DavidTennantsHairIsWhatILiveFor
85611
2888
229
#1 I’m not here to discuss politics or voting. I’m not even a U.S. citizen. I’m here to make a point. Many people say that people like Jeff Bezos have earned their money and shouldn’t be taxed more, which sounds fair at first. But I’m here to discuss why no one should own BILLIONS (plural) of dollars. The two tweets (#1 and #2) are to make you comprehend how much more a million dollars are worth.
#2 Again, a billion is so so much more than a million. You can calculate it yourself if you need to double check. I did.
#3 The left side of the curve represents the lowest income and the right side is the highest. The vertical axis is how much they are being taxed.
Sauce: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/10/06/opinion/income-tax-rate-wealthy.html
#4 shows that the top 1% in the U.S. owns 40% of ALL wealth while the bottom 90% owns just slightly more than 20%. That’s almost twice as much!
#5 English isn’t my first language so I’m not the best at explaining it, but this literal pie distribution should do the trick.
Pie! *insert GIF of Homer Simpson drooling*
#6
Sauces:
ww.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/12/06/the-richest-1-percent-now-owns-more-of-the-countrys-wealth-than-at-any-time-in-the-past-50-years/%3foutputType=amp
I’d like to make two things clear: a) the top 1% refers to net worth NOT income. That doesn’t change the meaning of any of the information above though. b) I’m not for one party or the other. I’m trying to help people understand the problem. Taxing the rich doesn’t mean taxing local restaurant owners or even big companies. I’m talking about companies who hire an Indian guy for a customer support job only to get paid minimum wage and be treated poorly.
munchmunchmunch
Hide yo kids, hide yo wealth.
howmanypeopleareonthisdamnwebsite
beardedballs
They taxin' er' body
animatronicChristmasChickens
Except the wealthy
gaidinbdj
His wealth isn't really hidden. It's in a publicly-traded company that employs hundreds of thousands directly and supports millions more.
munchmunchmunch
I’m being funny here. There is no room for your accuracy or logic here.
Bullheadbelly
Not all wealthy work hard and not all hard workers are wealthy. Check
xizar
I think it's probably easily seen without much checking.
wadatahmydamie
The majority of hard workers aren’t wealthy*. And, true self-made millionaires are exceptionally rare. Only one I can think of is MC Hammer.
Bullheadbelly
I once had a pair of Hammer Jammers
experiencemike
Oddly enough I picked up some Hammer Jammers in Diablo 3 last night.
Bullheadbelly
Excellent
jasonwhite1129
John Pierpont Morgan, founder of JP Morgan, once said that no one at the top of a company should earn more than 20 times those at the bottom
jasonwhite1129
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2009/sep/16/guardian-executive-pay-survey-ratios
DiracsDelta
Not to mention that payroll taxes are regressive, and unearned income is taxed at a lower rate.
waitwasthatreal
No they are flat taxes....
DiracsDelta
Flat up to a set limit. Then all marginal income isn’t taxed. Net regressive.
texag10
... And the PIA formula means that untaxed $ isn't increasing benefits. Why should it be taxed?
YourMomsSidePiece
The income tax rate graph is flawed in 2 ways. 1) It ignores the fact that 45% of people pay 0 fed income tax. 2) No one ever paid the 70%
YourMomsSidePiece
Top rate, there used to be many more legal deductions.
omh2
1: Income tax is a wealth tax, that the poor don't pay it is irrelevant. 2: The effective tax rates of the wealth follow the same trend
YourMomsSidePiece
Income tax is not a wealth tax, it is as the name suggests, an income tax. You can be wealthy and have little to no income, or you can have
YourMomsSidePiece
A high income & little wealth. How is it irrelevant that 45% of people pay 0 in income tax when discussing the issue of income tax levels?
YourMomsSidePiece
You also wrong on marginal vs effective rates. Source:
Tyco2
Not saying I disagree, just saying that most of Jeff Bozo' s wealth is in the form of Amazon stock. Not idle cash.
Tyco2
Meaning that by leaving his money in stock it is being put to work to grow the company which creates new jobs etc.
Tyco2
Amazon itself should also definitely pay meaningful taxes. Lower corporate taxes seems to lead to more share repurchased than investment.
DianNaoChong
It it could be in less fortunate hands doing the same, fostering competition and bring a safety net.
Tyco2
Are you suggesting tax in the form of remitted shares which would be used as a form of social subsidy?
DianNaoChong
Not necessarily,I'm for UBI but I am not sure how to solve the'you get x$ a month, everyones rent instantly goes up x$/month' problem though
Tyco2
Now his 20+ million dollar house. Idle investment, definitely needs more tax.
EchoWhiskyBravo
That’s not the way stock works. U mean retained earnings. Co leaves earnings in the company to increase value of stock rather than dividend
Tyco2
Which came from the initial capital contribution of the owners which have been left in the business to grow it rather than taken as dividend
Imayhavebeenhacked
his salary is also a lot lower than most fatcat CEO's. 1.6mil including benefits i think. facts dont matter though. eat the rich
slicksumbich
You’re getting downvoted because they don’t actually like those facts.
TheMajesticHarpyEagle
Where he doesnt pay or treat his workers well.
Tyco2
Could be. That's a component that leads to his wealth of stock. Different issue than taxing it more.
dakotaranch
Depends on the job really. I've got a friend making great money in the IT department at Amazon. Shit hours but awesome pay.
Giffylongstockings
"He has money but his mental health is shit."
moricai
Meanwhile: "Amazon robot attacks employees, hospitalizing 24 workers. Amazon warehouses now among top 12 most dangerous work environments."
geojustin
Stock doesn’t really work that way. But yea, most of his net worth only exists in theory. He couldn’t actually cash the entire thing out
Tyco2
Cashing out would require a mix of two things. 1) trading stock on the open market... This at least leaves the value in the business
Tyco2
But he could not move that much stock in the market in a short period
Tyco2
Or 2) having his share bought out by other owners from their retained earnings. This reduces the investible cash of the business
Silas007
Yeah and it increases the investible cash of the government .. that is how taxes work.
gaidinbdj
Except most of this wealth is owned businesses and businesses generate *way* more money for the economy than seizing their assets would.
tyrus111419925
as long as they honestly pay taxes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mid1VvK9Xpg
gaidinbdj
Even if they paid no taxes, the second order effects of a large business simply operating are worth more to the economy than...
gaidinbdj
the entire business itself. Why do you think all these places fight over getting large businesses to build there? They know they bring...
gaidinbdj
..way more than tax income to an area. That's why the first thing they offer up is tax incentives: they know that's peanuts.
WraithTDK
Also, who determines what the "ideal pie distribution" is? That sounds rather subjective.
tofuroshi
Billionaires aren't taking any money from me or you. It's not a giant pot of money we each get a share of. It wouldn't be there at all.
OliverClothesoff70
That’s not really true. A huge % of Amazon’s growth came from literally taking market share from old retailers. That meant lost jobs, etc.
CheapBeerHeadaches
Can I just say we should stop arguing about taxes? Why shouldn't ALL people pay less to an almost useless government?
tyrus111419925
for me, lobbying is the real issue- ie the inbuilt system we have for bribing politicians completely legally
CheapBeerHeadaches
Totally agree, just addressing stupid spending. I can't believe they couldn't use the amount gov gets already smarter I.L.O. MORE money.
AspAspAsp
Now I want to know what negative pie tastes like.
humptyblargh
It tastes like burning!
HenryLongfellowIII
Why would you not have an idea of how much bigger a billion is than a million? it's just 1000:1. Roughly, a teaspoon vs. a gallon/ 5 liters.
bobdobalita
It's just a way to visualize it more. A trillion is even crazier. https://www.pagetutor.com/trillion/index.html
ProfessorAssBlast2020
Maybe create a billion dollar business?
gostoso666
Isn't there 8 people who are worth as much as the bottom 3.5billion?
IMayNotReplyToYou
The mega rich, even just the rich help our economy more than all of us combined. They give so much more in tax than all of us, combined. My
IMayNotReplyToYou
Friend got taxed £100,000,000 when his inheritance came in, 40% tax. That's so so so so much more than I will ever pay in my life. So much
IMayNotReplyToYou
More than yours, your family's, everyone you've ever met. Furthermore the money he has left, will be spent (oh which will be taxed) and that
IMayNotReplyToYou
Goes towards our economy aswell. He also gave a few grand to the tree thing. He is gle handedly has done more for our economy than all
IMayNotReplyToYou
The people I've ever met, from the money taken/ stolen from his bank. Yet people have the audacity to day we should tax them more!ridiculous
waitwasthatreal
You are also probably worth as much as a couple billion people.
Blud4BludGod
Guys downvoting this- he's pointing out that if billions of people are living in DEBT, treading water means you have more wealth than all...
Blud4BludGod
...of them.
waitwasthatreal
Yeah, which is why I think it’s really dumb to compare total wealth. Even people at the very bottom have a greater sum wealth than the >>
waitwasthatreal
The bottom 40%. 100k in debt is “wealthier” than 1k people with 101$ debt.
gostoso666
I know on my average wage I'm in the top 2%
waitwasthatreal
Yeah, so I would guess the whole world wouldn’t be that far off, but you alone are likely about as wealthy as the entire bottom 45% in US
gostoso666
Most likely. But I'm not as wealthy as all of them combined.
waitwasthatreal
You likely are though, their total wealth is likely negative, so you just need to be less negative than them.
Throrf
The thing with distributions is that the high end is always really high.
avidatheist
No, it's really not. A lot of things follow a normal or close to normal deviation, where the high end isn't that much higher than the middle
Throrf
If you're talking about the normal distribution the tails stretch into - and + infinity.
pontiacbandit
It's not an immutable law of mathematics, it's a series of policy and tax choices
Throrf
I'm not talking about money specifically. The top 0.01% of just about anything will be very high on the scale of whatever is being measured.
pontiacbandit
I mean, it'll be pretty far out on the axis. But the distance between 0.01 and 0.1 etc. depends on the distribution. It need not be extreme
SpoilGOTandDie
The combined wealth of the bottom 3.5billion is probably negative. I've never understood the validity of this comparison.
Idontlikeolives
Its valid for people who dont understand economics.
gohomebaby
It’s saying very few people own a lot and most people own nothing
flexistraw
What makes it invalid?
xpiation
Think he means debt.
Stummel
The validity of the argument gets lost, if they are in debt. If you have 1$ you got more than the bottom 3.5billion. Bad comparison
flexistraw
You don’t think it would be an issue if the bottom 3.5 billion people were in debt?
mizunoami2
Why? How would the fact that 3.5 billion have debt in any way absolve our system of letting the rich skate? That's even more damning.
Silnt39
If a homeless person with no debt gas a 10 dollar bill in his pocket, he is richer than 90% of America.
IMayNotReplyToYou
Yeah he's richer than most people because he doesn't have debt. Not many people can buy a house straight off I'll be paying off themortgage
IMayNotReplyToYou
For 30 years when i buy a house, and I'm not classed as "poor".
plainoldusername
We should take $5 from him and divvy it up
Silnt39
Has not gas. Stupid autocorrect. This is why machines will never rule the world.
vitorsly
You're saying 90% of people in the US have a negative amount of wealth? I really doubt that
J0765
This is a fact. Most people have more debt that assets
supergingerman
My net worth is something like -$186,000. That's negative when including my mortgage, student loans, car payment, etc. So I believe it
applesandlemons
As @dohcohv said, you have to include the value of the asset against the value of the liability. Your car and house hopefully are (1/?)
applesandlemons
Worth more than you owe, indicating a positive overall net worth, unless your student loan and cc’s are 186k, it’s not that low. (2/?)
dohcohv
Your mortgage is on an asset, which hopefully, is worth more than your mortgage amount. My mort. Is 114k, my house, 240k
supergingerman
My mortgage is an asset, but the equity sure as hell isn't double the value of the house, not in my area
gostoso666
Jesus, there's hardly anywhere in NZ you can buy a house for less than 300k. Not if you want to live in it
ImTheJuggernautBricks
Look at how many people have mortgages.
manovsteele
But they must have equity? They could sell the house tomorrow and have far more money than the tramp
supergingerman
Sell your house and then what? I dont have another house just laying around
greentights
haha, i think 10% are paying mortgages more than house price since recession
Fi7tyCaliber
As of this point in my life, no billionaire has ever taken money from me without my permission.
whatsisname
Keep licking those boots. You are blissfully aware of how the entire economic system forces your choices without you realizing it.
rococosbasilisk
Well that very much depends on how you define taken. But generally a failure to pay taxes is the functional equivalent of taking money.
Cheesecakecrush
Here's food for thought: If you live in the US, even the poorest person here is in the top 20% wealthiest people worldwide.
Giffylongstockings
That's what corporate cocksuckers tell themselves to distract themselves from the old man dick on their mouth
whatsisname
That doesn't mean shit.
rococosbasilisk
I’m pretty sure that’s no longer true, so many people are in so much debt that they are unlikely to ever crawl out of it. At least in other
rococosbasilisk
Countries you’re just at 0
thatsmyfetish69
Is everyone here okay paying more Federal Tax than Amazon and Chevron? They make BILLIONS in profit every quarter. You make $15,000-$20,000.
abacab87
If you make that little, your not paying federal tax.
Talligan
You guys are getting paid?
danpik
2018, Chevron paid 5.75B in taxes and Amazon paid almost 2B in taxes. Source...public available balance sheets
ToAoRoS
Hey did you know this capital stuff is a relatively new thing, and it's not set in stone, like, we could change things for the better maybs?
RadicalLeftist
Like the 40yrs of a top end tax rate of over 70% that also happened to coincide with the greatest economic expansion in American history.
waitwasthatreal
Yeah, that wasn’t anybody’s tax burden, and idk maybe because the US was the only country producing anything?
RadicalLeftist
Yes america was one of the only producers but this lasted gor 40yrs of pretty good stability so that isnt the main cause
thewordsoftheprophetsarewrittenonthesubwaywall
it really is, I'm from Pittsburg that city got fucked when other players entered the steel market. When other places started manufacting(1)
thewordsoftheprophetsarewrittenonthesubwaywall
the growth slowed extremely fast and then went into decline as other nations required lower wages and less safety guidelines(2)
OneBoredS2Mook
I would also point out that it was during a time that the US had a hefty slice of the world’s surviving manufacturing capacity.
RadicalLeftist
Yes but it lasted 40yrs and then rapidly declined after those taxes were pulled back
gary46265
You're crazy if you think anyone paid anywhere near that rate.
RadicalLeftist
Can you show me any reason why they didnt? I was talking on actual facts and you came in with an unprovable concept
gary46265
https://slate.com/business/2017/08/the-history-of-tax-rates-for-the-rich.html Here, read up champ.
RadicalLeftist
So this doesnt prove that no one paid 90% but that the average was still 10% higher then today and was still more then any other earning 1/2
MuresanDani
So you're saying Amazon's valuation is too high? Or perhaps owning 12% of your business is too much? You are aware, of course, that Bezos 1/
MuresanDani
doesn't actually have billions in cash, right? Almost his entire fortune is in Amazon stock. 2/2
stronomer
Does that matter? His business model is putting other businesses out of business.
MuresanDani
Oh nooooo, competition is allowing a superior model to win over the others, what ever will we do....SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!
stronomer
Yeah, because of the "free market". Sure. Hear the applause by the workers on their 3rd job?
MuresanDani
Fewer than 5% of all working people in the US have more than 1 job and most of those have 1 full and one part time job.
vitorsly
That just means Amazon is too large and should be split into smaller, less monopolistic companies. It's not healthy for a single company 1/2
vitorsly
2/2 so large worth enough that if it was dissolved it'd give every single man woman and child in the US over 5000 dollars.
MuresanDani
How exactly do you figure dissolving Amazon would give everyone 5k?
gaidinbdj
And put hundreds of thousands of people out of work immediately, plus millions more long term.
thewordsoftheprophetsarewrittenonthesubwaywall
you get dissolution wouldn't magically create a pile of money right?
humptyblargh
Not a safe assumption.
n0v4
Don't worry, eventually a revolution will create some wealth destruction for everyone.
spookyactionatadistance
Just like the French Revolution created the liberal capitalist system we live in. Or how the Russian one created a system were no one had
StillNotEasyBeingGreen
Yep.... scheduled for tomorrow, right? Always tomorrow.
JoshCanJump
When strife comes, the richest hoard gold. When the trouble ends they are still rich. Revolutions just restructure the middle & low wealth.
zombiejedediah
Which is exactly why it's in the ultra-wealthy's own interest to have a more equal society.
HenryLongfellowIII
Or a war.
Gawky
can you say billionair warlords with private armies all moving abroad
Blue4Five
JamiesEPIRB
Doesn’t matter how much money anti-gunners have if the poor have all the guns, just like in 1776.
Enoan
Ideally we would be able to use all of the wonderful things called rights and voting to fix problems without killing people. Shame it’s so
Gawky
those are just guidelines for the commoners
Enoan
Reliably undermined.
slinkhi
you misspelled rigged
swellerelk
It's likely that we have another world war and nuke half the planet before that happens
TheRealJoeHasenguy
Which im kinda apathetic about
thatsmyfetish69
Which is due to pure greed: if I can’t have it ALL, no one will have ANYTHING
yzark01
Nukes wont be involved, no ones going to do something that 100% leads to their death. And wars wont be fought like they used too.
yzark01
Warfares more electronic and remote now and less infantry based due to soldiers being significantly more expensive to train and equip
swellerelk
Thats demonstratedly false. While some countries use more drones, boots on ground is still the most widespread form of warfare.
swellerelk
People do things all the time that 100% leads to their death, thats not counting suicides.
TheGhostofElizabethShue
You say "wealth destruction" like it's a bad thing, but I'd rather burn it all down than let the bastards win.
[deleted]
[deleted]
TheGhostofElizabethShue
And yet somehow them making everyone's lives worse is acceptable as the status quo. Fuck billionaires, they shouldn't exist.
Larnoc
I agree! Burn the rich
CPT1NS4N0
gary46265
I, too, can't wait see this country look like Syria.
Malus333
We will die like Rome. Long slow and painfull wondering what the fuck happened.
TheGhostofElizabethShue
You misunderstand. People like to say "you just want a handout". I'm saying if they could lose it all and I gain nothing, that's fine.
attofreak
You will lose, much more than them. Even if you have "nothing". There's a reason why imgur/internet is not legislative assembly of countries
TheGhostofElizabethShue
I suggest you re-read the above post. They have much, much further to fall. And if we're talking lives, everyone only gets one.
gary46265
Oh, I understand what you're saying. I'm just saying nothing short of incredibly destructive violence is actually going to fix it.
TheGhostofElizabethShue
Quite. It's the threat of destructive violence that keeps the people on top on top. "If we go down we take you all with us."
Blue4Five
This is why so many billionaires are behind firearm restrictions.
JoshCanJump
Which billionaires?
Blue4Five
Bloomberg, for one. Gates for another.
Gawky
how do you fight artillery and predator drones with privatly owned firearms
LooseyGooseyBrett
I'm surprised people aren't so fed up that they start attacking these greedy bastards.
Morrigi
Why should they? By and large, the people have jobs, food on the table, and more entertainment than ever.
LooseyGooseyBrett
Because the US revolutionary war. The rich squandering our resources for themselves. Democracy is down the shitter right now.
DanFendi
Because if you do, a man in a navy-blue uniform will shout 'stop resisting arrest!' and beat you to death with a pipe.
REVENGE488
Ironically if these super rich assholes dumped their money into their employees and companies. Our economy with boom
TheSomethingSomethingGenericReplyGuy
Shhhhh! All I want is to use the guillotine
Tyaldan
They dont want a booming economy. They can make more on the seesaw. Disaster capitalism is the name of the game now.
Tyaldan
Plunging prices due to a downturn? Means cheaper properties! Buy em up and then when it goes up from spending youve made more.
Tyaldan
They are working on squeezing every last bit of wealth out as they can, and they dont give a shit about consequences. They can afford em.
DigitalBang
They do, they don't hide it under their bed. stocks and loans are literal investments in others.
FabulousBadass
Their "money" is already in companies. Wealth is not cash on hand, it's in shares of companies. You suggest they just give that away?
StubbyJohnson
These idiots that regurgitate this nonsense don't have even a loose understanding of economics, market forces, and behavioral changes that
StubbyJohnson
will result from massive tax increases like the so-called "wealth tax".
Stretch18
https://www.forbes.com/sites/investor/2017/10/17/tax-rates-and-economic-growth-is-there-really-a-correlation/#1fa0deb27c3e
twozerooz
Forbes has 2 sides, the article side, and the blog side. Authors denoted as "contributors" are just random people. Anyone can be one
FabulousBadass
"While general observations can be made, it would be inaccurate to draw any firm conclusions between top tax rates and economic growth."
howuuuuudoin
No that would just cause inflation and decrease purchasing power
[deleted]
[deleted]
twozerooz
It's only "true" in the same sense as a denialist saying "CO2 is plant food"
[deleted]
[deleted]
howuuuuudoin
How is it without inflation? The economic forces stay the same no matter how the funds are appropriated because the economy is a self regula
howuuuuudoin
Ting system
twozerooz
That isn't how economics works, yes inflation occurs, but purchasing power never decreases. Even in an extremely oversimplified model,
howuuuuudoin
Purchasing power is literally how much you can buy per unit money by definition if inflation occurs purchasing power shrinks
twozerooz
Incorrect. Please refer to literally any article on Google. E.g. straight from the wiki page: "Inflation does not always imply falling
twozerooz
With only a basic understanding of economics, purchasing power increases temporarily until inflation pushes it back to normal.
twozerooz
Ergo constant(but unpredictable) min wage hikes will turn a temporary increase into a semi-permanent one
FlexGunship
I don't understand this argument. Bezos didn't earn billions. He MADE that wealth. It didn't exist previously. 1/2
captain5
Lol he made wealth, okay dawg. Investors and shoppers just pulled money out of a hat to give it to him?
FlexGunship
He hasn't sold most of his shares. What money are you talking about?
captain5
Reread your prior statement.
FlexGunship
Wealth isn't money. Value isn't money. Money is just a tool of exchange. If you build a log cabin, you created value through labor. No money
FlexGunship
His valuation isn't based on dollars taken from other people. It's based on the hypothetical value that he's created which didn't exist. 2/2
OliverClothesoff70
It did exist. It used to be owned by Sears & Montgomery Ward & Toys R Us. Bezos’ creation was better. Old retail died when online was born.
FlexGunship
Is it your contention that the economy is a zero sum game and no new wealth is ever created?
OliverClothesoff70
Of course not. But it would be obviously wrong to say Amazon’s growth was not directly tied to the massive shrinking of old school retail.
FlexGunship
Were cars invested at the expense of the horse drawn carriage industry? Are EVs designed at the expensive of ICE cars?
whatsisname
He made a portion of that wealth, his employees made the majority of it, but the economic system assigns most of that value to Bezos.
RoyDMercer
The rich use their money in the best way possible - contributing to politicians.
Blue4Five
obviouslyrob
And third yachts worth 9 figures.
MostlyWhelmed
Politicians provide a good return on investment
thatsmyfetish69
Yo THEIR benefit, not anyone else’s. Pure greed and potential destruction of an economy.
crash217
Exactly. They are going to ensure their prosperity & wealth just like “random citizen”. politicians & the rich just have a stage to do so.
bellyfullofbees
Thanks, Citizens United.
SkepticalPancake
Is it bad that I don't have a problem with the wealthy being taxed at the same rate as everyone else? Seems fair to me.
captain5
Yeah but a wealthy paying say, $300k in taxes is a drop of water for a billionaire, is like the entire salary of a top 5% earner.
szepasszony
They're making that wealth off of workers earning poverty wages-and relying on tax payer money for welfare to subsidize those wages.
Gawky
you sir are mad, my contry takes 55-62%
EarlGreyOrDeath
If you tax $10M and $40k at 20%, the first has $8M left and the second has $32k. See how a flat tax hits lower incomes more?
oldandbored
#3 is shocking. How can anyone possibly justify the richest paying a smaller % tax rate than the poorest.
Sutashi
This is what bothers me. I don't care if someone is obscenely rich but they need to pay their fair share of taxes. Honestly if they did...
Sutashi
taxes could go down for everyone.
Someshithead241
Because the people making those laws are the richest.
DiabolicalStench
Or they're getting funded by the richest. You'd be surprised how little money it takes for senators to sell out voters
executor2
Because the rich make workplaces for milions of ppl while a low income person cannot create any job.
derekjohn
Ayn Rand lives !
GCRust
On social assistance. Like she did.
malexmatt
Because it's bullshit agitprop from a hack economist shilling for Warren https://www.aier.org/article/the-big-fib-about-the-rich-and-taxes/
humptyblargh
the poorest don't pay income tax at all
tofuroshi
45% of Americans pay no federal income tax at all, and the top 1% pays more in taxes than the bottom 90% combined.
ArcaneConjecture
This bullshit stat only includes FEDERAL INCOME TAX. #3 includes all taxes.
vitorsly
I better fucking hope that the people who *own* more than the bottom 90% pay more than the bottom 45%
Raspootin
But the Narrative!!
Someshithead241
Because only one member of the top 1% has more money than the bottom 90% combined. Thats how this shit works.
tofuroshi
https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2018-update/
Idontlikeolives
Shhhhh! When you start talking about quantity and not percentage it destroys the narrative.
whenitcomesdowntoit
Fuck millions when you got billions, when you got pennies and none to spare of course you’d be mad too at the rich paying less than you do
whenitcomesdowntoit
The rich have money to spare, where as the rest of us have to hear how so many companies had a zero tax liability for 2018, fuck that noise
bobdobalita
When that company has added tax liability, guess who pays it? If you buy from that company, YOU do. Guess who pays all the taxes.... (1/2)
Idontlikeolives
I suggest you look at HOW these companies achieve zero liability.
Jemidana
In a free market, people become wealthy by making the pie bigger, not by taking pie from others.
captain5
Yeah but amazon didn’t make the pie bigger, they closed like half of retail stores
OriginalgamerX
Amazon didn't close those stores, those companies closed their stores.
captain5
Haha take an MBA class, read the case study on what amazon did to diapers and zappos
GoddamnitClown
Obviously both things happen. Treating workers the way Amazon does is not making the pie any bigger, it's just moving their pie upwards.
bigassballs1
Assuming of course the market is "free". It isn't...Google "Regulatory Capture" & then understand it's just 1 on the way they cheat
Morrigi
A whole lot of people somehow don't understand this.
Silas007
A whole lot of people dont see anything of a bigger pie.
thewordsoftheprophetsarewrittenonthesubwaywall
it's just insane how few get this
mksu
I don't want to live in a country with an economy run by people so clueless as to think labor is the only valid source of income.
captain5
Ok don’t, take your rich ass to Monaco for the true tax haven.
RoloTonyBrown
TheMajesticHarpyEagle
It is. Valuable labor should be worth more, but beyond a certain point nothing any one person could ever do in their lives is worth so much.
assortedletters
Seriously.
Tajik
This guy is a dumb ass
DavosTheOnionKnight
The OPs points have some validity, but yes it ignores basic mathematical/financial concepts like compounding.
Magnum3point141592654
I think it's important to realize OP is making the most basic of comparisons just to make a point in the differences and leave it at that.
Magnum3point141592654
But all of you lounge accountants want to inject data that is not required to make said point. Just STFU for a second and stay simple.
DavosTheOnionKnight
Big number is big, wow, no think just he big me small no fair. Is that better?
Giffylongstockings
Hey look he doesn't have a valid counter so he relies on un-witty insults
Magnum3point141592654
It's just a simple comparison to show the difference in numerical values.
humptyblargh
Rationalize your envy all you like, but in the end you're far more greedy than those you accuse. Bezos isn't stealing anything from you. 1/
whatsisname
When my preferred local retailers shut down because they can't compete with Bezo's more efficient squeezing of employees and legal trickery,
whatsisname
then yes, he is stealing from us.
humptyblargh
No he's not. He's out-competing your preferred local retailers, because they don't offer more value to the customers.
Giffylongstockings
No it's just that he has the money to under cut local businesses so he can sell the same product cheaper
humptyblargh
That's how competition works, punkin. You can offer the lowest price, more convenience, better service, and intangibles like prestige 1/
humptyblargh
You want to steal the product of his ideas and work from him. He pays more taxes in a day than you will in your entire life. 2/2
Gawky
and the tax rate is too low and to easy to work around when you have armies of lawyers
opetchas
As he should. He earns more money in a day than I will in my entire life.
humptyblargh
Not sure if you think you're arguing against what I said.
Giffylongstockings
He got to where he is on the blood sweat and tears of his workers if not for them he could have the best idea and it would mean nothing
NameyMcUsername
Repeat after me: Other people's shit is not my shit. I can't take other people's shit just because they have more shit than me.
JoshCanJump
But you're ok with taking more from people who have less? 20%+ of your income compared to 5% of a corporate income? One rule for all.
ImgurIsCurrentlyOverCapacity
The corporate income will go to retained earnings where, to simplify, it’s paid out as dividends to shareholders that get taxed. 1/2
ImgurIsCurrentlyOverCapacity
Stop comparing apples to oranges if you don’t understand how corporate taxation works in addition with, not instead of, income tax. 2/2
PeeterParker
I'm pretty sure what he means is there should be no income tax in general so I don't see your logic behind this comment.
JoshCanJump
So how is stuff like roads or police service or jails or fire services or schools supposed to be paid for?
PeeterParker
State income tax as opposed to federal income tax. I get what you mean basic organizations have different funding but we're talking more 1/
PeeterParker
Of a federal side here as far as a regulated tax. If people are generally concerned why do we keep paying members of congress to do a job 2/
whatsisname
When people have shit because the economic system assigns them that shit, the people of the system have the right to decide on that system
mikeatike
Eat the rich.
dilgar2000
It’s the only thing that they’re good for.
Graylinfaux
Have some pepper it'll compliment your salty attitude.
TheGriffin
Nah. Nah. Use the rich as fertilizer to help regrow the amazon
JHawke
I don't think throwing more toxins around helps growing plants.
Gerdalearnedme
Took the words right out my mouth.
jahiva
time to sharpen the guillotines
HenryLongfellowIII
I have an alternative modest proposal.
Morrigi
Cannibals should be tried before a court and hanged.
mikeatike
Eat the judges.
Traja01
Eat morrigi
Morrigi
Hanged.
raknor88
Holy shit, I didn't think #1 would be right but it is. from 1492 to 2019 you would only make $961,775,000. $5K a day is $1.825M a year. 1/
Tantx2
However, that amount of money without investing? Unrealistic. Also can you imagine compounded interest on even 5 k$ whoa.
raknor88
Though if you were making $5K a day in 1492, you were a king. No one else could be that rich back then. 2/2
Whatwhatsomethingbutt
This again... Obviously inflation exists. It's a device to contextualize / demonstrate the size of $1 billion, not an economic exercise.
SupermassiveZebra
962,430,000! Leap days are a thing. Insert 'ackshually' pictures here.
Boomermcntastey
So does bezos really make $1 billion a week?
Imayhavebeenhacked
amazon makes 1 bil a week or w/e. Bezos' income including benefits is 1.6 mil per year or something like that. his wealth is in stocks
Imayhavebeenhacked
i googled his salary the other day but i dont remember/care what the exact number is. google it. or dont, w/e
hurleyman77
No, he might have stocks that do that sometimes, but he doesn't make $1 billion a week.
DiabolicalStench
He makes $215m - $275m a day, so he makes somewhere between $1.5b to $2b a week.
DiabolicalStench
https://www.businessinsider.com/what-amazon-ceo-jeff-bezos-makes-every-day-hour-minute-2018-10
DiabolicalStench
Amazon employ 566,000 people. If Bezos gave a week of his earnings to his staff, split evenly, they'd each get $2,650.18...
DiabolicalStench
... and Bezos would still make $16.5b for the remaining 51 weeks in the year.
stormcomponents
Don't forget that if you were making 5k a year, you'd invest like anyone else and most likely be a billionaire. Bezos isn't a billionaire...
stormcomponents
...from work. It also comes from proper investments - something most never do and then argue why others get ahead.
meskarune
Others get ahead by exploitation
opetchas
A poor person is not becoming a billionaire through proper investments. No matter how hard anyone works, no one is besides a few rich people
stormcomponents
Seems you missed the bit where I said "If you were making 5k a day".
Whatwhatsomethingbutt
You cannot be a billionaire by smart investing unless you're already very rich. And many can't invest b/c it all goes to rent/food/transport
stormcomponents
Seems you missed the bit where I said "If you were making 5k a day".
humptyblargh
Wiliam Buffett didn't start out very rich. He became a billionaire primarily by smart investing.
Whatwhatsomethingbutt
Warren. & he didn't invest his way to a billion. He did it by buying companies building an investment firm, having a massive property empire