What people don't understand about taxing the rich
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 фев 2024
- "It's just about punishing wealthy people for being wealthy. It has nothing to do with, with even raising tax revenue," argues Peter Suderman
Watch the full episode: • Nikki Haley's primary ...
---
Subscribe to the Reason Roundtable:
RUclips: • Politics Created the B...
RUclips Music: • The Reason Roundtable ...
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/68EwVbY...
Apple: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
The politicians think of money and taxes just like freedom and restrictive laws. The less you have of it the less they need to worry about you.
I moved from one state to another over $10K annual cost of living. To think people with much more wouldn't is just stupid.
That's relative. One thing is earning $30K and moving over 10K.
Earning $200K and questioned if it's worth moving over 10K is another.
@@adrianalexandrov7730 Or you look at it the other way. Is it more expensive to move, or stay? If you pay 30% in tax at 30k a year, that's 10k. If you pay 30% tax at 200k per year, then that's 60k. If the cost of moving is the same for both, then the wealthier people are incentivised more. Add progressive taxation on top, and it's no wonder the only wealthy people around a massive tax dodgers.
Government greed = corporate greed. Since 2008 the private asset market floats on massive liquidity from the state and especially central banks (due to QE).
Wealth taxes are a real band-aid solution to the stitches problem of government spending…
I teach at a state University. Why should I be expected to work for 30+ years and never get a raise?
If you don't like it go work somewhere else, do something else.
@@fantabuloussnuffaluffagus ok. Will do. Hopefully I can take most of my colleagues with me.
@@mattrex8599 Are you pretending that's a threat or something? If you had marketable skills you would have left years ago.
No, I don't want fries with that.
@@fantabuloussnuffaluffagus true enough. I guess it's stay there or kill myself
I’ve been noticing and thinking a lot lately about how the views of the general US population believes or has been led to believe that the rich are the enemy and that creating a wealth tax will in someway even the playing field. The real issue as I see it isn’t the wealthy people but the fact that we live in a country that has a multitiered system which the rich benefit from the most. For example, the ability for large corporations to have such influence on public policy which not only directly benefits them but also keeps the politicians in office they rely on to provide these benefits is the real problem. A few possible solutions come to mind. Term limits for congressional seats, limit campaign contributions by placing a cap on them, and prohibit super pacs just to name a few. The American people need to study history and realize in the late 1800’s government corruption was just as bad as now but some of it was removed by smart Presidents.
Mises.
"I’ve been noticing and thinking a lot lately about how the views of the general US population believes or has been led to believe that the rich are the enemy and that creating a wealth tax will in someway even the playing field."
That's what happens when your CEO earns more in an hour than you earn in a year.
All your complaints about politicians will not change this.
This is a very unprofessional group. I am married to a Teacher and we can't afford the boat and have never heard anyone discussing we need the IVF embryos to be taxpayers so we can afford the boat. These 4 take the Reason out of ReasonTV. This group spent over 5 minutes of 8.28 minutes bashing Teachers and Unions rather than getting to the point of Wealth Tax. Yesterday I subscribed to ReasonTV thinking it was a good channel. I just now unsubscribed.
We don’t have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem.
Tax revenues have never exceeded 20% of GDP in the US. No matter how we’ve tried to slice it.
High taxes aren’t really a way to pay for everything. They are an incentive for wealthy corporations to reinvest rather than give the money away. Pay 91% or build another factory? This is what we’ve had in the past
@@marshallkobe their money doesn’t just end up in a Scrooge mcduck vault
Government taxes should never be higher than 10% -- a tithe -- or you know it's greedy and a thief.
Taxes should be voluntary. You don't want a public service? Don't pay for it. You do want it? Pay for it. None of this "Imma vote for someone else to pay for my stuff" nonsense.
@SoMuchFacepalm This is the right idea. Puts competition between government and corporate forces, instead of encouraging them to get in bed, together.
That didn't even work in the 19th century and it won't work now.
Nah. WAY MORE for rich assholes.
This is a masterclass on Strawman Arguments
@pjbth do you think they could get a government representative to defended the government's viewpoint? I mean I kind of disagree as in thinking that if the government was trying to pay off the debt this wouldn't even be an issue IMO. Thoughts?
@@MathiasYmagnus Try again, but in English this time?
Yeah, that's what all the poor boys always say!
You mean an argument you don’t have a decent answer for?
Gotcha
@@bilosdiogee410 He's right, though. This wasn't a well-argued segment. The dude literally said that academics aren't saying that wealth taxes are to punish the rich in the same sentence where he accuses academics of saying that wealth taxes are there to punish the rich.
I thought public sector unions were banned by federal law because of national security? I.E. airport employees going on strike and world wide transit could stop for a certain region /etc
Police unions. Teacher unions. Public transportation unions.
There's even garbage like American Federation of Government Employees.
I'd put it into law, anyone paid by tax dollars is barred from joining unions. The tax payers have no say at the negotiation table.
All unions, both public & private, exist to ensure their continued existence. Period. No different than the dnc & gop.
Well, however much money Bezos saved, Uncle Sam is still gonna take 40% of it when he dies. How can politicians say there isn't a wealth tax when the government takes almost half of wealthy estates? It's not even something I have to worry about (the cutoff is something crazy, around $13M), but just hearing about the government taking all that money (to fund them killing randos in countries we don't belong in) makes me queasy.
so let me understand. it is ok if the big company takes care of its individual needs (needs of the individual shareholders) but it isn't ok if the individuals (not shareholders) look after their interests?
seems legit.
You can clearly see who funds these people
Agreeing to tax the rich relentlessly is the first step to taxing everyone, relentlessly. All that dedicated statists have is to blame the greed of the private sector. $35 trillion in debt, and printing away the value of saver’s money, is as greedy as it gets. I think public sector pensions should be reduced before social security is reduced, but that’s just me
They should just give it out, how tf you gonna spend a billion, bro.
If not by taxes, then how do we limit the ability of the insanely wealthy to keep the politicians in their back pockets, making policies that benefit mainly them, whilst screwing over just about everyone else?
By giving more power to local governments that people can easily access and less power to federal government
Taxes do nothing to prevent that, in fact probably the reverse due to tax break incentives and such.
By separating the state from economics? You love the lobby system. You just don't like that the rich can use it too.
Well. You could reverse the QE policy that gave them all that free money since 2008 and keep doing it when the market is hurting. They will be forced to sell their assets at some point. It's basically the same as taxing them but fiscally conservative people won't notice. Just as most didn't notice that QE is similar to running massive deficits.
I work in affordable housing - all the taxes/fees/affordable requirements just get passed to middle-class renters as higher rents. Investors either hit their return or just don't invest.
They pretend they're taxing the rich, while young middle class are getting fleeced
There are age based taxes?
Plz discuss the examples of when the wealth tax didn’t work in other countries
“Many countries that have implemented wealth taxes have later reversed those decisions due to capital flight and impracticalities of enforcement, including Austria, France, Sweden, and the Netherlands.”
- Wikipedia “Wealth Tax”
If European wealth taxes worked tax havens like Monaco wouldn’t exist.
If you had 6 million dollars in front of you in denominations that would make that stack 1 foot high, Bezo’s 200 billion stack would reach the altitude of the airplanes you can barely see that make the contrails. Clearly all these billionaires get a windfall amount of money by being first into a very uncompetitive environment.
The scaling factor between a millionaire and a billionaire is about the same as between a month and a lifetime.
What's funny is you think that Bezos literally has 200 Billion.
@@ricardocantoral7672 He may not have it in cash, but he has the same leverage as if he did. I don't technically have hundreds of thousands of dollars in my 401k's, I have assets totaling that much. But they're still earning and compounding more.
Yes, there's definitely an uncompetitive environment. It's called "access to the taxpayers wallet"
@@ricardocantoral7672these people don't understand anything. They're just envious of successful people that provide them with everything they use to live.
Really? Teachers and Police are the greedy ones? Have you looked at government spending on defense, healthcare etc.?
Kind regards from Denmark.
lol - first ridiculous thing was “public sector unions” - you people are nuts - unions benefit workers - and taxpayers bail out the rich all the time
Wealth tax is not to raise revenue, it is there to support the whole life insurance industry and other forms of generational wealth transfer industries.
How? You mean rather than paying a wealth tax, people spent it on massive life insurance premiums and then the money goes to their kids when they die? So who wants there to be a wealth tax, the life insurance industry?
@@SoMuchFacepalm yes, whole life insurance exists only to transfer wealth. To the next generation. They lobby hard for wealth taxes. Whole life is one of the worst possible investments. Term life and an IRA invested in s&p 500 will return 11%, but at a certain point that will get hit with an inheritance tax. 10 20 million whole life policy is tax free, of any inheritance tax.
@@jeffreyhill4705 "yes, whole life insurance exists only to transfer wealth."
I mean, I'm sure it's also to deal with unexpected deaths and motivating murderous spouses, right? Or are those different plans?
@@jeffreyhill4705 Inheritance tax is immoral. They should avoid it if they can, because it shouldn't exist. Do you not want to pass good things on to your children and make the world a better place? Or do you want literally everyone to start from scratch and have the hardest time possible to accomplish anything in their life? Do you want humanity to advance or don't you?
@@anon_y_mousse we are on the same page. Government is picking the winners and losers, by supporting an industry that the market would kill. I am of the opinion that there should either be a flat sales tax or flat income tax. That money should only be used, for that which private industry is proven to fails at. We can argue about where that line should be or both agree government is way over that line.
Wealth taxes are killing the golden goose
Those rich billionaires won't be starving any time soon 😂
But when they laid off millions of employees because of their need to protect themselves the employees will indeed suffer. But thanks for showing us that you don't care about the poor, you just hate the rich.
Reason, libertarianism, and all of your rhetorical footwork don't disguise that your motive is greed. Profiteering is your prime freedom, far more important than the freedom to live in a humane and civilized society.
Imagine saying that cannibalism is civilized society.😂
There's nothing humane or civilized about stealing from productive and highly skilled people, in order to give to others whom you arbitrarily deem "more deserving"
@@joeseibold1471Thanks for using a straw man to distract from my argument. It shows how far you will go to rake in very dollar. Side note, even skilled people benefit from a fair and humane society.
Yep, the ol’ “don’t tax the rich because they will leave” nonsense. Let them leave, then lock them out from doing business. So many contradictions in this video. “Make the most money you can” except if you are a middle class worker. These takes are so brutal and destructive.
"the ol’ “don’t tax the rich because they will leave” nonsense." ??? .... I left Europe precisely because of ridiculously high taxes, and I am really not alone.
The problem is not that the rich leave, it's that their dominant economic position lets them pass on the cost of those taxes onto everyone else anyway.
@@KerbalFacile I don't fully agree with this, but it is more of a point. Society('merican government) has put things in places so that the government can pretty much decide who wins and loses their assets. By the u.s. supreme court's decision in the affordable care act. This ruling left pretty much anything to be taxed if it passes legislation. I.E. all Teslas driving on the road could be taxed if it passed legislation every house with a second floor now has to pay triple house property taxes /etc. That being said. I do believe in tax reform and for the wealthy to pay more taxes, but I think ending corporate welfare would be a better alternative. Like you said make a stipulation that no company can leave until the us debt is paid off. The penalty would be forfeiture of assets.
@@lescommercantesdindochine1954 where are they going to go? We allow them to participate in our markets. We used to tax them much greater to incentivize reinvestment. That’s where the 91% effective rates come from. Amazon is putting everyone else out of business. The system isn’t sustainable.
Wealth taxes do NOT work. Several European countries have tried and the cost of administering the programs actually EXCEEDED the revenue produced from new taxes.
How much is a painting worth? How much is vacant land worth? How much is a coin collection worth?
There cost of evaluating everyone's assets and then dealing with the appeals via different evaluators was a costly MESS.
Wealthy people are not stupid. They convert assets or transfer assets to different jurisdictions (such as the Bezos example in this clip).
Unsubscribed… this is nonsense
Why were you here to begin with? This is Free Market Liberalism 101.
Run off to your leftist echo chamber full of bullshit then
Bad premises lead to bad conclusions.
1) Public unions negotiated fat pensions in lieu of fair present wages only to have bad pension managers either blow their bets (usually helped by vulture capitalist "advisors") or had funds syphoned away by underfunded state governments. The pensions weren't "theft" as much as the scavengers
2 The weakth-taxes-dont-work argument was not just wrong but actually makes the strong argument for nationwide wealth tax plus penalties for offshoring wealth. It's also factually wrong because there is a country where wealth taxes worked for 30 years and accompanied the largest boom in middle-class prosperity ever. That country? The United States before Reagan gutted tax rates based on since proven sham of "trickle down "
Stop coddling the rich. By, definition they are already coddled enough.
1. Coddled by who exactly? Who made them rich?
2. " nationwide wealth tax plus penalties for offshoring wealth"
So you don't want them creating wealth at all? Just shut it all down? Cause that's what you are incentivising. Why say and create wealth when you can just leave (offshoring penalties don't apply, cause you don't actually have any wealth yet) and then build wealth in a more business friendly environment.
Yes this does happen, it's called moving to America. I think it was on the news.
3. That boom wasn't a boom, it was post war and post Depression recovery. A boom doesn't have multiple recessions.
Outright lies. The teachers in this country are paid well AND get good pensions on top of it. Wealth taxes do not work and never have.
@@SoMuchFacepalm "who made them rich?"
Fully 80% of the Fortune 500 billionaires got there wealth the old-fashioned way, by the sweat of their mother's labor. Literally, as in birthing them. Most are nepo babies who inherited their wealth. The rest benefit from huge tax breaks, grants (Musk), public research (Pharma), resource subsidies (water, drilling rights) and public infrastructure (transportation, bridges, ports, stadiums, etc).
Self-made billionaires are extremely rare.
Also, a top marginal tax doesn't take away incentive to build wealth (never has). If you are comfortably making $2 million a year and taxed 90% above that, you don't stop being rich. Rather you look for ways to reinvest and make the next $10 million so you take home $1 million more. (Nevermind that you'd still have capital gains on top of income, yes, also taxed appropriately but money is money).
It's so pathetic how "Regular Joes" have been trained to parrot the tax fears of millionaires when those proposed taxes won't impact the 99% at all (except positively) and won't mean the 1% are suddenly not rich anymore. But go ahead, and defend the poor, defenseless rich, as you've been trained to do. They're so oppressed, after all.
@@jones1618 How about we stop taxing everything. For that matter, how about the government stop giving money away to anyone, but especially companies. No stealing it, no giving it away. You keep what you earn, whether you think a billionaire running a corporation and making decisions that keep the corporation solvent and employing thousands of people is actually earning or not. Stop defending being a jealous weakling who has to steal from others just to live when you could work instead and maybe if the government wasn't stealing your money you could invest like they do and perhaps pass that on to your children making their lives and the world a better place.
@@jones1618 Love how you just ignored the entire point of my comment. I even made sure it was the first thing you read.
Taxing wealth makes more sense than taxing income. That we are able to do the second, but not the first implies that either we are not being smart, or the wealthy are so powerful that the need to address the problem is really important. The natural libertarian approach is that some things that are currently paid for by taxes ought to be paid for by fees. The wealthy benefit more than everyone else from peace, security, and a well ordered society. If the benefits are constrained, it wouldn't be possible to avoid paying just by changing jurisdictions. Police are an occupying force for the very poorest, and security guards for the very richest. The benefit is closer to scaling with wealth than income, especially as income for normal folks is basically taxed on gross, while for the wealthy it is effectively net, although push back basically makes it muddled. Unless you are pretty well off, at best the justice system is a defensive weapon.
How about we don't tax income at all. It's an immoral restriction on our right to work and provide for ourselves and our families.
@@anon_y_mousse Seems fine, but we are a long way from a pure free market economy, so what do you do as intermediate steps?