Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   The 7 wealthiest Americans could easily pay for 1/3rd of the $3.5 trillion budget plan   (truthout.org) divider line
    More: Obvious, Tax, Taxation, Wealth, Taxation in the United States, Income tax in the United States, Income tax, Sergey Brin, Tax refund  
•       •       •

611 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 Sep 2021 at 5:55 AM (5 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



78 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
5 days ago  
I think I speak for most Christian Americans, when I have 100 billion dollars through god's holy grace, amen. I do not want anybody touching even one billion of it.
 
5 days ago  
Should, not could.
 
4 days ago  

Unright: Should, not could.


Why not both?

If they should but couldn't, that would be bad.
 
4 days ago  
It's already 6am, you'd think all those white knights for Job Creators™ would already be here tsk-tsking
 
4 days ago  

ArcadianRefugee: Unright: Should, not could.

Why not both?

If they should but couldn't, that would be bad.


Well, okay, yeah.
 
4 days ago  
The problem with that line thought / math exercise is that you run out of rich people very quickly.  You can shear a sheep a hundred times but your can only butcher it once.  We need to work on increasing the shearing efficiency, not sharpening the butcher knives.
 
4 days ago  

Unright: ArcadianRefugee: Unright: Should, not could.

Why not both?

If they should but couldn't, that would be bad.

Well, okay, yeah.


Ah, but wait. I don't want them to have that loophole where it's their turn to actually pay their fair share but they go "whoops, all my money is tied up and not very liquid at the moment, I'll get you next time" and there never is a next time.

fark the rich. Make them pay their fair share.
 
4 days ago  
So the State could confiscate 100% of the lifetime assets of its most productive citizens and it would barely pay for 1/3 of a single year of the new spending programme being proposed by the democrats?

This seems to highlight as much about the sheer size of this bloated, profligate proposal as it does the wealth gap in America.
 
4 days ago  

Shaggy_C: So the State could confiscate 100% of the lifetime assets of its most productive citizens and it would barely pay for 1/3 of a single year of the new spending programme being proposed by the democrats?

This seems to highlight as much about the sheer size of this bloated, profligate proposal as it does the wealth gap in America.


Billionaires are not 'productive'. Workers are productive. Billionaires are exploitative parasites.
 
4 days ago  
"wealth" isn't liquid cash.
 
4 days ago  

bighairyguy: The problem with that line thought / math exercise is that you run out of rich people very quickly.  You can shear a sheep a hundred times but your can only butcher it once.  We need to work on increasing the shearing efficiency, not sharpening the butcher knives.


But if one sheep is eating 99% of the feed you put out and the rest of your herd is starving, you're better off butchering it than shearing it.
 
4 days ago  

RedZoneTuba: bighairyguy: The problem with that line thought / math exercise is that you run out of rich people very quickly.  You can shear a sheep a hundred times but your can only butcher it once.  We need to work on increasing the shearing efficiency, not sharpening the butcher knives.

But if one sheep is eating 99% of the feed you put out and the rest of your herd is starving, you're better off butchering it than shearing it.


I've been informed that one sheep produces 10,000x the amount of wool of your other sheep combined.

I mean technically he's been eating all their wool before you can even shear them, and won't even shiat it out for you to use as fertilizer, but comparatively, so much more wool. And you'd lose it all if you butchered him, that's just math.
 
4 days ago  
We should have a contest where at the end of the year the Government seizes half of the assets of the top billionaire.

It would be great fun watching them try to hide their immense wealth.
 
4 days ago  
Well I could go for a nice MLT right now.
 
4 days ago  

Shaggy_C: So the State could confiscate 100% of the lifetime assets of its most productive citizens and it would barely pay for 1/3 of a single year of the new spending programme being proposed by the democrats?

This seems to highlight as much about the sheer size of this bloated, profligate proposal as it does the wealth gap in America.


You think the $3.5T is the annual cost of the proposal? Why?
 
4 days ago  

Unright: Unright: ArcadianRefugee: Unright: Should, not could.

Why not both?

If they should but couldn't, that would be bad.

Well, okay, yeah.

Ah, but wait. I don't want them to have that loophole where it's their turn to actually pay their fair share but they go "whoops, all my money is tied up and not very liquid at the moment, I'll get you next time" and there never is a next time.

fark the rich. Make them pay their fair share.


Oh, def.
 
4 days ago  
Yes, there's nothing wrong with taking the money of people who don't want you to take it, dumbassmitter, just because they're rich and you don't think they deserve to have it.

I'm not happy with the situation either, but forcibly taking the wealth of the elite under the guise of "redistributing" it has never worked out well in the history of ever. It didn't work in France, it didn't work in Russia, and there's no reason to think it will work here.

Find another way to get the wealth out of the top and back to the bottom besides the point of a bayonet.
 
4 days ago  

Shaggy_C: So the State could confiscate 100% of the lifetime assets of its most productive citizens


O_o
 
4 days ago  
You guys do realize that this article isn't an action plan, right? It's not a proposal to take all of Jeff's and Elon's money, just an illustration of how unevenly the pie is sliced.
 
4 days ago  
Billionaires shouldn't exist. Keep tax laws the same, but the >$999,999,999.99 tax bracket is 100%.
 
4 days ago  
Most of billionaires' wealth is part ownership of companies.

Take away Elon Musk's share of Tesla and the stock value plunges. Try to sell that stock in order to pay for your budget plan, and it plunges again.

What you should be doing instead is closing all the tax loopholes. Oh and hike up the death tax, Junior will still have more than enough to live on but he shouldn't be automatically entitled to a life of luxury while doing nothing.
 
4 days ago  

JerkStore: Billionaires shouldn't exist. Keep tax laws the same, but the >$999,999,999.99 tax bracket is 100%.


You'd still have billionaires because, again, most top-end wealth is in owning companies and not selling (which would generate a tax event).
 
4 days ago  

TabASlotB: You think the $3.5T is the annual cost of the proposal? Why?


Because I'm an idiot, that's why!

I realised my mistake while out on my morning run. One of those "oh shiat" moments. Oops...
 
4 days ago  

bighairyguy: The problem with that line thought / math exercise is that you run out of rich people very quickly.  You can shear a sheep a hundred times but your can only butcher it once.  We need to work on increasing the shearing efficiency, not sharpening the butcher knives.


You can always get more sheep.
 
4 days ago  

Shaggy_C: TabASlotB: You think the $3.5T is the annual cost of the proposal? Why?

Because I'm an idiot, that's why!

I realised my mistake while out on my morning run. One of those "oh shiat" moments. Oops...


Gotchya. It's not an uncommon misunderstanding. When you do the (right) math, it amounts to an increase in federal spending by ~5%.
 
4 days ago  

RedZoneTuba: bighairyguy: The problem with that line thought / math exercise is that you run out of rich people very quickly.  You can shear a sheep a hundred times but your can only butcher it once.  We need to work on increasing the shearing efficiency, not sharpening the butcher knives.

But if one sheep is eating 99% of the feed you put out and the rest of your herd is starving, you're better off butchering it than shearing it.


That is the dumbest of socialist lines. The money supply isn't finite Bill Gates having a billion dollars doesn't mean there is a billion less for everyone else. Anybody is free to start their own company and earn all the billions they want.
 
4 days ago  

Summoner101: Well I could go for a nice MLT right now.


When the tomtato's ripe...they're at perky. I love that. But that's clearly not what he said.
 
4 days ago  
Yeah, but that would affect their dick measuring contest.  How would we know who has the bigger dick, otherwise?
 
4 days ago  

RTOGUY: RedZoneTuba: bighairyguy: The problem with that line thought / math exercise is that you run out of rich people very quickly.  You can shear a sheep a hundred times but your can only butcher it once.  We need to work on increasing the shearing efficiency, not sharpening the butcher knives.

But if one sheep is eating 99% of the feed you put out and the rest of your herd is starving, you're better off butchering it than shearing it.

That is the dumbest of socialist lines. The money supply isn't finite Bill Gates having a billion dollars doesn't mean there is a billion less for everyone else. Anybody is free to start their own company and earn all the billions they want.


I'm not a "socialist" and I'm not an economist, but I do have eyes and I'm old enough to have lived in a time when the wealth disparity was much less and the average working class American could feed their family and own their own home on one income.
 
4 days ago  

Shaggy_C: So the State could confiscate 100% of the lifetime assets of its most productive citizens and it would barely pay for 1/3 of a single year of the new spending programme being proposed by the democrats?

This seems to highlight as much about the sheer size of this bloated, profligate proposal as it does the wealth gap in America.


Strawman vanquished!
You are very smart.
 
4 days ago  

TabASlotB: Shaggy_C: So the State could confiscate 100% of the lifetime assets of its most productive citizens and it would barely pay for 1/3 of a single year of the new spending programme being proposed by the democrats?

This seems to highlight as much about the sheer size of this bloated, profligate proposal as it does the wealth gap in America.

You think the $3.5T is the annual cost of the proposal? Why?


He's dumb?
 
4 days ago  
One thing that needs to happen is that we need to end the scam of CEOs and such being able to live off of loans that they get on the value of their stock.

It's a big part of how they duck taxes. They claim they're worth millions to the bank, but then they have nothing tangible except debt when the tax man comes a calling. There's got to be a smart way to address that.
 
4 days ago  
Well except our politicians are morons who think the wealthy should have all the benefits of living in this country with none of the cost like a bunch of farking parasites.
 
4 days ago  
Except that wealth is a market delusion.  If any of those people divested more than a tiny fraction of their holdings, the stocks would tank and that wealth would disappear.

Many moons ago, Bill Gates complained about being with wealthiest person in the USA, but any time he sold any stock, the price dropped and the other stockholders got on his case.
 
4 days ago  
I wonder what would happen to the world economy if the richest 1,000 familes were to suddenly disappear over night. Unmitigated chaos? Socialist uptopia? Societal collapse? The mind boggles.
 
4 days ago  

bighairyguy: The problem with that line thought / math exercise is that you run out of rich people very quickly.  You can shear a sheep a hundred times but your can only butcher it once.  We need to work on increasing the shearing efficiency, not sharpening the butcher knives.


That is some deep philosophy there.
 
4 days ago  
The Senators from the most poverty stricken states will vote against this reform, when it is this reform that would help their constituents the most.
 
4 days ago  

Lambskincoat: I think I speak for most Christian Americans, when I have 100 billion dollars through god's holy grace, amen. I do not want anybody touching even one billion of it.


Something, something, render unto Caesar, something something,
 
4 days ago  

TabASlotB: Gotchya. It's not an uncommon misunderstanding. When you do the (right) math, it amounts to an increase in federal spending by ~5%.


It's an interesting sleight of hand the way these numbers are presented, always representing total outlays over 10 years. What we don't really talk about is the net effect of these budget changes with successive governments - the Trump Tax Cuts and Further Handouts for the Rich Bill of 2017 and the Wasteful Pork for Red States Bill of 2018 were ostensibly meant to run through 2029; what is the combined effect of those bills (estimated around $5.5 trillion) with this one?

Maybe that's the way we should be framing this; the Democrats are spending even less than the Republicans did, and it's going to get us more 'bang for our buck' in terms of positive outcomes for US citizens rather than sending money overseas in the form of tax breaks for shareholders.
 
4 days ago  
Maybe we have a spending problem? Not even stealing all their wealth could cover a third of this bill. Idk, seems like the spend side of the equation is a little out of our league.
 
4 days ago  

Lambskincoat: I think I speak for most Christian Americans, when I have 100 billion dollars through god's holy grace, amen. I do not want anybody touching even one billion of it.


This article is literally discussing how if we took ALL of their wealth.  And if we did, it would cover a third of the spending plan.  But only if you really did your math lazily and poorly.

I mean, it really is talking about ALL of their wealth, not 1 percent like you say.
 
4 days ago  

lolmao500: So why again are 340 million people held hostage by 7 farking people?

Off with their heads.


How are you held hostage? Nobody is forcing you to buy a Tesla or shop with Amazon.
 
4 days ago  
I mean, I guess we could seize Bill Gates' $150 million house and sell it to feed the poor, but who, exactly, are we selling that house to after we've taken all the assets of the rich?

And who is going to pay that $1.5m tax bill to the city of Medina each year?

I don't like that there are very rich people, but simply taking everything they own is going to have some very disastrous effects to the schools of Seattle, LA, SF Bay, and NYC when there's suddenly nobody left to pay the billions of dollars in property taxes that the public schools count on each year.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
4 days ago  

Gyrfalcon: Yes, there's nothing wrong with taking the money of people who don't want you to take it, dumbassmitter, just because they're rich and you don't think they deserve to have it.

I'm not happy with the situation either, but forcibly taking the wealth of the elite under the guise of "redistributing" it has never worked out well in the history of ever. It didn't work in France, it didn't work in Russia, and there's no reason to think it will work here.

Find another way to get the wealth out of the top and back to the bottom besides the point of a bayonet.


guess you never heard of my tax plan?
nationalinterest.orgView Full Size
 
4 days ago  

bighairyguy: The problem with that line thought / math exercise is that you run out of rich people very quickly.  You can shear a sheep a hundred times but your can only butcher it once.  We need to work on increasing the shearing efficiency, not sharpening the butcher knives.


Well we could slaughter a few so the others will get the hint.
 
4 days ago  

Shaggy_C: So the State could confiscate 100% of the lifetime assets of its most productive citizens and it would barely pay for 1/3 of a single year of the new spending programme being proposed by the democrats?

This seems to highlight as much about the sheer size of this bloated, profligate proposal as it does the wealth gap in America.


Christ, do you even own a watch? Doesn't that cheap POS phone or computer you're using even have a clock? YOU WERE ON CALL AT 6 AM
 
4 days ago  
No they could not. They have paper money and if they sell enough stock to cover this, even monthly over 10 years, the market will respond by dropping the price.

"Between 2014 and 2018, America's 25 top billionaires paid federal income tax during that five-year period equal to just 3.4 percent of the increase in their collective wealth over that same period"

That's not income you idiot bastards.
 
4 days ago  

shpritz: You guys do realize that this article isn't an action plan, right? It's not a proposal to take all of Jeff's and Elon's money, just an illustration of how unevenly the pie is sliced.


Jeff and Elon are akin to lottery winners. They got lucky.

This is like arguing how unevenly the lottery pie is sliced.
 
4 days ago  

evilmrsock: RedZoneTuba: bighairyguy: The problem with that line thought / math exercise is that you run out of rich people very quickly.  You can shear a sheep a hundred times but your can only butcher it once.  We need to work on increasing the shearing efficiency, not sharpening the butcher knives.

But if one sheep is eating 99% of the feed you put out and the rest of your herd is starving, you're better off butchering it than shearing it.

I've been informed that one sheep produces 10,000x the amount of wool of your other sheep combined.

I mean technically he's been eating all their wool before you can even shear them, and won't even shiat it out for you to use as fertilizer, but comparatively, so much more wool. And you'd lose it all if you butchered him, that's just math.


The above statement is hilarious. Tell me, exactly what does Bezos do that justifies earning $350,000 a MINUTE?
 
4 days ago  

shpritz: You guys do realize that this article isn't an action plan, right? It's not a proposal to take all of Jeff's and Elon's money, just an illustration of how unevenly the pie is sliced.


Also compare per capita of countries. How unevenly is that pie also sliced?

People are perfectly happy when the pie is sliced more for them.

US has per capita of 65K and Afghanistan has 0.5K. Somalia has 0.3K. Where is the talk of cutting some of the pie their way? Would you give some of your share to help lift them up?
 
Displayed 50 of 78 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.