical force against legally disarmed victims.

posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 07:02 AM
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

Blame Govt largesse for that. Also inflation and the size of houses getting bigger. If you start talking about tax minimization by large corporations you would be getting closer to the truth.

posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 01:16 PM
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight
Ayn rand is full of hubris and crap. Also capitalism is all about getting a free lunch. The whole system is about how you can arrange your money to be able to exploit your fellow man and live off their work. Sorry, but that’s not inspired, nor is it productive. It’s stealing productivity from others so you don’t have to produce. Not sure why so many people seem ok with the idea that an elite group of individuals should be able to reap the profit generated by thousands. As for economic theory, all the mainstream economic theory of today is garbage, based off of mathematics and not factoring in debt, banks, or money. And the whole system is there solely to siphon all excess money from the public and give it to the leeches, that’s banks, speculators, and landlords. This IS the end result of capitalism, it’s de facto rule by capital, ie those with the most money make the rules, and there’s nothing there to stop them. Massive accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few will always destabilize any democracy or any other system, it will always increase in speed, and will always end up with a small group dominating everyone else.

posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 03:22 AM
a reply to: pexx421

But what if you didn’t? I guarantee you that those in the 10 million a year range are not “workers”

I'll repeat your quote above as you fail to appreciate that people can earn $10 mill from innovation and actually producing.

Whilst Rand had her critics the quote I used were about hard work and using your brains. Whats wrong with that?

This perhaps illustrates why some of your ideas are dangerous......

I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.

Why should my earnings be taxed at 70% if I reach a certain bracket. Wheres the incentive to better myself or provide for my offspring or legacy? Why should I pay a higher portion tax? It probably will fly over your head but when I'm making $10 mill a year I'm also paying more sales tax Goods and services tax and perhaps payroll taxes then you'll pay in 20 years.

Whats wrong with being a landlord? Someone has to provide housing stock for Joe Public to live and rent. Or would you rather the Government provide more handouts?

posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 09:46 AM
a reply to: pexx421

Maybe. But at some point you'll concede to logics eventually.

Corporate finance researcher Philip Mattera examines the large-scale wage theft by American corporations - as a pervasive practice built in to the policies of the country's largest employers, an opportunistic scheme targeting precarious workers, and a multi-billion dollar crimewave being pulled off by the already rich every day, hour by hour.

And there's more, take your pick!

A complete list of everything we learned on This Is Hell! in 2018.

posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 09:55 AM
a reply to: pexx421

It's worse.

David Harvey, Distinguished Professor of anthropology and geography at City University of New York and author of "A Brief History of Neoliberalism" argues with Chris Hedges that Neoliberalism, the manta of the global corporate elites, has created the worst income inequality in American history.

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4   >>

log in