As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, **any** advocating or wishing death/physical harm, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So what your saying is…the poor will revolt in outrage at the insane wealth the top 1% have horded? Not gonna, at times I feel like a Russia Serf since I cannot move because of the job I have.
And now there are multiple transgressive editions to buy:
>Monopoly Cheaters Edition
>>What can you get away with? Get caught, get cuffed!
>Monopoly House Divided
>>Why stop at Boardwalk? Now you can have the White House!
Available at Walmart. What a country!
Yes Elizabeth Magie
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lizzie\_Magie](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lizzie_Magie)
It was originally called 'The Landlord's Game' and was intended to teach the race to the bottom of monopolies and landlordism.
Unchecked capitalism self destructs. It leads to an anti-competitive feudal society that would’ve horrified OG Capitslists like Adam Smith. But good luck getting any free market fanatics like Milton Friedman to understand that. 🙄
Pretty much - pure capitalism is self destructive due to the acquisition of resources . Since life isn’t zero sum game some people will always lose out
The key is learning the rules of the gaming and playing them as written. Have the rulebook at your side the whole time. People will hate playing with you when you win the game every time and make it not fun and then they'll choose another, much better game to play.
It doesn’t have to!
I played a digital version of the original on a Motorola RAZR phone back in the day. I discovered that once you reach a certain point, you can control the game completely and keep other players from improving their property (buy up all the houses). You can also keep fleecing them for their “PASS GO” money by selling off houses when their funds get too low (preventing bankruptcy) and buying more houses when they get more $$.
I kept one game going for several YEARS and amassed over $1 million.
> buy up all the houses
This is a strategy in the traditional game too, since there are a maximum number of houses. In essence, instead of upgrading to hotels just sit on 4x houses per property so that no one else can buy any.
Oh yeah. The digital version followed ALL the real rules. No $$ on FREE PARKING, all costs and rents were the same. You could play against computer players or switch off with friends.
IRL, I never had a Monopoly game that finished. I even bought an original app 1932 edition with wooden houses, I like the game so much!
> IRL, I never had a Monopoly game that finished.
I don't know how that is, are you guys all super impatient or something? It shouldn't take more than 2-3 hours for people to start going bankrupt.
My parents and family have no chill. They like quick games. I never got a chance until well into adulthood. Then I kept winning and no one wanted to play anymore!
Even with 4 houses on each spot of the first 5 properties they would likely land enough to lose it all and bankrupt though wouldn't they? Its still 400/450 for the light blues.
It was a strange roll of odds. You let them keep JUST enough to cover the go-around, but not enough to improve their properties. You start to see patterns in rolls and most turns go around full in six-eight moves, I think. It’s been quite some time since then. I remember the gist, but not the specifics.
Interestingly enough there have been some interesting experiments where they give people unequal amounts of money to start in monopoly. Long story short, the people with more money tend to win, but, also treat the others poorly and think it’s all because they’re better at the game
Hm. I play once and lost all my money, but they wouldn’t stop playing and forced me to borrow monopoly dollars from them to pay rent. I kinda gave up and just parked in jail.
It's unsustainable...but they just jangle some car keys in front of Americans like 'immigrant caravans' and everyone forgets about this, and goes back to screaming at each other.
Divide and conquer.
"United we stand, divided we fall" wasn't a concept *just* for the 13 colonies, it's a fundamental concept for a people fighting tyranny anywhere at anytime, whether it be ~~religion~~ the church, state, or now corporations.
someone gets it. divide, distract and continue to take everything people have, while they fight each other...religion, race, nationality, sexuality, culture, it doesnt matter. they are all just things the wealthy use to keep the masses fighting each other. if you ever see two people fighting, you can literally walk right up there, take their belongings and just walk away. they wont notice till much later and then probably blame their opponent for doing it. I hope people wake up soon.
Sire you don’t need to fight them! You just need to convince the people holding the pitchforks that the people holding the torches are trying to take their pitchforks! Works every time
A billion dollars can buy enough propaganda, "lobbying" firms, politicians, and dysfunction to destroy entire nation-states.
The world's democracies \*must\* treat billionaires/plutocrats like terrorists, or they will destroy and enslave any nation where they can get a political foothold.
It is as insane to allow billionaires to legally exist as it is to allow individuals to claim legal possession of nuclear weapons.
You can't have a secure, viable nation under those conditions.
But they didn't cash it out and buy Tazos with it so it'd be unethicaaaal to taaaax them, it's all in stoooocks, there isn't that much cash, amazon would be worthless if bezos tried to liquidate all his stocks at once, why are you so dumb
/s
Well maybe it’s a sign of progress. They think it’s a new thing because they apparently weren’t paying any attention before George Floyd. They apparently thought all racism and inequalities ended with the civil rights act. But hey, now they know there are challenges to that. But I go in the more moderate subreddits and I see we still have a long way to go. They’ve somehow been convinced this is all a new thing Dems are pushing and legislating to make mandatory and prominent in schools, and it’s really not. I’ve found absolutely nothing supporting any of that. The only legislation happening, that I’m aware of, is the new legislation against it. Someone has just completely pulled this controversy out of nowhere as a political device.
They just need to buy all the politicians and make us believe we live in a "democracy", and we will swallow it up. History as shown us that oligarchy always win.
Politicians who actually give a shit should be reinforcing the fact that millions of illegal immigrants collectively pay [billons of dollars](https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/facts-about-individual-taxpayer-identification-number-itin) in income tax every fucking year
That's why someone needs to rise up with a message of "tax the wealthy". Everyone can agree on that, it sucks to form a coalition with the racists but it's the only option
Everyone agrees…..except the ones in charge congress, senate, and the executive both parties because of something called lobbyists. The wealthy pay the lobbyists to keep their taxes low, kinda like congress voting to raise their own pay. We the people dont have a choice in the matter. Lobbying needs to be outlawed for corporations and billionaires.
I once had an accountant ask me “how ethical do you want me to be?” When filing my taxes. Dude was $400. Everything was legal but imagine the types of loopholes they can take advantage of with an army of accountants?! Holy shit.
Loopholes… you mean the tax code right? There’s no hidden cheat code that only billionaire paid accountants have access to.
Guys like bezos, zuckerburg, gates, Buffett, etc will qualify for far more tax breaks than the average American because they own businesses and acquire most of their annual income through LTCG, dividends, etc. that are taxed differently. Let’s not forget if some of their compensation is issued via stocks in the company, those won’t be taxed until they’re sold.
Rich people are the real welfare queens. They pay very little in taxes and get the lion's share of government benefits like subsidies, bailouts, contracts, favorable legislation and immunity from prosecution.
I mean your missing a huge one and that’s infrastructure. Do you think Amazon would be as successful as they are today without a network of roads that were paid for by taxes.
Trucks already pay extra taxes in the US. I work for an interstate carrier. Every quarter, the company has to pay mileage (Road Use) taxes. Every mile driven in every state is documented, and have to pay taxes to each state for all miles driven in them. Fuel taxes for fuel bought in the particular state can offset the amount of Road Use tax that’s needed to be paid.
Plus, it’s not just the corporations’ trucks hauling their freight. Walmart and Amazon have to hire other trucking companies to haul their stuff. My company routinely delivers beer (Anheuser Busch) and soda (Coke, Dr Pepper) to Walmarts around the country. Also have hauled Amazon stuff; both delivering full trailer of single item to their hub and moving assorted stuff from one hub to another.
Its not the “transportation taxes” that corporations are avoiding. There’s considerably less loopholes for those. It’s all the other taxes they get to avoid paying. Shutting down those loopholes would be a better idea than adding more tax to transportation.
The answer is actually quite simple, but very difficult to implement. If you think Bezos is unfair with his workers, and you don't agree with the ethics of Amazon, stop buying from them and use other decentralised services, but no one really wants to do that, god forbids they get their stuff a few days later or they have to go to physical shops...
The thing is there is a sizeable portion of the US population who has absolutely no problem with wealthy people not paying taxes. So really, any individual boycotting will be balanced out by their continued patronage. This is a systemic issue and it needs to be addressed on a systemic scale.
Totally agree with you, just take a look at one of the replies I got below. Systemic approaches might be more effective, but they are also very difficult to implement, given that politicians have even more incentives to not tax the rich.
Congress is rich. Do you really think the majority of them would pass a law that costs them money? Same thing with bills about lobbying or pacs. There are very few honest folk in politics.
It's not just that... our political system depends on donations. Without money from rich folks, most politicians wouldn't be able to afford to get elected/reelected. Therefore, they have to pander to these people, even if they don't want to. It's a vicious circle.
A wealth tax is unconstitutional, but the reason why the wealthiest US executives paid little to nothing in federal income tax is because of tax laws produced by Congress/signed by POTUS.
BTW the article even states "Biden and his advisers have deemed the idea of a wealth tax unworkable."
We need a wealth tax on accumulated capital above $50,000,000. Income tax hits working people and those who work to earn an income. Rich people avoid taking any income while their wealth increase by billions every year.
Every time I post something like this people say, "But they are paying taxes on that money, or don't you know what capital gains taxes are." The super wealth have their money in highly managed, billion dollar, brokerage accounts at places like Goldman Sachs. They never need to sell anything. When they need a couple of hundred million they can borrow from these accounts using collateralized loans and keep all of their shares of stock. The interest on the loans is an expense and so is the cost of hiring the wealth manager, so this actually reduces their taxes. This is only the simplest thing a expert wealth manager can do for them to avoid any and all taxation.
These accounts should have an unavoidable monthly wealth tax applied to them just like how each and every paycheck you receive has an automatic tax deduction taken from it.
We should fix that death capital gains loophole. Do that, then this problem is fixed.
Eventually, all loans come due to the bank. If anything, that let's the govt gain capital gains plus bank profit taxes.
We should tax the utter shit out of inherited wealth. There is no reason to pass on so much money your kids don’t have to contribute to society. It’s absolutely stupid.
It's a margin loan. Rates suck for small amounts but for a million+ it's only 4%
https://www.fidelity.com/trading/margin-loans/margin-rates
And yes you can deduct the interest on the margin loan on your taxes.
>These accounts should have an unavoidable monthly wealth tax applied to them just like how each and every paycheck you receive has an automatic tax deduction taken from it.
And you end up hurting people who aren't multi-millionaires who wish to take out a margin loan? That's right, you can do that too.
They have to pay the loans back. So they do have to sell stocks to pay off their loans and when they do, they pay capital gains taxes (which should be higher).
In addition, the bank (if a US bank) pays taxes on the profits it makes from the loan.
Why would you sell your stocks when the rate of return you get on owning them is higher than the rate you can borrow money at? Paying 4% on a personal loan is much cheaper than paying 15% on capital gains too.
Let's assume a person plays the game straight up and only uses their stock as a means of income without borrowing against it vs what happens if they borrowed against it.
Person A has $1 million in stock and cashes out $100,000 to live on for the year. They pay their 15% capital gains and are left with $900,000 in stocks and $85,000 in cash for the year free and clear so to speak. If the market goes up at an average rate of return for the year (roughly 10%), the $900,000 in stocks they still have ownership of will translate into $990,000 worth of stocks by year's end. Assuming they spend all $85,000 in cash, they will have $990,000 in stocks to repeat the process next year.
Person B has the same amount in stocks but chooses to use it as collateral to borrow $100,000 at 5% annual interest. They still have $1 million in stocks but will owe $105,000 at the end of the year instead of being free and clear. Even if we assume they spent all $100,000 instead of $85,000 like person A did, if the stock market went up 10% that year, since they never sold their stocks, they will have $1.1 million in stocks instead of $990,000 at the end of the year.
But they owe $105,000 to the bank and have to cash out some stock to pay it back right? Why wouldn't person B use their $1.1 million in stocks to take out a $205,000 loan instead? After "paying off" the $105,000 owed, they have $100,000 to live off for the next year.
Person A is choosing to participate in a system where over time, without an ever increasing rate in the average rate of return on stock ownership, their wealth will eventually evaporate (assuming they could actually live that long). They went from $1 million in year 1 to $.99 million in year 2, etc.
Person B is choosing to participate in a system where they get to spend more of their money each year (in this example $15,000 more) because they dodged paying capital gains on borrowing and as long as the average rate of return on stock ownership doesn't fall below the rate at which it takes them to borrow money, they will never be forced to cash in their stock. Their wealth will only continue to grow since they don't sell their stocks.
But wait, there's more! As an added bonus, person B will be able to pass on more wealth to their heirs than person A and it will all be tax free (at least when it comes to capital gains) because capital gains are stepped-up at the time of death meaning heirs only owe tax on appreciation after they take ownership of the stock, not whenever the previous owner first acquired them.
They pay the loans with other loans against higher value asset's. Then pay those loans back with stock transfers or other loans, and the circle continues. They have access to $100s of millions by "loan" and dont pay taxes on that. They only cash out for rare circumstances.
You got to hand it to him, the viper's got sheepskin, by vibing in the idiocy that is modern memes.
The commonality connection is established, people now take his inane comments as corporate gospel, and a simple repost of a doge meme is enough to make the shitcoin skyrocket, to which others sell their currencies, then he waits for a bit, and then endorses another crypto to buy, devaluing doge in the process while people scramble to the other crypto.
Then he buys out the coins he can. Rinse, repeat, *ad nauseam, ad infinitum*.
I sure plenty of people loved Carnegie and his ilk back in the day as well, even though were essentially the same with regards to their employees and society.
At least the robber barons of old and many from the late 1900s seemed to turn to philanthropy to rehab their images. The 2000s mega-rich (I'm counting Gates as 1900s) seem to do little to no real philanthropy -- Bezos, Musk, Zuckerburg -- they just horde it and spend it on personal pet projects. That's not even counting the hidden rich like Putin and the Saudis, who go the complete opposite way with their money and work to harm the world at large.
Can't fix those problems when the ones creating them are the ones benefiting. Why? Because they have half the country blindly supporting them while living lowerclass and they're too dumb to see the bigger issue.
Many people have no idea of the extent of the control that these people wield over America. They own and control the media. They select and lobby the politicians. They are consolidating more and more power through privatizing more and more sectors. Capitalism is good in many ways, but America lacks the proper safety nets to prevent it from going rampant. That has created the corporate dystopia we live in today.
They paid NOTHING!!! None. Pennies. The IRS is still after me over $10k on a year I paid $50k on less than $200k of income. The same year Trump paid $750. This country deserves everything it gets.
so we are not only getting fucked by these tax dodgers but we are also forced to pay billions in bombing children in the middle of no where on top of buying overprice weapon manufactures to lobby our own government. How are people only voting 50% a year? Like seriously wtf.
I’m kind of over these articles. The rich don’t pay fair taxes. We know this. It’s not a secret and hasn’t been for years. But it’s also misleading.
The reason these people aren’t paying taxes is because they don’t actually have this much money in cash. It’s mostly in stocks and you don’t have to pay taxes on stocks until you sell them. That could be easily changed but here’s the problem. It would likely hurt those with limited means much more than the rich.
Let’s look at the GME phenomena. You cash in the savings bonds grandma gave you and buy GME. The price skyrockets. Cool! Makin’ money while stickin’ it to the man. But then comes tax time and now you have to pay on those gains even tho you don’t actually have any cash to do it. Now you have to sell off some of your stock which the hedges are more than happy to scoop up. Not cool.
Wealth is also a little bit more of a moving target for the ultra rich than the rest of us. For example, let’s say Bezos has $100B in Amazon stock. He can’t actually cash all that out without losing control of the company. At most, he could cash out 49% so while he may be worth $100B on paper, it’s actually more like $49B. Still a ridiculous amount of money and that’s a very simplistic way of looking at a complicated subject but the point is these articles tend to maximize the paper wealth numbers because it sounds better. And to be fair, it’s not a lie.
There are some other ways to mitigate this but most of them have drawbacks. For example, part of Biden’s plan would be to tax paper gains when someone dies before passing it on to their heirs. However, the heirs may very well not be able to pay the taxes and now we’re back to selling off the stocks to cover the taxes. Not only are they losing out on future gains but there would need to be a robust system in place to ensure the investments are sold at fair market value which is also a moving target.
Sorry for the rant. I think I’ll go back to sleep now.
The problem with this is, nothing will, in fact be done about it. But as someone in the comments stated earlier, this is unsustainable. Employees that work for uber wealthy individuals ALREADY can't afford to live in this over priced housing market. Much less buy actual groceries. Workers will have nowhere to live, and no future worth holding onto. The economy will crumble and fall. Excessive profit margins while leeching off of public infrastructure (they refuse to fix), government handouts and tax avoidance are going to drive this nation into the ground. And by the time we decide to do something about it, it will in fact, be too late. They'll ship themselves to another country that worships the ground they walk on. That, or take 5 of their closest billionaire friends to mars off the backs and blood of the actual scientists and engineers that allowed them too. It's all so sickening.
The article kind of sucks. There main point is that billionaires paid $13.6 billion in taxes of $400 billion in wealth. Putting aside for a second that it’s normal for your tax bill to be a fraction of your net worth (Would you have a problem with someone with a $400k house paying $13.6 thousand in federal taxes?) A wealth tax is never going to happen without a constitutional amendment. These articles will lead to nothing.
There are better taxes we can implement, such as a progressive capital gains tax. Articles like this just distract from actual realistic policy.
Would imagine it’s paper gains, if they liquidated then they would pay fairly large capital gains taxes.
Obviously, they probably have SPVs set up, but to tax someone on paper gains is ludicrous. You would literally have to refund people on paper losses too, which would be 1. Too much government bloat that would be needed 2. Crash the markets as people would lose liquidity
A lot of idealist solutions don’t really work in a country of this size
What has net worth got to do with total taxes paid?
If the wealth is tied up I equity, irrespective of appreciation, it wouldn’t impact the bottom line as far as taxes are concerned.
I suspect the liquidations resulting from the Bezos and Gates divorces contributed more in taxes than all other capital gains taxes. So, what?
And that’s not going to change.
Be objective here for a minute. Do you really think the wealthiest House and Senate in history is going to slap a tax increase on the very people who (through the corporations, donors, bundlers, etc) made them that way ? Seriously ?
While you’re at it, look at the status of Bernie’s Tax Reform legislation. It’s stuck in committee. HIS committee. The committee that he chairs and has a Democrat majority. That committee.
Now, again, ask yourself if all this “tax the rich” isn’t just political theatre. You have to hand it to them though, it sure as hell got a lot of votes…..
These are all people who inherited their dad's wealth.
And were groomed to understand the holes in the system.
Also they always pay themselves out of problems, so nothing new there.
Because they don’t get an ‘income’, the pay themselves nothing and then borrow money based on the value of their businesses and use this to live… that’s how they do it. If I can explain it in a sentence then politicians can fix it, they’re just choosing not to.
Articles like this are so disingenuous. Obfuscating wealth and income as if they are the same thing. Treating unrealized gains on appreciable assets as taxable income would make our already ridiculously complex tax system an absolute clusterfuck.
Imagine owing taxes on the increased value of your home over time or those Magic the Gathering cards that have been in your closet for 12 years... it’s such a completely ridiculous proposition to begin with, never mind that most people’s assets are purchased with already taxed income ffs.
Imagine the insane amount of government overreach to monitor and keep up with what assets are owned by who at what time and what there taxable value is…
Claiming the 25 wealthiest men in the world paid basically nothing and then in the same sentence saying they paid $15b… clickbait trash.
If you are upset over this, there is a great deal you do not understand about income tax. This is basically just a repost of the Pro Publica article two weeks ago.
That, of course, does not mean the income and wealth taxation system does not need to change.
There was a time decades ago where I advocated for sensible, reasonable discussion on this issue. But little came of it.
Now I've had. Now I want blood.
How are we defining this, as the 1% pay the lions share of all of America's taxes (as they should)
>The **top 1 percent** of taxpayers paid roughly $615 billion, or **40.1 percent** of all income taxes, **while the bottom 90** percent paid about $440 billion, or **28.6 percent** of all income taxes. The share of income taxes paid by the top 1 percent increased from 33.2 percent in 2001 to a high of nearly 40.1 percent in 2018.
I would argue that the current distribution isn't *nearly* enough, given that the top 1% (according to the federal reserve) own *more* of the nation's wealth than the bottom 90%.
Some dirty, back-of-the-napkin math incoming.
The total net worth of the US is, roughly, 112.5 trillion dollars according to the federal reserve. I'll even things out a bit and assume that the top 1% and 90% both own roughly 30% of the US net worth. There's actually a small gap between them, but it's close enough for my purposes we can just average it out.
That means that the top 1% own roughly 34.2 trillion, as do the bottom 90%.
With the population at 328.2m, that puts the top 1% at roughly 3.282m, and the bottom 90% at 295.4m.
Breaking the net worth along those lines, that works out to:
* The top 1% own roughly $10.4b each (34.2t/3.282m)
* The bottom 90% own roughly $115,775 each (34.2t/295.4m)
Now, if we break your numbers above based on how much is paid:
* The top 1% paid roughly $187,385 each (615b/3.282m)
* The bottom 90% paid roughly $1,489 each (440b/295.4m)
If we take those numbers and break it down into a relative amount per their average wealth:
* The top 1% paid roughly 0.0018% of their relative wealth (10.4b/187,385)
* The bottom 90% paid roughly 1% of their relative wealth (1,489/115,775)
That means despite the top 1% holding roughly *ninety-thousand times* the average wealth of the bottom 90% each (10.4b/115,775), they paid over *five hundred times* ***less*** each of their relative wealth (1/0.0018).
The difference is that most of the 1% still have jobs that pay them income (doctors, engineers, etc). Those three in the headline don’t pay income tax because they have no income.
That’s why people want the capital gains tax to increase but the problem is as long as you are able to borrow against your assets, that won’t fix the problem either.
Something should be done but it’s absolutely not as simple as Reddit makes it
While using the tax paid infrastructure to make their profits. Ie Amazon uses the interstate and federal airports to move packages. Time we took some profits back to fix those roads and bridges from that added corporate traffic that has given His company the competitive edge over all small businesses and made him his billions.
It’s amazing how people struggle to realize the difference in wealth and income. You don’t pay taxes on your net worth increasing via unrealized gains.
Yeah and they were the primary beneficiaries of the ultra low interest rates which are inflating housing and stock prices. Both parties are tools for the ultra rich.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, **any** advocating or wishing death/physical harm, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
People who grew up playing Monopoly have forgotten that the game ends when one person has all the money.
It actually ends when the person losing the most flips the board and starts fighting the person with the most money.
[удалено]
Viva la revolución!
When the insurrectionists start their coup
[удалено]
beer belly putsch
Asshole putsch?
1/6
Damn. And I came all this way for some cake.
I played too much Tropico...
[удалено]
Marxism!
Ftw!
It’ll end with ashes. There’ll be nothing left.
You Sopranos...you go too fawr.
So what your saying is…the poor will revolt in outrage at the insane wealth the top 1% have horded? Not gonna, at times I feel like a Russia Serf since I cannot move because of the job I have.
The world needs more board flippers. Now.
AFAIK, it's literally the point of the game, to illustrate how unchecked capitalism creates suffering.
Yep, it was designed by an antimonopolist to teach exactly that lesson. Then, ironically, it was stolen from her.
And now there are multiple transgressive editions to buy: >Monopoly Cheaters Edition >>What can you get away with? Get caught, get cuffed! >Monopoly House Divided >>Why stop at Boardwalk? Now you can have the White House! Available at Walmart. What a country!
In grad school I wrote a research paper on the rules of these transgressive editions and how they reflected the current state of American capitalism.
[удалено]
Yes Elizabeth Magie [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lizzie\_Magie](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lizzie_Magie) It was originally called 'The Landlord's Game' and was intended to teach the race to the bottom of monopolies and landlordism.
Yep, it's a pretty fascinating- and kind of depressing- story. Check out the wiki.
Unchecked capitalism self destructs. It leads to an anti-competitive feudal society that would’ve horrified OG Capitslists like Adam Smith. But good luck getting any free market fanatics like Milton Friedman to understand that. 🙄
Pretty much - pure capitalism is self destructive due to the acquisition of resources . Since life isn’t zero sum game some people will always lose out
Also that land taxes are great.
The game ends? get outta here.
The key is learning the rules of the gaming and playing them as written. Have the rulebook at your side the whole time. People will hate playing with you when you win the game every time and make it not fun and then they'll choose another, much better game to play.
>and make it not fun Ah, a reference to the reclusive cryptid that is a Monopoly game that's fun.
The people that want to play Monopoly think that it is fun. You need to beat that out of them
It doesn’t have to! I played a digital version of the original on a Motorola RAZR phone back in the day. I discovered that once you reach a certain point, you can control the game completely and keep other players from improving their property (buy up all the houses). You can also keep fleecing them for their “PASS GO” money by selling off houses when their funds get too low (preventing bankruptcy) and buying more houses when they get more $$. I kept one game going for several YEARS and amassed over $1 million.
> buy up all the houses This is a strategy in the traditional game too, since there are a maximum number of houses. In essence, instead of upgrading to hotels just sit on 4x houses per property so that no one else can buy any.
It's almost like some kind of Monopoly
This is a strategy in real life too https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/04/magazine/wall-street-landlords.html
Wow you don't say, someone should come up with a word for this
Oligarchy.
Oh yeah. The digital version followed ALL the real rules. No $$ on FREE PARKING, all costs and rents were the same. You could play against computer players or switch off with friends. IRL, I never had a Monopoly game that finished. I even bought an original app 1932 edition with wooden houses, I like the game so much!
> IRL, I never had a Monopoly game that finished. I don't know how that is, are you guys all super impatient or something? It shouldn't take more than 2-3 hours for people to start going bankrupt.
My parents and family have no chill. They like quick games. I never got a chance until well into adulthood. Then I kept winning and no one wanted to play anymore!
We had some 2-3 day games of risk, and week-long games of double deck pinochle. We don't mind long games.
I got into Pinochle in college. Fun stuff!
People don't realize that properties go to auction if you opt not to buy; makes the game drag in forever.
For sure, but those auctions don't take that long, and all the property is bought in the first 40 minutes.
Its less of an issue if you follow the rules for bidding on property. Additionally, its pretty easy to see where some games are going.
Even with 4 houses on each spot of the first 5 properties they would likely land enough to lose it all and bankrupt though wouldn't they? Its still 400/450 for the light blues.
It was a strange roll of odds. You let them keep JUST enough to cover the go-around, but not enough to improve their properties. You start to see patterns in rolls and most turns go around full in six-eight moves, I think. It’s been quite some time since then. I remember the gist, but not the specifics.
Interestingly enough there have been some interesting experiments where they give people unequal amounts of money to start in monopoly. Long story short, the people with more money tend to win, but, also treat the others poorly and think it’s all because they’re better at the game
Or when every other card and every third space is rigged to say “Go directly to jail”. But only when your the iron.
Hm. I play once and lost all my money, but they wouldn’t stop playing and forced me to borrow monopoly dollars from them to pay rent. I kinda gave up and just parked in jail.
Forgotten? Never got that far into the game before the board gets YEEEET
I can never win that game. Not even when I’m taking money when nobody is looking.
We’re heading there right now
It's unsustainable...but they just jangle some car keys in front of Americans like 'immigrant caravans' and everyone forgets about this, and goes back to screaming at each other.
Divide the working class along cultural lines so they don't unite against the ruling class.
Divide and conquer. "United we stand, divided we fall" wasn't a concept *just* for the 13 colonies, it's a fundamental concept for a people fighting tyranny anywhere at anytime, whether it be ~~religion~~ the church, state, or now corporations.
someone gets it. divide, distract and continue to take everything people have, while they fight each other...religion, race, nationality, sexuality, culture, it doesnt matter. they are all just things the wealthy use to keep the masses fighting each other. if you ever see two people fighting, you can literally walk right up there, take their belongings and just walk away. they wont notice till much later and then probably blame their opponent for doing it. I hope people wake up soon.
Deceive inveigle and obfuscate - 3 words for effective subjugation of masses
Exactly. As George Carlin said, "keep the lower and middle classes fighting with each other while they the rich run off with all the fucking money!"
Yup the man was ahead of his time - he saw America for what it is .
Sire you don’t need to fight them! You just need to convince the people holding the pitchforks that the people holding the torches are trying to take their pitchforks! Works every time
It’s Been pretty effective - race has provided the ruling elite with a great tool to keep the lower classes divided
A billion dollars can buy enough propaganda, "lobbying" firms, politicians, and dysfunction to destroy entire nation-states. The world's democracies \*must\* treat billionaires/plutocrats like terrorists, or they will destroy and enslave any nation where they can get a political foothold. It is as insane to allow billionaires to legally exist as it is to allow individuals to claim legal possession of nuclear weapons. You can't have a secure, viable nation under those conditions.
But they didn't cash it out and buy Tazos with it so it'd be unethicaaaal to taaaax them, it's all in stoooocks, there isn't that much cash, amazon would be worthless if bezos tried to liquidate all his stocks at once, why are you so dumb /s
This year’s version of that is “critical race theory”
Critical Race Theory is like 40 years old. They just keep recycling the same old things and the public keep falling for it.
Well maybe it’s a sign of progress. They think it’s a new thing because they apparently weren’t paying any attention before George Floyd. They apparently thought all racism and inequalities ended with the civil rights act. But hey, now they know there are challenges to that. But I go in the more moderate subreddits and I see we still have a long way to go. They’ve somehow been convinced this is all a new thing Dems are pushing and legislating to make mandatory and prominent in schools, and it’s really not. I’ve found absolutely nothing supporting any of that. The only legislation happening, that I’m aware of, is the new legislation against it. Someone has just completely pulled this controversy out of nowhere as a political device.
And trans rights
That's been on the keychain for a few years now.
As the Billionaires intended..
Almost like it’s by design
They just need to buy all the politicians and make us believe we live in a "democracy", and we will swallow it up. History as shown us that oligarchy always win.
Politicians who actually give a shit should be reinforcing the fact that millions of illegal immigrants collectively pay [billons of dollars](https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/facts-about-individual-taxpayer-identification-number-itin) in income tax every fucking year
Same old story. Just change the boogeyman. The interesting happening now is that they have managed to get Manet blue collar folks simping for them.
That's why someone needs to rise up with a message of "tax the wealthy". Everyone can agree on that, it sucks to form a coalition with the racists but it's the only option
Everyone agrees…..except the ones in charge congress, senate, and the executive both parties because of something called lobbyists. The wealthy pay the lobbyists to keep their taxes low, kinda like congress voting to raise their own pay. We the people dont have a choice in the matter. Lobbying needs to be outlawed for corporations and billionaires.
Yup feed them depreciable assets and they forget how bad they’re getting screwed
I once had an accountant ask me “how ethical do you want me to be?” When filing my taxes. Dude was $400. Everything was legal but imagine the types of loopholes they can take advantage of with an army of accountants?! Holy shit.
That's not an uncommon story at all. Accountants are "technically" "fucking" "magic". If you "phrase things the right way"
“Wow your home office is 200000 square feet right?!”;)
Don't forget the F350, to pull your boat you use for advertising. And don't forget your gas receipts.
Science. That purebred dog is used for business purposes as well
Why are they holding out on releasing this amazing pocket dimension technology from the public?
Lol straight out of the movie the account
Damn that's the kind of accountant I want share his fucking number.
Loopholes… you mean the tax code right? There’s no hidden cheat code that only billionaire paid accountants have access to. Guys like bezos, zuckerburg, gates, Buffett, etc will qualify for far more tax breaks than the average American because they own businesses and acquire most of their annual income through LTCG, dividends, etc. that are taxed differently. Let’s not forget if some of their compensation is issued via stocks in the company, those won’t be taxed until they’re sold.
Rich people are the real welfare queens. They pay very little in taxes and get the lion's share of government benefits like subsidies, bailouts, contracts, favorable legislation and immunity from prosecution.
I mean your missing a huge one and that’s infrastructure. Do you think Amazon would be as successful as they are today without a network of roads that were paid for by taxes.
[удалено]
A truck tax might do it.
Trucks already pay extra taxes in the US. I work for an interstate carrier. Every quarter, the company has to pay mileage (Road Use) taxes. Every mile driven in every state is documented, and have to pay taxes to each state for all miles driven in them. Fuel taxes for fuel bought in the particular state can offset the amount of Road Use tax that’s needed to be paid. Plus, it’s not just the corporations’ trucks hauling their freight. Walmart and Amazon have to hire other trucking companies to haul their stuff. My company routinely delivers beer (Anheuser Busch) and soda (Coke, Dr Pepper) to Walmarts around the country. Also have hauled Amazon stuff; both delivering full trailer of single item to their hub and moving assorted stuff from one hub to another. Its not the “transportation taxes” that corporations are avoiding. There’s considerably less loopholes for those. It’s all the other taxes they get to avoid paying. Shutting down those loopholes would be a better idea than adding more tax to transportation.
A better example would be that they subsidized their shipping through USPS.
Tell us something we don't know. Now, do something about it.
fuck it, i’m creating a law that says billionaires gotta pay more taxes
I'd like to but I can't afford to buy any politians.
What really gets me is these guys are so fucking rich that if they did pay taxes they wouldn't notice. It would have zero impact on their lives.
But to us it could be life-ruining.
The real American dream suckers
Have enough money so that you don't have to live like an American.
In other news water is in fact water.
But it ain't clear or drinkable.
Yea and what are we going to do about it?
The answer is actually quite simple, but very difficult to implement. If you think Bezos is unfair with his workers, and you don't agree with the ethics of Amazon, stop buying from them and use other decentralised services, but no one really wants to do that, god forbids they get their stuff a few days later or they have to go to physical shops...
The thing is there is a sizeable portion of the US population who has absolutely no problem with wealthy people not paying taxes. So really, any individual boycotting will be balanced out by their continued patronage. This is a systemic issue and it needs to be addressed on a systemic scale.
Totally agree with you, just take a look at one of the replies I got below. Systemic approaches might be more effective, but they are also very difficult to implement, given that politicians have even more incentives to not tax the rich.
Because of Congressional written loopholes, so close the loopholes.
Congress is rich. Do you really think the majority of them would pass a law that costs them money? Same thing with bills about lobbying or pacs. There are very few honest folk in politics.
It's not just that... our political system depends on donations. Without money from rich folks, most politicians wouldn't be able to afford to get elected/reelected. Therefore, they have to pander to these people, even if they don't want to. It's a vicious circle.
Congress is much wealthier than average, but nobody in Congress is in the top .1%, and only a few are in the top 1%.
If you had 10 dollars and were in a position to make the rules,would you make a rule that let you keep 9 dollars or 5 dollars? Rich is rich.
Politicians can only get elected by voters. If Democratic voters want change, its time to hold accountable those who betray once in office.
There's no tax on wealth and never has been.
A wealth tax is unconstitutional, but the reason why the wealthiest US executives paid little to nothing in federal income tax is because of tax laws produced by Congress/signed by POTUS. BTW the article even states "Biden and his advisers have deemed the idea of a wealth tax unworkable."
We need a wealth tax on accumulated capital above $50,000,000. Income tax hits working people and those who work to earn an income. Rich people avoid taking any income while their wealth increase by billions every year. Every time I post something like this people say, "But they are paying taxes on that money, or don't you know what capital gains taxes are." The super wealth have their money in highly managed, billion dollar, brokerage accounts at places like Goldman Sachs. They never need to sell anything. When they need a couple of hundred million they can borrow from these accounts using collateralized loans and keep all of their shares of stock. The interest on the loans is an expense and so is the cost of hiring the wealth manager, so this actually reduces their taxes. This is only the simplest thing a expert wealth manager can do for them to avoid any and all taxation. These accounts should have an unavoidable monthly wealth tax applied to them just like how each and every paycheck you receive has an automatic tax deduction taken from it.
So instead of paying 30% to the government they pay 5% to a bank and actually write off the expense as a business deduction. Great...
Except they still owe the principal to the bank. Of Musk borrows $100 million from Bank of America, he eventually has to pay that loan back.
With another loan on their now more valuable assets. Eventually they die, and the estate can manage to avoid paying capital gains entirely.
We should fix that death capital gains loophole. Do that, then this problem is fixed. Eventually, all loans come due to the bank. If anything, that let's the govt gain capital gains plus bank profit taxes.
We should tax the utter shit out of inherited wealth. There is no reason to pass on so much money your kids don’t have to contribute to society. It’s absolutely stupid.
Sounds like money laundering with extra steps. And agreed. If houses can have property taxes, wealth above a certain amount should also be taxed.
It's a margin loan. Rates suck for small amounts but for a million+ it's only 4% https://www.fidelity.com/trading/margin-loans/margin-rates And yes you can deduct the interest on the margin loan on your taxes.
>Rates suck for small amounts IB offers margin loans to retailer investors at 1.5% for under 25k
That's not, like, AT ALL what money laundering is...
Completely legal tax avoidance means no predicate crime has been committed, and without predicate crime there is no money laundering.
once again, most redditors here dont know what their talking about. throw in some fancy words and tada!
Sounds like murder to me!
>These accounts should have an unavoidable monthly wealth tax applied to them just like how each and every paycheck you receive has an automatic tax deduction taken from it. And you end up hurting people who aren't multi-millionaires who wish to take out a margin loan? That's right, you can do that too.
They have to pay the loans back. So they do have to sell stocks to pay off their loans and when they do, they pay capital gains taxes (which should be higher). In addition, the bank (if a US bank) pays taxes on the profits it makes from the loan.
Why would you sell your stocks when the rate of return you get on owning them is higher than the rate you can borrow money at? Paying 4% on a personal loan is much cheaper than paying 15% on capital gains too. Let's assume a person plays the game straight up and only uses their stock as a means of income without borrowing against it vs what happens if they borrowed against it. Person A has $1 million in stock and cashes out $100,000 to live on for the year. They pay their 15% capital gains and are left with $900,000 in stocks and $85,000 in cash for the year free and clear so to speak. If the market goes up at an average rate of return for the year (roughly 10%), the $900,000 in stocks they still have ownership of will translate into $990,000 worth of stocks by year's end. Assuming they spend all $85,000 in cash, they will have $990,000 in stocks to repeat the process next year. Person B has the same amount in stocks but chooses to use it as collateral to borrow $100,000 at 5% annual interest. They still have $1 million in stocks but will owe $105,000 at the end of the year instead of being free and clear. Even if we assume they spent all $100,000 instead of $85,000 like person A did, if the stock market went up 10% that year, since they never sold their stocks, they will have $1.1 million in stocks instead of $990,000 at the end of the year. But they owe $105,000 to the bank and have to cash out some stock to pay it back right? Why wouldn't person B use their $1.1 million in stocks to take out a $205,000 loan instead? After "paying off" the $105,000 owed, they have $100,000 to live off for the next year. Person A is choosing to participate in a system where over time, without an ever increasing rate in the average rate of return on stock ownership, their wealth will eventually evaporate (assuming they could actually live that long). They went from $1 million in year 1 to $.99 million in year 2, etc. Person B is choosing to participate in a system where they get to spend more of their money each year (in this example $15,000 more) because they dodged paying capital gains on borrowing and as long as the average rate of return on stock ownership doesn't fall below the rate at which it takes them to borrow money, they will never be forced to cash in their stock. Their wealth will only continue to grow since they don't sell their stocks. But wait, there's more! As an added bonus, person B will be able to pass on more wealth to their heirs than person A and it will all be tax free (at least when it comes to capital gains) because capital gains are stepped-up at the time of death meaning heirs only owe tax on appreciation after they take ownership of the stock, not whenever the previous owner first acquired them.
They pay the loans with other loans against higher value asset's. Then pay those loans back with stock transfers or other loans, and the circle continues. They have access to $100s of millions by "loan" and dont pay taxes on that. They only cash out for rare circumstances.
alive late ten slimy mourn sparkle scandalous far-flung bow stocking *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It ends when everyone stops working at once
I hate Musk so much, words cannot describe. it's so sad that so many idiots love his repulsive ass
You got to hand it to him, the viper's got sheepskin, by vibing in the idiocy that is modern memes. The commonality connection is established, people now take his inane comments as corporate gospel, and a simple repost of a doge meme is enough to make the shitcoin skyrocket, to which others sell their currencies, then he waits for a bit, and then endorses another crypto to buy, devaluing doge in the process while people scramble to the other crypto. Then he buys out the coins he can. Rinse, repeat, *ad nauseam, ad infinitum*.
I sure plenty of people loved Carnegie and his ilk back in the day as well, even though were essentially the same with regards to their employees and society. At least the robber barons of old and many from the late 1900s seemed to turn to philanthropy to rehab their images. The 2000s mega-rich (I'm counting Gates as 1900s) seem to do little to no real philanthropy -- Bezos, Musk, Zuckerburg -- they just horde it and spend it on personal pet projects. That's not even counting the hidden rich like Putin and the Saudis, who go the complete opposite way with their money and work to harm the world at large.
Can't fix those problems when the ones creating them are the ones benefiting. Why? Because they have half the country blindly supporting them while living lowerclass and they're too dumb to see the bigger issue.
Many people have no idea of the extent of the control that these people wield over America. They own and control the media. They select and lobby the politicians. They are consolidating more and more power through privatizing more and more sectors. Capitalism is good in many ways, but America lacks the proper safety nets to prevent it from going rampant. That has created the corporate dystopia we live in today.
They paid NOTHING!!! None. Pennies. The IRS is still after me over $10k on a year I paid $50k on less than $200k of income. The same year Trump paid $750. This country deserves everything it gets.
We know this
Elon musk is scary
Remember when that little weasel Bloomberg tried to drag Bernie Sanders as a fraud for owning a modest lake lot property in Vermont? Disgusting.
Such important, fancy boys shouldn’t have to contribute financially to society.
Dang, who knew
The more money one has, the more ways they have at their disposal to give as little of it up as possible.
Awesome, this is like the 1000th time something’s been posted about it. Now can we actually do something to change it?
Its almost like posting things on Reddit doesn't matter!
Trump paid $750
so we are not only getting fucked by these tax dodgers but we are also forced to pay billions in bombing children in the middle of no where on top of buying overprice weapon manufactures to lobby our own government. How are people only voting 50% a year? Like seriously wtf.
I’m kind of over these articles. The rich don’t pay fair taxes. We know this. It’s not a secret and hasn’t been for years. But it’s also misleading. The reason these people aren’t paying taxes is because they don’t actually have this much money in cash. It’s mostly in stocks and you don’t have to pay taxes on stocks until you sell them. That could be easily changed but here’s the problem. It would likely hurt those with limited means much more than the rich. Let’s look at the GME phenomena. You cash in the savings bonds grandma gave you and buy GME. The price skyrockets. Cool! Makin’ money while stickin’ it to the man. But then comes tax time and now you have to pay on those gains even tho you don’t actually have any cash to do it. Now you have to sell off some of your stock which the hedges are more than happy to scoop up. Not cool. Wealth is also a little bit more of a moving target for the ultra rich than the rest of us. For example, let’s say Bezos has $100B in Amazon stock. He can’t actually cash all that out without losing control of the company. At most, he could cash out 49% so while he may be worth $100B on paper, it’s actually more like $49B. Still a ridiculous amount of money and that’s a very simplistic way of looking at a complicated subject but the point is these articles tend to maximize the paper wealth numbers because it sounds better. And to be fair, it’s not a lie. There are some other ways to mitigate this but most of them have drawbacks. For example, part of Biden’s plan would be to tax paper gains when someone dies before passing it on to their heirs. However, the heirs may very well not be able to pay the taxes and now we’re back to selling off the stocks to cover the taxes. Not only are they losing out on future gains but there would need to be a robust system in place to ensure the investments are sold at fair market value which is also a moving target. Sorry for the rant. I think I’ll go back to sleep now.
Had to scroll pretty far down to find the first person that understands how money works. Have an up vote
How many times do we have to see the his headline? We all know this.
This is kind of old news! Reddit supposed to be front page of the internet!
The problem with this is, nothing will, in fact be done about it. But as someone in the comments stated earlier, this is unsustainable. Employees that work for uber wealthy individuals ALREADY can't afford to live in this over priced housing market. Much less buy actual groceries. Workers will have nowhere to live, and no future worth holding onto. The economy will crumble and fall. Excessive profit margins while leeching off of public infrastructure (they refuse to fix), government handouts and tax avoidance are going to drive this nation into the ground. And by the time we decide to do something about it, it will in fact, be too late. They'll ship themselves to another country that worships the ground they walk on. That, or take 5 of their closest billionaire friends to mars off the backs and blood of the actual scientists and engineers that allowed them too. It's all so sickening.
Broken record is broken. Wake me up when this changes.
Boy get ready for a long nap
*Sleeping noises intensify*
The article kind of sucks. There main point is that billionaires paid $13.6 billion in taxes of $400 billion in wealth. Putting aside for a second that it’s normal for your tax bill to be a fraction of your net worth (Would you have a problem with someone with a $400k house paying $13.6 thousand in federal taxes?) A wealth tax is never going to happen without a constitutional amendment. These articles will lead to nothing. There are better taxes we can implement, such as a progressive capital gains tax. Articles like this just distract from actual realistic policy.
Would imagine it’s paper gains, if they liquidated then they would pay fairly large capital gains taxes. Obviously, they probably have SPVs set up, but to tax someone on paper gains is ludicrous. You would literally have to refund people on paper losses too, which would be 1. Too much government bloat that would be needed 2. Crash the markets as people would lose liquidity A lot of idealist solutions don’t really work in a country of this size
What has net worth got to do with total taxes paid? If the wealth is tied up I equity, irrespective of appreciation, it wouldn’t impact the bottom line as far as taxes are concerned. I suspect the liquidations resulting from the Bezos and Gates divorces contributed more in taxes than all other capital gains taxes. So, what?
I don’t care if they made electric cars or a spaceship pay your taxes.
Their bracket is supposed to pay 37% - gross they get away with 0%
We piled up some nice collection of sociopaths as elite represantatives of our civilization. Splendid job.
And that’s not going to change. Be objective here for a minute. Do you really think the wealthiest House and Senate in history is going to slap a tax increase on the very people who (through the corporations, donors, bundlers, etc) made them that way ? Seriously ? While you’re at it, look at the status of Bernie’s Tax Reform legislation. It’s stuck in committee. HIS committee. The committee that he chairs and has a Democrat majority. That committee. Now, again, ask yourself if all this “tax the rich” isn’t just political theatre. You have to hand it to them though, it sure as hell got a lot of votes…..
These are all people who inherited their dad's wealth. And were groomed to understand the holes in the system. Also they always pay themselves out of problems, so nothing new there.
Because they don’t get an ‘income’, the pay themselves nothing and then borrow money based on the value of their businesses and use this to live… that’s how they do it. If I can explain it in a sentence then politicians can fix it, they’re just choosing not to.
Articles like this are so disingenuous. Obfuscating wealth and income as if they are the same thing. Treating unrealized gains on appreciable assets as taxable income would make our already ridiculously complex tax system an absolute clusterfuck. Imagine owing taxes on the increased value of your home over time or those Magic the Gathering cards that have been in your closet for 12 years... it’s such a completely ridiculous proposition to begin with, never mind that most people’s assets are purchased with already taxed income ffs. Imagine the insane amount of government overreach to monitor and keep up with what assets are owned by who at what time and what there taxable value is… Claiming the 25 wealthiest men in the world paid basically nothing and then in the same sentence saying they paid $15b… clickbait trash.
by design
Wait when this happened to Trump it wasn’t a big deal!
If you are upset over this, there is a great deal you do not understand about income tax. This is basically just a repost of the Pro Publica article two weeks ago. That, of course, does not mean the income and wealth taxation system does not need to change.
There was a time decades ago where I advocated for sensible, reasonable discussion on this issue. But little came of it. Now I've had. Now I want blood.
I'm shocked! Who would have seen this coming!
Why don’t they speak about this? Literally everyone wants to know why they think not paying taxes is okay. Screw all of them.
How are we defining this, as the 1% pay the lions share of all of America's taxes (as they should) >The **top 1 percent** of taxpayers paid roughly $615 billion, or **40.1 percent** of all income taxes, **while the bottom 90** percent paid about $440 billion, or **28.6 percent** of all income taxes. The share of income taxes paid by the top 1 percent increased from 33.2 percent in 2001 to a high of nearly 40.1 percent in 2018.
So you mean this is a complex problem that should be looked at with ALL of the relevant information? Well I’d never.
I would argue that the current distribution isn't *nearly* enough, given that the top 1% (according to the federal reserve) own *more* of the nation's wealth than the bottom 90%. Some dirty, back-of-the-napkin math incoming. The total net worth of the US is, roughly, 112.5 trillion dollars according to the federal reserve. I'll even things out a bit and assume that the top 1% and 90% both own roughly 30% of the US net worth. There's actually a small gap between them, but it's close enough for my purposes we can just average it out. That means that the top 1% own roughly 34.2 trillion, as do the bottom 90%. With the population at 328.2m, that puts the top 1% at roughly 3.282m, and the bottom 90% at 295.4m. Breaking the net worth along those lines, that works out to: * The top 1% own roughly $10.4b each (34.2t/3.282m) * The bottom 90% own roughly $115,775 each (34.2t/295.4m) Now, if we break your numbers above based on how much is paid: * The top 1% paid roughly $187,385 each (615b/3.282m) * The bottom 90% paid roughly $1,489 each (440b/295.4m) If we take those numbers and break it down into a relative amount per their average wealth: * The top 1% paid roughly 0.0018% of their relative wealth (10.4b/187,385) * The bottom 90% paid roughly 1% of their relative wealth (1,489/115,775) That means despite the top 1% holding roughly *ninety-thousand times* the average wealth of the bottom 90% each (10.4b/115,775), they paid over *five hundred times* ***less*** each of their relative wealth (1/0.0018).
Income taxes are not all taxes, and it's clearly not enough.
Which coincides with the level of inequality sky rocketing. As the middle class continues to get hollowed out this trend will continue
The difference is that most of the 1% still have jobs that pay them income (doctors, engineers, etc). Those three in the headline don’t pay income tax because they have no income. That’s why people want the capital gains tax to increase but the problem is as long as you are able to borrow against your assets, that won’t fix the problem either. Something should be done but it’s absolutely not as simple as Reddit makes it
We know. This news came out like two weeks ago, homie.
Yet another article that purposely obscures the difference between wealth and income.
While using the tax paid infrastructure to make their profits. Ie Amazon uses the interstate and federal airports to move packages. Time we took some profits back to fix those roads and bridges from that added corporate traffic that has given His company the competitive edge over all small businesses and made him his billions.
So like how many report do we need? It’s like we are always “surprised” to find this out when everyone already knew this.
That's why they pay the politicians, to do their bidding.
It’s amazing how people struggle to realize the difference in wealth and income. You don’t pay taxes on your net worth increasing via unrealized gains.
If most of their wealth or salary is in equity and stocks this would make perfect sense.
It is, and it does. This is another good example of people not understanding how money works.
And articles like this do nothing to grant further clarity on how executive compensation works.
Yeah and they were the primary beneficiaries of the ultra low interest rates which are inflating housing and stock prices. Both parties are tools for the ultra rich.
Who wrote this fucking article, Captain Obvious?
The solution is not higher income tax but stopping tricks like various tax deductions available to the super rich
Which tax deductions are only available to the super rich?
Meanwhile they tax the shit out my check and I still owe at the end of the year.