623
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ccunning@lemmy.world 253 points 8 months ago

If the billionaires are upset it’s a good sign you’re doing something right.

[-] kautau@lemmy.world 40 points 8 months ago

Exactly. Most policies are in billionaire's favors, since they fund lobbying groups and super pacs. They mostly stay quiet about everything because they’re getting their way behind the scenes. If they’re complaining outright, it’s an absolute win for everyone else

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Kalysta@lemmy.world 207 points 8 months ago

Crying billionaires are a sign of society healing.

A healthy society has zero billionaires.

Let’s go further with these taxes.

[-] SarcasticMan@lemmy.world 123 points 8 months ago

Don't like it? Fuck you. Your greed is unconscionable and your hoarding of wealth is amoral and disgusting. In conclusion, fuck you.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] RGB3x3@lemmy.world 123 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

It's nuts for them to rail against this because when Biden said 25% minimum, I was like, "that's it‽"

I get taxed at 25% already and I'm making $125k.

25% is nowhere near enough. Anyone making over 400k individually should be taxed closer to 50%.

[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 77 points 8 months ago

there should be a 100% tax for anyone who has a billion dollars or more.

That level of wealth is not compatible with existing in a society.

[-] Zink@programming.dev 57 points 8 months ago

I think the biggest problem isn’t the tax rate, but the fact that the billionaire class can circumvent the tax system entirely.

Own billions of dollars in stock, don’t ever sell any, don’t pay any taxes on that growth. Maybe some dividends get taxed or something.

Need pocket money though. Take out a loan for $100 million using a little bit of your stock as collateral. You don’t get taxed on taking out debt.

[-] Furbag@lemmy.world 27 points 8 months ago

People don't realize that billionaires don't have their billions sitting in a bank account somewhere like you or I might have our own life savings tucked away in a savings account. That would be foolish of them, obviously, the FDIC won't insure them past a certain point, so a bank failure could cause them to lose everything.

Every single billionaire is only a billionaire "on paper". It's the sum total of all their assets, both liquid and non-liquid (like stocks, but also properties, etc.). They leverage their assets as collateral for a loan, and then use that loan to buy the stuff they want or just use it to make more investments. They leverage debt in a way that we can't even begin to fathom.

It's mad, but I can see the conundrum. How do you tax assets that aren't worth anything until sold? Can you compel them to sell their assets to settle a tax bill? How do you go after rich folk who use loans to circumvent generating income through the sale of their assets without also harming regular people who need to take out loans to buy things like cars and houses?

Rich people have gotten too good at playing the system and we seriously need to look at how we can fix things before it's too late. Right now, the wealthy have unprecedented control over the government, but it's still not an oligarchy yet. There's still time, though. Someone out there has to have a solution.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[-] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 66 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

“I don’t agree with the idea of just singling out people because of how much they have or don’t have,”

That's literally how income tax works, you ignorant slut.

[-] derf82@lemmy.world 13 points 8 months ago

The ones being singled out are poor people and the middle class. The rich get preferential rates, deductions that only apply to them, the ability to have armies of accountants and lawyers to limit their liability, and are far less likely to be audited.

It SHOULD be that all income within different brackets should be taxed the same. The rich only pay more because they have more. We all should be taxed 50% on income over $500,000, it’s just that most of us don’t have any income over that.

[-] Patches@sh.itjust.works 13 points 8 months ago

He best start believing in being singled out to pay more taxes because the alternative is being singled out to have his head cut off.

The old old money knew this. Why do the nuveau rich not?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] htrayl@lemmy.world 62 points 8 months ago

You have to leave incentives for people who are the ones who are going to create the jobs for all those people trying to climb the ladder.

Oh my god, FUCK OFF

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 59 points 8 months ago

Billionaires: you should tax us more

Also billionaires: nooooo.... Not more taxes!

[-] clgoh@lemmy.ca 63 points 8 months ago

Maybe not the same billionaires?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] spider@lemmy.nz 58 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

"You're trying to take away the incentives for people to work hard," [Catsimatidis] said.

The working class is referred to as such for a reason.

He should stop pretending to be one of them.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] pastabatman@lemmy.world 54 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Biden claimed in his State of the Union address that the 25 percent minimum tax on the ultra-rich will raise $500 billion over 10 years. “Imagine what that could do for America,” he said.

Maybe I'm not good at comprehending numbers at this scale but does this seem kind of low to anyone else? I mean, that's a lot of money in absolute terms but the government spent $6.3 trillion in FY 2023 alone.

We should still do it obviously. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good and all that.

[-] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 36 points 8 months ago

No, it sounds correct. Taxing billionaires' income is fine, but the real money would come from actually taxing corporations more.

See, they only have income in certain circumstances, so the amount raised from an income tax would not be very high. You can raise corporate taxes by a little bit and get much more.

That way the income is taxed before it gets to anyone. It doesn't matter if they have a billion dollars. Plus it encourages investment in the company (wages, new products, better quality, etc.) because business costs are tax write-offs.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] nokturne213@sopuli.xyz 52 points 8 months ago
[-] Spitzspot@lemmings.world 48 points 8 months ago

Thoughts and prayers

[-] Octagon9561@lemmy.ml 46 points 8 months ago

Billionaires should not exist. Honestly, I'd expropriate them.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 44 points 8 months ago

Apparently it's not just Billionaires who hate this, but also Russian trolls pretending to be leftists. Who would have guessed the two would be allied?!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] abbadon420@lemm.ee 40 points 8 months ago

Did you expect an addict to thank you when you take away their drug cold turkey? Billionairism is a mental disorder, like addiction, and it should be handled with the same care. The kind of care that only billionairs can afford in the US, I must add.

[-] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 39 points 8 months ago

For $10,000 a year, billionaires can pay me to give a shit.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Daft_ish@lemmy.world 37 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Music to my ears? Oh wait, he could lose the billionaire vote. Like all 100 of them.

[-] TallonMetroid@lemmy.world 31 points 8 months ago

Problem isn't the billionaire vote, but rather the billionaire dark money being funneled to the other guy instead. Which I'm sure they're all doing anyway, but they could decide to do it more. Which makes it ever more important for grassroots efforts to get the vote out so that we can eat the rich in spite of their efforts to dodge our hungry maws.

[-] Bristle1744@lemmy.today 37 points 8 months ago

Why would you take away these creations from them??? /s

https://www.twwyachts.com/yachts-for-sale/support/

Image

Support yachts are the finest way to improve your yachting experience. Not only you will be able to increase the number of guest & crew accommodations, but also the amount of water toys & tenders that are within your fleet. Upgrapding the mothership to obtain the same results usually comes at a much heftier cost than a support vessel. In addition, the support yacht will be able to resupply the mothership while at anchor and make sure that you never run out of food, wines and all the supplies you may ever need.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] RamblingPanda@lemmynsfw.com 37 points 8 months ago

If it hurts you, it's the right thing. Cry some, leeches.

[-] Rooskie91@discuss.online 35 points 8 months ago

Good. Rage until you hurt yourself you undeveloped children.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] YeetPics@mander.xyz 26 points 8 months ago

Wah wah wah just get into your fkn submarine, we double-checked the bulkhead for you 🫡

[-] AFKBRBChocolate@lemmy.world 23 points 8 months ago

I don't really understand why they're upset, or how it will raise that much revenue. As the article points out, most billionaires don't get their billions from income, they get it from investments. For instance, Jeff Bezos' salary is like $80k, and then he gets other compensation that puts him at like $1.7M. if you put him in a much higher tax bracket, he shouldn't even care - would hardly notice - because he's worth $194B. To put that in perspective, if he earns just 5% a year in growth on that, it's almost $10B. His compensation is like 0.02% of what he's likely to make on investments, if that.

It's also worth mentioning that most billionaires can't really spend much of the billions. If Bezos tried to cash out much of his Amazon stock, the price would plummet and he'd be worth a lot less. What those guys do is take out loans with the stock as collateral and live off of that. Of course, Bezos himself is at a level of wealth where he can cash out a small percentage and it's still enormous. I think last year he cashed out like $2B worth, which is a giant amount of money, but only 1% of his net worth.

[-] sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz 25 points 8 months ago

Wealth Tax. That is what we desperately need.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] someguy7734206@sh.itjust.works 23 points 8 months ago

😭🤌🎻🎶🎵

[-] Snapz@lemmy.world 22 points 8 months ago

"Won't you please stop and think of the billionaires?"

"For just $5,479,452.05 a day, you can support a multibillionaire who needs you TODAY."

🎶🎶 "We are the world... we are old white men... We are the ones that have yachts that need second yachts to land helicopters on... so you start giving us your change... If you don't, we'll fucking find a way to kill you." 🎶🎶

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 21 points 8 months ago

why do i suddenly have the impression this tax aint coming to pass?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] TengoHipo@lemm.ee 21 points 8 months ago

Well they got rich taking advantage of the poor. That’s the only way you become a billionaire. I feel nothing towards them.

[-] callouscomic@lemm.ee 19 points 8 months ago

Billionaires: "I DO think we should be taxed more."

puts money into lobbying against tax increases

[-] Empricorn@feddit.nl 16 points 8 months ago

Billionaires: You want to prey upon the rest of us unilaterally? That fine. Just stay on your little island, announce it as a sovereign nation, pay to defend it, and good luck! That's what happens when you contribute nothing to society yourself...

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] dephyre@lemmy.world 15 points 8 months ago
[-] MushuChupacabra@lemmy.world 13 points 8 months ago

Good. Fuck em.

[-] vin@lemmynsfw.com 12 points 8 months ago

This is ragebait content from democrats. 25 percent minimum income tax on anyone worth at least $100 million is still grossly unfair. 50 billion in a year is a pittance for the owning class. Removing loopholes and including expenditure as a factor is needed to fix income tax.

[-] glovecraft@infosec.pub 21 points 8 months ago

It's a bit better than the 8% they currently pay. Some of them pay nothing. I think we should go back to the Eisenhower era 90% marginal rates, but baby steps, I guess?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2024
623 points (97.0% liked)

politics

19126 readers
1301 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS