Should Billionaires Even Exist?

[gipper]

You know what’s not cool anymore? Billionaires.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Elizabeth Warren believe some Americans have too much money, and they’re not alone.

Their very existence is now the subject of political debate, sparked most recently by tax-the-rich proposals from two prominent politicians.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) proposed placing a 2 percent tax on wealth over $50 million and 3 percent on assets over $1 billion. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said she wants to increase the marginal tax rate on those earning more than $10 million a year.

Their ideas went viral, starting a mainstream conversation about inequality and wealth.

This kind of talk has always existed among a certain group of hard-core progressives and left-leaning economists, but heading into next year’s presidential election, the idea that the super-rich should pay their fair share is gaining real momentum.

Marshall Steinbaum, a research director at the left-leaning Roosevelt Institute, has advocated taxing the rich at higher rates for years. “We do not need billionaires,” Steinbaum told HuffPost. “The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past.”

For Steinbaum, higher taxes on the wealthy would mean freeing up more money for everyone else. If you think of the economy as a pie, right now, billionaires are getting just about all of it, while we’re all left splitting just one slice.

If you raise taxes on the richest, their incentive to grab at every morsel declines. The theory is they’ll fight a little less hard to depress everyone else’s wages if they know that every extra million is going to get taxed away. A high-paid CEO has less incentive to keep workers’ wages low so he can get a bigger payday.

Billionaires were once a rare breed. In the past few decades, as the U.S. has slashed tax rates, their numbers have exploded, far outpacing inflation.

Since 2008, the number of billionaires in the world has doubled, according to a report published last week by the anti-poverty nonprofit Oxfam. In just the last year, billionaires raked in an astonishing $2.5 billion each day.

In 1982, the first year Forbes debuted its list of the 400 richest Americans, there were about a dozen billionaires. The richest man in the U.S. back then was an 85-year-old shipping magnate with an estimated worth of $2 billion, or $5.2 billion in today’s dollars.

"We do not need billionaires. The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past."
--Marshall Steinbaum, Roosevelt Institute​

Nowadays, Forbes’ list is entirely billionaires. The richest is Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, worth $160 billion.

More: Should Billionaires Even Exist?

I agree! Billionaires aren't cool anymore! The playing field is tilted like the Titanic before it went down. There is no logical reason for so few to have so much. What do you think?

They never were cool. Take most of their wealth or prevent them from buying off the politicians and the government.

If they have bought off the politicians and government, how are you going to pass laws to strip them of their wealth?

There in lies the rub. Can you see it?

 

[gipper]

You know what’s not cool anymore? Billionaires.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Elizabeth Warren believe some Americans have too much money, and they’re not alone.

Their very existence is now the subject of political debate, sparked most recently by tax-the-rich proposals from two prominent politicians.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) proposed placing a 2 percent tax on wealth over $50 million and 3 percent on assets over $1 billion. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said she wants to increase the marginal tax rate on those earning more than $10 million a year.

Their ideas went viral, starting a mainstream conversation about inequality and wealth.

This kind of talk has always existed among a certain group of hard-core progressives and left-leaning economists, but heading into next year’s presidential election, the idea that the super-rich should pay their fair share is gaining real momentum.

Marshall Steinbaum, a research director at the left-leaning Roosevelt Institute, has advocated taxing the rich at higher rates for years. “We do not need billionaires,” Steinbaum told HuffPost. “The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past.”

For Steinbaum, higher taxes on the wealthy would mean freeing up more money for everyone else. If you think of the economy as a pie, right now, billionaires are getting just about all of it, while we’re all left splitting just one slice.

If you raise taxes on the richest, their incentive to grab at every morsel declines. The theory is they’ll fight a little less hard to depress everyone else’s wages if they know that every extra million is going to get taxed away. A high-paid CEO has less incentive to keep workers’ wages low so he can get a bigger payday.

Billionaires were once a rare breed. In the past few decades, as the U.S. has slashed tax rates, their numbers have exploded, far outpacing inflation.

Since 2008, the number of billionaires in the world has doubled, according to a report published last week by the anti-poverty nonprofit Oxfam. In just the last year, billionaires raked in an astonishing $2.5 billion each day.

In 1982, the first year Forbes debuted its list of the 400 richest Americans, there were about a dozen billionaires. The richest man in the U.S. back then was an 85-year-old shipping magnate with an estimated worth of $2 billion, or $5.2 billion in today’s dollars.

"We do not need billionaires. The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past."
--Marshall Steinbaum, Roosevelt Institute​

Nowadays, Forbes’ list is entirely billionaires. The richest is Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, worth $160 billion.

More: Should Billionaires Even Exist?

I agree! Billionaires aren't cool anymore! The playing field is tilted like the Titanic before it went down. There is no logical reason for so few to have so much. What do you think?

They never were cool. Take most of their wealth or prevent them from buying off the politicians and the government.

You mean like all those Wall Street tycoons that gave all that money to Crooked Hillary and Obama or the Silicon Valley billionaires that financed their campaigns? Maybe you are thinking about the fat cat Limousine Hollywood Liberal donors that keep the Democrats rolling in cash.

Exactly. They give to both parties. Right?

 

[toomuchtime_]

You know what’s not cool anymore? Billionaires.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Elizabeth Warren believe some Americans have too much money, and they’re not alone.

Their very existence is now the subject of political debate, sparked most recently by tax-the-rich proposals from two prominent politicians.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) proposed placing a 2 percent tax on wealth over $50 million and 3 percent on assets over $1 billion. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said she wants to increase the marginal tax rate on those earning more than $10 million a year.

Their ideas went viral, starting a mainstream conversation about inequality and wealth.

This kind of talk has always existed among a certain group of hard-core progressives and left-leaning economists, but heading into next year’s presidential election, the idea that the super-rich should pay their fair share is gaining real momentum.

Marshall Steinbaum, a research director at the left-leaning Roosevelt Institute, has advocated taxing the rich at higher rates for years. “We do not need billionaires,” Steinbaum told HuffPost. “The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past.”

For Steinbaum, higher taxes on the wealthy would mean freeing up more money for everyone else. If you think of the economy as a pie, right now, billionaires are getting just about all of it, while we’re all left splitting just one slice.

If you raise taxes on the richest, their incentive to grab at every morsel declines. The theory is they’ll fight a little less hard to depress everyone else’s wages if they know that every extra million is going to get taxed away. A high-paid CEO has less incentive to keep workers’ wages low so he can get a bigger payday.

Billionaires were once a rare breed. In the past few decades, as the U.S. has slashed tax rates, their numbers have exploded, far outpacing inflation.

Since 2008, the number of billionaires in the world has doubled, according to a report published last week by the anti-poverty nonprofit Oxfam. In just the last year, billionaires raked in an astonishing $2.5 billion each day.

In 1982, the first year Forbes debuted its list of the 400 richest Americans, there were about a dozen billionaires. The richest man in the U.S. back then was an 85-year-old shipping magnate with an estimated worth of $2 billion, or $5.2 billion in today’s dollars.

"We do not need billionaires. The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past."
--Marshall Steinbaum, Roosevelt Institute​

Nowadays, Forbes’ list is entirely billionaires. The richest is Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, worth $160 billion.

More: Should Billionaires Even Exist?

I agree! Billionaires aren't cool anymore! The playing field is tilted like the Titanic before it went down. There is no logical reason for so few to have so much. What do you think?

They never were cool. Take most of their wealth or prevent them from buying off the politicians and the government.

If they have bought off the politicians and government, how are you going to pass laws to strip them of their wealth?

There in lies the rub. Can you see it?

Not really, but maybe if I smoked some of the stuff you're smoking I would.

 

[gipper]

You know what’s not cool anymore? Billionaires.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Elizabeth Warren believe some Americans have too much money, and they’re not alone.

Their very existence is now the subject of political debate, sparked most recently by tax-the-rich proposals from two prominent politicians.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) proposed placing a 2 percent tax on wealth over $50 million and 3 percent on assets over $1 billion. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said she wants to increase the marginal tax rate on those earning more than $10 million a year.

Their ideas went viral, starting a mainstream conversation about inequality and wealth.

This kind of talk has always existed among a certain group of hard-core progressives and left-leaning economists, but heading into next year’s presidential election, the idea that the super-rich should pay their fair share is gaining real momentum.

Marshall Steinbaum, a research director at the left-leaning Roosevelt Institute, has advocated taxing the rich at higher rates for years. “We do not need billionaires,” Steinbaum told HuffPost. “The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past.”

For Steinbaum, higher taxes on the wealthy would mean freeing up more money for everyone else. If you think of the economy as a pie, right now, billionaires are getting just about all of it, while we’re all left splitting just one slice.

If you raise taxes on the richest, their incentive to grab at every morsel declines. The theory is they’ll fight a little less hard to depress everyone else’s wages if they know that every extra million is going to get taxed away. A high-paid CEO has less incentive to keep workers’ wages low so he can get a bigger payday.

Billionaires were once a rare breed. In the past few decades, as the U.S. has slashed tax rates, their numbers have exploded, far outpacing inflation.

Since 2008, the number of billionaires in the world has doubled, according to a report published last week by the anti-poverty nonprofit Oxfam. In just the last year, billionaires raked in an astonishing $2.5 billion each day.

In 1982, the first year Forbes debuted its list of the 400 richest Americans, there were about a dozen billionaires. The richest man in the U.S. back then was an 85-year-old shipping magnate with an estimated worth of $2 billion, or $5.2 billion in today’s dollars.

"We do not need billionaires. The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past."
--Marshall Steinbaum, Roosevelt Institute​

Nowadays, Forbes’ list is entirely billionaires. The richest is Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, worth $160 billion.

More: Should Billionaires Even Exist?

I agree! Billionaires aren't cool anymore! The playing field is tilted like the Titanic before it went down. There is no logical reason for so few to have so much. What do you think?

They never were cool. Take most of their wealth or prevent them from buying off the politicians and the government.

If they have bought off the politicians and government, how are you going to pass laws to strip them of their wealth?

There in lies the rub. Can you see it?

Not really, but maybe if I smoked some of the stuff you're smoking I would.

As I thought. You aren’t informed.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The rich already pay far more than a fair share.

No, they don't.

You are mistaken

the tax rate on the rich is much, much higher than it is for everyone else

with poor paying nothing or even less than nothing

that is unjust

Nobody pays tax rates. My tax rate in 2020 is 21%. I will pay 1.5%

What's your AGI?
What taxes will you pay?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The rich already pay far more than a fair share.

The rich and wealthy pay far less percentage of all the money they make than you, and you can least afford it.

The poor pay no taxes dumbass. The rich pay their way.

Because the poor don't make enough money dumbass. The rich and wealthy pay far less percentage in tax of all the money they make than you do. We have all of the good deductions.

We have all of the good deductions.

Like your Nevada Corporation?

That lie still makes me chuckle.

No State income or business tax. Pretty sweet!!!!!

You said you paid low single digit Federal corporate taxes....thanks to your Nevada Corp.

Because you lied.

 

[toomuchtime_]

You know what’s not cool anymore? Billionaires.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Elizabeth Warren believe some Americans have too much money, and they’re not alone.

Their very existence is now the subject of political debate, sparked most recently by tax-the-rich proposals from two prominent politicians.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) proposed placing a 2 percent tax on wealth over $50 million and 3 percent on assets over $1 billion. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said she wants to increase the marginal tax rate on those earning more than $10 million a year.

Their ideas went viral, starting a mainstream conversation about inequality and wealth.

This kind of talk has always existed among a certain group of hard-core progressives and left-leaning economists, but heading into next year’s presidential election, the idea that the super-rich should pay their fair share is gaining real momentum.

Marshall Steinbaum, a research director at the left-leaning Roosevelt Institute, has advocated taxing the rich at higher rates for years. “We do not need billionaires,” Steinbaum told HuffPost. “The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past.”

For Steinbaum, higher taxes on the wealthy would mean freeing up more money for everyone else. If you think of the economy as a pie, right now, billionaires are getting just about all of it, while we’re all left splitting just one slice.

If you raise taxes on the richest, their incentive to grab at every morsel declines. The theory is they’ll fight a little less hard to depress everyone else’s wages if they know that every extra million is going to get taxed away. A high-paid CEO has less incentive to keep workers’ wages low so he can get a bigger payday.

Billionaires were once a rare breed. In the past few decades, as the U.S. has slashed tax rates, their numbers have exploded, far outpacing inflation.

Since 2008, the number of billionaires in the world has doubled, according to a report published last week by the anti-poverty nonprofit Oxfam. In just the last year, billionaires raked in an astonishing $2.5 billion each day.

In 1982, the first year Forbes debuted its list of the 400 richest Americans, there were about a dozen billionaires. The richest man in the U.S. back then was an 85-year-old shipping magnate with an estimated worth of $2 billion, or $5.2 billion in today’s dollars.

"We do not need billionaires. The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past."
--Marshall Steinbaum, Roosevelt Institute​

Nowadays, Forbes’ list is entirely billionaires. The richest is Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, worth $160 billion.

More: Should Billionaires Even Exist?

I agree! Billionaires aren't cool anymore! The playing field is tilted like the Titanic before it went down. There is no logical reason for so few to have so much. What do you think?

They never were cool. Take most of their wealth or prevent them from buying off the politicians and the government.

If they have bought off the politicians and government, how are you going to pass laws to strip them of their wealth?

There in lies the rub. Can you see it?

Not really, but maybe if I smoked some of the stuff you're smoking I would.

As I thought. You aren’t informed.

A couple of hits on what you are smoking and I would also become "informed".

 

[gipper]

They never were cool. Take most of their wealth or prevent them from buying off the politicians and the government.

If they have bought off the politicians and government, how are you going to pass laws to strip them of their wealth?

There in lies the rub. Can you see it?

Not really, but maybe if I smoked some of the stuff you're smoking I would.

As I thought. You aren’t informed.

A couple of hits on what you are smoking and I would also become "informed".

To think billionaires don’t buy politicians, is to not think.

 

[MaryL]

You know what’s not cool anymore? Billionaires.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Elizabeth Warren believe some Americans have too much money, and they’re not alone.

Their very existence is now the subject of political debate, sparked most recently by tax-the-rich proposals from two prominent politicians.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) proposed placing a 2 percent tax on wealth over $50 million and 3 percent on assets over $1 billion. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said she wants to increase the marginal tax rate on those earning more than $10 million a year.

Their ideas went viral, starting a mainstream conversation about inequality and wealth.

This kind of talk has always existed among a certain group of hard-core progressives and left-leaning economists, but heading into next year’s presidential election, the idea that the super-rich should pay their fair share is gaining real momentum.

Marshall Steinbaum, a research director at the left-leaning Roosevelt Institute, has advocated taxing the rich at higher rates for years. “We do not need billionaires,” Steinbaum told HuffPost. “The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past.”

For Steinbaum, higher taxes on the wealthy would mean freeing up more money for everyone else. If you think of the economy as a pie, right now, billionaires are getting just about all of it, while we’re all left splitting just one slice.

If you raise taxes on the richest, their incentive to grab at every morsel declines. The theory is they’ll fight a little less hard to depress everyone else’s wages if they know that every extra million is going to get taxed away. A high-paid CEO has less incentive to keep workers’ wages low so he can get a bigger payday.

Billionaires were once a rare breed. In the past few decades, as the U.S. has slashed tax rates, their numbers have exploded, far outpacing inflation.

Since 2008, the number of billionaires in the world has doubled, according to a report published last week by the anti-poverty nonprofit Oxfam. In just the last year, billionaires raked in an astonishing $2.5 billion each day.

In 1982, the first year Forbes debuted its list of the 400 richest Americans, there were about a dozen billionaires. The richest man in the U.S. back then was an 85-year-old shipping magnate with an estimated worth of $2 billion, or $5.2 billion in today’s dollars.

"We do not need billionaires. The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past."
--Marshall Steinbaum, Roosevelt Institute​

Nowadays, Forbes’ list is entirely billionaires. The richest is Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, worth $160 billion.

More: Should Billionaires Even Exist?

I agree! Billionaires aren't cool anymore! The playing field is tilted like the Titanic before it went down. There is no logical reason for so few to have so much. What do you think?

Well, lets see here after careful thought, I have to ask: should poor people even exist?

 

[toomuchtime_]

If they have bought off the politicians and government, how are you going to pass laws to strip them of their wealth?

There in lies the rub. Can you see it?

Not really, but maybe if I smoked some of the stuff you're smoking I would.

As I thought. You aren’t informed.

A couple of hits on what you are smoking and I would also become "informed".

To think billionaires don’t buy politicians, is to not think.

When you sober up, perhaps you'll tell me which billionaires bought which politicians.

 

[gipper]

There in lies the rub. Can you see it?

Not really, but maybe if I smoked some of the stuff you're smoking I would.

As I thought. You aren’t informed.

A couple of hits on what you are smoking and I would also become "informed".

To think billionaires don’t buy politicians, is to not think.

When you sober up, perhaps you'll tell me which billionaires bought which politicians.

When you get an education, you won’t be dumb.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Not really, but maybe if I smoked some of the stuff you're smoking I would.

As I thought. You aren’t informed.

A couple of hits on what you are smoking and I would also become "informed".

To think billionaires don’t buy politicians, is to not think.

When you sober up, perhaps you'll tell me which billionaires bought which politicians.

When you get an education, you won’t be dumb.

lol So you've got nothing.

 

[gipper]

As I thought. You aren’t informed.

A couple of hits on what you are smoking and I would also become "informed".

To think billionaires don’t buy politicians, is to not think.

When you sober up, perhaps you'll tell me which billionaires bought which politicians.

When you get an education, you won’t be dumb.

lol So you've got nothing.

You mean you got nothing. Dumb people can’t help it.

 

[LuckyDuck]

You know what’s not cool anymore? Billionaires.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Elizabeth Warren believe some Americans have too much money, and they’re not alone.

Their very existence is now the subject of political debate, sparked most recently by tax-the-rich proposals from two prominent politicians.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) proposed placing a 2 percent tax on wealth over $50 million and 3 percent on assets over $1 billion. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said she wants to increase the marginal tax rate on those earning more than $10 million a year.

Their ideas went viral, starting a mainstream conversation about inequality and wealth.

This kind of talk has always existed among a certain group of hard-core progressives and left-leaning economists, but heading into next year’s presidential election, the idea that the super-rich should pay their fair share is gaining real momentum.

Marshall Steinbaum, a research director at the left-leaning Roosevelt Institute, has advocated taxing the rich at higher rates for years. “We do not need billionaires,” Steinbaum told HuffPost. “The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past.”

For Steinbaum, higher taxes on the wealthy would mean freeing up more money for everyone else. If you think of the economy as a pie, right now, billionaires are getting just about all of it, while we’re all left splitting just one slice.

If you raise taxes on the richest, their incentive to grab at every morsel declines. The theory is they’ll fight a little less hard to depress everyone else’s wages if they know that every extra million is going to get taxed away. A high-paid CEO has less incentive to keep workers’ wages low so he can get a bigger payday.

Billionaires were once a rare breed. In the past few decades, as the U.S. has slashed tax rates, their numbers have exploded, far outpacing inflation.

Since 2008, the number of billionaires in the world has doubled, according to a report published last week by the anti-poverty nonprofit Oxfam. In just the last year, billionaires raked in an astonishing $2.5 billion each day.

In 1982, the first year Forbes debuted its list of the 400 richest Americans, there were about a dozen billionaires. The richest man in the U.S. back then was an 85-year-old shipping magnate with an estimated worth of $2 billion, or $5.2 billion in today’s dollars.

"We do not need billionaires. The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past."
--Marshall Steinbaum, Roosevelt Institute​

Nowadays, Forbes’ list is entirely billionaires. The richest is Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, worth $160 billion.

More: Should Billionaires Even Exist?

I agree! Billionaires aren't cool anymore! The playing field is tilted like the Titanic before it went down. There is no logical reason for so few to have so much. What do you think?

Let's simplify this: If there was a 10% flat tax for everyone, the following would occur, some person who made 30,000$ per year, would pay, 3,000$ in taxes. Some person who made 30,000,000 per year, would pay 300,000$. That person who made the millions would have paid HIS/HER fair share, 270,000$ more than the person making 30,000$ per year. That's fair.
I am in favor of a flat tax with no loopholes for the rich, no different percentage regardless of your earnings and no exemptions for kids, we have more than enough kids in the country.
If the "billionaire" earned or inherited the money, I don't see a problem with it.
The way I look at it is, it's their money, they earned it, I didn't. Taking more from them, is simply immoral and stealing. Their work, your theft.
I also paid my way through college while working, I don't believe in bailing students out of their student loan debts. If you sign your name on a document, essentially swearing an oath, that YOU will pay the loan off, YOU are responsible and must pay for it and that is the same for car loans, home loans, et cetera. As the old saying goes, "You've signed your John Hancock to it, own it!"
Just because some woman spread her legs and spit out a kid, doesn't mean that the government is responsible for the kid. The kid is the responsibility of the parents, unless the kid is abandoned, which would then be the responsibility of adoption agencies. You're an adult and as such, it's your responsibility to get your way through life, not the government's.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You know what’s not cool anymore? Billionaires.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Elizabeth Warren believe some Americans have too much money, and they’re not alone.

Their very existence is now the subject of political debate, sparked most recently by tax-the-rich proposals from two prominent politicians.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) proposed placing a 2 percent tax on wealth over $50 million and 3 percent on assets over $1 billion. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said she wants to increase the marginal tax rate on those earning more than $10 million a year.

Their ideas went viral, starting a mainstream conversation about inequality and wealth.

This kind of talk has always existed among a certain group of hard-core progressives and left-leaning economists, but heading into next year’s presidential election, the idea that the super-rich should pay their fair share is gaining real momentum.

Marshall Steinbaum, a research director at the left-leaning Roosevelt Institute, has advocated taxing the rich at higher rates for years. “We do not need billionaires,” Steinbaum told HuffPost. “The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past.”

For Steinbaum, higher taxes on the wealthy would mean freeing up more money for everyone else. If you think of the economy as a pie, right now, billionaires are getting just about all of it, while we’re all left splitting just one slice.

If you raise taxes on the richest, their incentive to grab at every morsel declines. The theory is they’ll fight a little less hard to depress everyone else’s wages if they know that every extra million is going to get taxed away. A high-paid CEO has less incentive to keep workers’ wages low so he can get a bigger payday.

Billionaires were once a rare breed. In the past few decades, as the U.S. has slashed tax rates, their numbers have exploded, far outpacing inflation.

Since 2008, the number of billionaires in the world has doubled, according to a report published last week by the anti-poverty nonprofit Oxfam. In just the last year, billionaires raked in an astonishing $2.5 billion each day.

In 1982, the first year Forbes debuted its list of the 400 richest Americans, there were about a dozen billionaires. The richest man in the U.S. back then was an 85-year-old shipping magnate with an estimated worth of $2 billion, or $5.2 billion in today’s dollars.

"We do not need billionaires. The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past."
--Marshall Steinbaum, Roosevelt Institute​

Nowadays, Forbes’ list is entirely billionaires. The richest is Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, worth $160 billion.

More: Should Billionaires Even Exist?

I agree! Billionaires aren't cool anymore! The playing field is tilted like the Titanic before it went down. There is no logical reason for so few to have so much. What do you think?

Let's simplify this: If there was a 10% flat tax for everyone, the following would occur, some person who made 30,000$ per year, would pay, 3,000$ in taxes. Some person who made 30,000,000 per year, would pay 300,000$. That person who made the millions would have paid HIS/HER fair share, 270,000$ more than the person making 30,000$ per year. That's fair.
I am in favor of a flat tax with no loopholes for the rich, no different percentage regardless of your earnings and no exemptions for kids, we have more than enough kids in the country.
If the "billionaire" earned or inherited the money, I don't see a problem with it.
The way I look at it is, it's their money, they earned it, I didn't. Taking more from them, is simply immoral and stealing. Their work, your theft.
I also paid my way through college while working, I don't believe in bailing students out of their student loan debts. If you sign your name on a document, essentially swearing an oath, that YOU will pay the loan off, YOU are responsible and must pay for it and that is the same for car loans, home loans, et cetera. As the old saying goes, "You've signed your John Hancock to it, own it!"
Just because some woman spread her legs and spit out a kid, doesn't mean that the government is responsible for the kid. The kid is the responsibility of the parents, unless the kid is abandoned, which would then be the responsibility of adoption agencies. You're an adult and as such, it's your responsibility to get your way through life, not the government's.

Some person who made 30,000,000 per year, would pay 300,000$

you mean they'd pay $3,000,000

 

[toomuchtime_]

You know what’s not cool anymore? Billionaires.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Elizabeth Warren believe some Americans have too much money, and they’re not alone.

Their very existence is now the subject of political debate, sparked most recently by tax-the-rich proposals from two prominent politicians.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) proposed placing a 2 percent tax on wealth over $50 million and 3 percent on assets over $1 billion. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said she wants to increase the marginal tax rate on those earning more than $10 million a year.

Their ideas went viral, starting a mainstream conversation about inequality and wealth.

This kind of talk has always existed among a certain group of hard-core progressives and left-leaning economists, but heading into next year’s presidential election, the idea that the super-rich should pay their fair share is gaining real momentum.

Marshall Steinbaum, a research director at the left-leaning Roosevelt Institute, has advocated taxing the rich at higher rates for years. “We do not need billionaires,” Steinbaum told HuffPost. “The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past.”

For Steinbaum, higher taxes on the wealthy would mean freeing up more money for everyone else. If you think of the economy as a pie, right now, billionaires are getting just about all of it, while we’re all left splitting just one slice.

If you raise taxes on the richest, their incentive to grab at every morsel declines. The theory is they’ll fight a little less hard to depress everyone else’s wages if they know that every extra million is going to get taxed away. A high-paid CEO has less incentive to keep workers’ wages low so he can get a bigger payday.

Billionaires were once a rare breed. In the past few decades, as the U.S. has slashed tax rates, their numbers have exploded, far outpacing inflation.

Since 2008, the number of billionaires in the world has doubled, according to a report published last week by the anti-poverty nonprofit Oxfam. In just the last year, billionaires raked in an astonishing $2.5 billion each day.

In 1982, the first year Forbes debuted its list of the 400 richest Americans, there were about a dozen billionaires. The richest man in the U.S. back then was an 85-year-old shipping magnate with an estimated worth of $2 billion, or $5.2 billion in today’s dollars.

"We do not need billionaires. The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past."
--Marshall Steinbaum, Roosevelt Institute​

Nowadays, Forbes’ list is entirely billionaires. The richest is Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, worth $160 billion.

More: Should Billionaires Even Exist?

I agree! Billionaires aren't cool anymore! The playing field is tilted like the Titanic before it went down. There is no logical reason for so few to have so much. What do you think?

Let's simplify this: If there was a 10% flat tax for everyone, the following would occur, some person who made 30,000$ per year, would pay, 3,000$ in taxes. Some person who made 30,000,000 per year, would pay 300,000$. That person who made the millions would have paid HIS/HER fair share, 270,000$ more than the person making 30,000$ per year. That's fair.
I am in favor of a flat tax with no loopholes for the rich, no different percentage regardless of your earnings and no exemptions for kids, we have more than enough kids in the country.
If the "billionaire" earned or inherited the money, I don't see a problem with it.
The way I look at it is, it's their money, they earned it, I didn't. Taking more from them, is simply immoral and stealing. Their work, your theft.
I also paid my way through college while working, I don't believe in bailing students out of their student loan debts. If you sign your name on a document, essentially swearing an oath, that YOU will pay the loan off, YOU are responsible and must pay for it and that is the same for car loans, home loans, et cetera. As the old saying goes, "You've signed your John Hancock to it, own it!"
Just because some woman spread her legs and spit out a kid, doesn't mean that the government is responsible for the kid. The kid is the responsibility of the parents, unless the kid is abandoned, which would then be the responsibility of adoption agencies. You're an adult and as such, it's your responsibility to get your way through life, not the government's.

Some person who made 30,000,000 per year, would pay 300,000$

you mean they'd pay $3,000,000

Not if he had a really good tax attorney.

 

[LuckyDuck]

You know what’s not cool anymore? Billionaires.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Elizabeth Warren believe some Americans have too much money, and they’re not alone.

Their very existence is now the subject of political debate, sparked most recently by tax-the-rich proposals from two prominent politicians.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) proposed placing a 2 percent tax on wealth over $50 million and 3 percent on assets over $1 billion. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said she wants to increase the marginal tax rate on those earning more than $10 million a year.

Their ideas went viral, starting a mainstream conversation about inequality and wealth.

This kind of talk has always existed among a certain group of hard-core progressives and left-leaning economists, but heading into next year’s presidential election, the idea that the super-rich should pay their fair share is gaining real momentum.

Marshall Steinbaum, a research director at the left-leaning Roosevelt Institute, has advocated taxing the rich at higher rates for years. “We do not need billionaires,” Steinbaum told HuffPost. “The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past.”

For Steinbaum, higher taxes on the wealthy would mean freeing up more money for everyone else. If you think of the economy as a pie, right now, billionaires are getting just about all of it, while we’re all left splitting just one slice.

If you raise taxes on the richest, their incentive to grab at every morsel declines. The theory is they’ll fight a little less hard to depress everyone else’s wages if they know that every extra million is going to get taxed away. A high-paid CEO has less incentive to keep workers’ wages low so he can get a bigger payday.

Billionaires were once a rare breed. In the past few decades, as the U.S. has slashed tax rates, their numbers have exploded, far outpacing inflation.

Since 2008, the number of billionaires in the world has doubled, according to a report published last week by the anti-poverty nonprofit Oxfam. In just the last year, billionaires raked in an astonishing $2.5 billion each day.

In 1982, the first year Forbes debuted its list of the 400 richest Americans, there were about a dozen billionaires. The richest man in the U.S. back then was an 85-year-old shipping magnate with an estimated worth of $2 billion, or $5.2 billion in today’s dollars.

"We do not need billionaires. The economy’s done better without billionaires in the past."
--Marshall Steinbaum, Roosevelt Institute​

Nowadays, Forbes’ list is entirely billionaires. The richest is Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, worth $160 billion.

More: Should Billionaires Even Exist?

I agree! Billionaires aren't cool anymore! The playing field is tilted like the Titanic before it went down. There is no logical reason for so few to have so much. What do you think?

Let's simplify this: If there was a 10% flat tax for everyone, the following would occur, some person who made 30,000$ per year, would pay, 3,000$ in taxes. Some person who made 30,000,000 per year, would pay 300,000$. That person who made the millions would have paid HIS/HER fair share, 270,000$ more than the person making 30,000$ per year. That's fair.
I am in favor of a flat tax with no loopholes for the rich, no different percentage regardless of your earnings and no exemptions for kids, we have more than enough kids in the country.
If the "billionaire" earned or inherited the money, I don't see a problem with it.
The way I look at it is, it's their money, they earned it, I didn't. Taking more from them, is simply immoral and stealing. Their work, your theft.
I also paid my way through college while working, I don't believe in bailing students out of their student loan debts. If you sign your name on a document, essentially swearing an oath, that YOU will pay the loan off, YOU are responsible and must pay for it and that is the same for car loans, home loans, et cetera. As the old saying goes, "You've signed your John Hancock to it, own it!"
Just because some woman spread her legs and spit out a kid, doesn't mean that the government is responsible for the kid. The kid is the responsibility of the parents, unless the kid is abandoned, which would then be the responsibility of adoption agencies. You're an adult and as such, it's your responsibility to get your way through life, not the government's.

Some person who made 30,000,000 per year, would pay 300,000$

you mean they'd pay $3,000,000

Your right. I was thinking 300,000,000, but typed 30,000,000. My bad.

 

[Kondor3]

Change the law so that anyone with Net Income over "X" per year is obliged to transfer >X into the US Treasury as a non-deductible levy.

Since most wealthy people are corporations, How would that work?

Your response rests upon the belief that societal pressures will not sweep such distinctions aside as conditions worsen...

It's easy enough to force a piercing of the corporate veil when the will to do so exists...

It's not a distinction, it's an IRS rule.

Rules change under sufficient pressure.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The rich already pay far more than a fair share.

No, they don't.

You don't have to hate Billionaires to ask them to pay their fair share... Many of them agree they should be paying more. Warren Buffet put it best when comparing to his secretary...

Then why doesn't Buffet invest his money in taxable returns instead of tax sheltered investments? Why did he fight the IRS to the last breath when they audited him and said he owed more money?

Why do you not take your personal deduction?

I take any and all deductions. What made you ask a question like that? If you're comparing me to Buffett, I don't complain that the government doesn't take enough of my money. He does, thus a hypocrite.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

George Soros is a billionaire, why isn't he in the picture?

He helps keep the left wing hate site that wrote the article in business. They know who butters their bread.

.

Doris thinks his own taxes should be raised

With that I quote George W Bush. "For those who say government should take more of their money, I am happy to tell you the IRS accepts all checks and money orders."

Text Of Bush's State Of The Union Speech

You're quoting the guy that crashed the world economy? Really?

He wasn't alone. That little stunt was started under Clinton. Bush just didn't do enough to stop it.