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.

 

Elizabeth Warren's "Wealth Tax" Now Will Pay For Social Security Increase

page: 1
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Sounds to me, Warren will pander to just about anyone to get elected prez. Now, she's vowing to increase Social Security payments by $200/mo, to every current and future beneficiary in the nation. Is it coincidence for her to announce this plan on the day of the third Democratic presidential debate? Talk about good timing...maybe Hillary gave her some tips, when they talked "behind the scenes" five days ago.


Warren, on debate day, proposes Social Security boost of $200 per month



Declaring that “it’s getting harder to save enough for a decent retirement,” Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Thursday unveiled a plan to increase monthly Social Security benefits by $200 for every current and future beneficiary.



says she’ll pay for extending the solvency of Social Security by nearly two decades with revenues from her plan to tax the wealthiest Americans.

www.msn.com...

There are probably many middle and low class Americans, who think that taxing the very wealthy would be the right thing to do. However, there is a potential negative aspect to consider. The loss of jobs.


Warren’s plan is to to tax people 2% per year on NET ASSETS over $50 million (and 3% over $1 billion). The wealth tax would tax people twice – once on their income and again on the assets they own – even cash in the bank.



Even the most oppressive tax regimes in Europe (like Sweden and Denmark, where the top tax bracket is 63% and capital gains are taxed at 43%) have abandoned the wealth tax. That’s right, even the most ardent, socialist countries realized that a wealth tax doesn’t work. As a matter of fact, nine countries in Europe abandoned the tax. Why? Because people were leaving in droves to avoid paying the oppressive levy.



In France, 513 wealthy households left the country every year for 35 years because they were tired of paying a wealth tax – taking an estimated $175 billion of assets with them.



The wealth tax simply does not work. In fact, it hurts any country that imposes one, because…Rich people are excellent at legally avoiding taxes. And they’re also the most mobile.



But when the wealth leave, they take more than their money… they also stop investing and creating jobs.

LINK

Also, there's this to consider:


Here’s Why Elizabeth Warren’s Wealth Tax Is Completely Unconstitutional. Warren, a Harvard law professor, understands the difference between direct taxes and indirect taxes, but she’s counting on the people not to pay attention.

LINK

So, I wonder how this will play out in tonight's debate, with Warren and Biden polling neck and neck? There definitely will be some grandstanding, perhaps even a few gaffes from the gaffe machine himself, but remember, cursing will NOT be tolerated!


edit on 9/12/2019 by shawmanfromny because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 12:40 PM
link   
To illustrate your point:



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 12:40 PM
link   
The notion of taxing wealth is absurd. The wealth has already been taxed when it was produced, it will be taxed when it is used and in some cases it will be taxed when it is passed on as an inheritance.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 01:00 PM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Another liberal loser who can't seem to understand that dual taxation isn't Constitutional.

So it would go before the SC, thrown out and...

Oh wait.

This is supposing Pocahontas would become President.

~giggling~

Carry on!!!




posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 01:13 PM
link   
I think it's a dumb idea. Social Security needs a bigger overhaul than throwing a few more bucks at it if I ever want to see some of the money I've paid towards it.

That said the argument that the wealthy will leave the country if we tax them more always confuses me.

Every other First World Country is already taxing the wealthy at a much higher rate and offering things like universal healthcare and universal education. Meanwhile, Second and Third World countries already allow the wealthy to have their money go farther.

So, if America is the greatest country in the world currently, as many like to claim, why would they move to another country if their tax rate goes up?



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 01:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
I think it's a dumb idea. Social Security needs a bigger overhaul than throwing a few more bucks at it if I ever want to see some of the money I've paid towards it.

That said the argument that the wealthy will leave the country if we tax them more always confuses me.

Every other First World Country is already taxing the wealthy at a much higher rate and offering things like universal healthcare and universal education. Meanwhile, Second and Third World countries already allow the wealthy to have their money go farther.

So, if America is the greatest country in the world currently, as many like to claim, why would they move to another country if their tax rate goes up?


What is confusing about it?

Capital is fluid and will go where there is the least amount of friction (taxes). We already see it happening at the state level (NYC, CT, NJ) losing billionaires to lower tax states like Florida. At some point, the uber wealthy will figure it isn't worth it and move to other countries who want their capital.

Yes, the US has a lot to offer, but don't think for a minute people won't move if they have that option.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 01:26 PM
link   
Even if you agree with her idea there is no chance in hell the bill would ever get passed.
She can promise the world but hasn't got the ability to deliver.

I guess she could go on the warpath...ha



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

She claims she is going to tax the "wealthiest Americans." In another article her plan was basically taxing individuals making $250k or households making $400k+.

Not really the wealthiest Americans in how people define uber rich....



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

F- all these politicians and their promises.

How about one of them step up and do something before being elected. That's who I would vote for. Imagine if they
used their campaign money to actually do something.
Here are some of the promises

disclosure on aliens - prove it now
cure to cancer - why wait, you could be saving people
build a wall - c'mon get out there with a brick and some mortar & barbed wire

or how about tell the Truth, we all are going to be taxed to death and none of us are going to see social security!

edit on 12-9-2019 by JAGStorm because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-9-2019 by JAGStorm because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

For a lot of people, that seems "uber rich". But you're right, it isn't. It's upper middle class.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 02:27 PM
link   
I've never been a fan of wealth taxes or "death" taxes.

We already have income taxes, capital gains taxes and sales taxes. This means you get taxed when you earn, taxed when you buy and taxes if your property appreciates in value.

Now on top of that they want to tax you for just having the stuff you bought with the money you were taxed for earning, and taxed for spending. They want to tax you for saving your money in the bank at a rate that is greater than the normal interest rate you'd get for that money.

I'm sorry but there is only so much you can take from the "haves" to give to the "have nots" and there is only so many ways you can tax the same dollar without driving that dollar underground or overseas.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 02:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: shawmanfromny


How about one of them step up and do something before being elected. That's who I would vote for. Imagine if they used their campaign money to actually do something.





posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

If the answer to everything is raising taxes, then you just might be a communist.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 02:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Edumakated

For a lot of people, that seems "uber rich". But you're right, it isn't. It's upper middle class.


I know. Sure top earner from a percentage standpoint... top 1 or 2%, but not uber rich. A household making $400k has more in common with a household making $75k than they do with someone making $10 million. People making $400k are doctors, lawyers, middle managers, business owners, etc. Working stiffs putting in 70 hour weeks trying to figure out how to find time to get to their kids PTA meeting.

It is really devious. These people have nothing in common with multi-millionaires. They make too much for anyone to have any sympathy, but seriously negatively impacted by increasing taxes.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 02:42 PM
link   
How dare some poeple know how to make wise decisions and husband their wealth while others make poor choices so they never seem to have any!



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 02:42 PM
link   
Were I one of those wealthiest Americans, and some politician, such as Warren, wanted to tax my already heavily taxed wealth, I would leave, and take my wealth with me.

Assuming I'm that wealthy, tax havens all over the world would beckon.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

And it won't be long before that kind of tax works its way back down the chain, too. Who needs to be a millionaire anymore? Obviously no one for this plan. Rich only needs to mean "more than me". Not to mention, they have to dial it down to where people have a harder time escaping their grasp.
edit on 12-9-2019 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 02:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Edumakated

For a lot of people, that seems "uber rich". But you're right, it isn't. It's upper middle class.


I know. Sure top earner from a percentage standpoint... top 1 or 2%, but not uber rich. A household making $400k has more in common with a household making $75k than they do with someone making $10 million. People making $400k are doctors, lawyers, middle managers, business owners, etc. Working stiffs putting in 70 hour weeks trying to figure out how to find time to get to their kids PTA meeting.

It is really devious. These people have nothing in common with multi-millionaires. They make too much for anyone to have any sympathy, but seriously negatively impacted by increasing taxes.



shhhhhhhhhhhhh you aren't allowed to question it, because you know, that means you hate poor people...



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Warren is talking the talk for sure, hard to say if she
can out do Bernie on Socialism.

Although, she is not an angry white man, so she
has that going for her.






posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 03:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Edumakated

And it won't be long before that kind of tax works its way back down the chain, too. Who needs to be a millionaire anymore? Obviously no one for this plan. Rich only needs to mean "more than me". Not to mention, they have to dial it down to where people have a harder time escaping their grasp.


Exactly what has happened in the UK. The government taxed the rich so heavily that they were run out of heir mansions, which were given to the National Trust. The inheritance tax is such that "fortunes" last barely more than two generations. I was talking about this to one of the docents dressed as a butler who squires you around these places for a fee. He was quite worried that this onerous tax was going to affect him and, as he explained, "I'm far from wealthy." Thus what was intended to tax "the rich until their pips squeaked" after WWII now is affecting the lower middle class. Well done, Britain. Well done!



new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join