GullahGullahIslander
28582
901
14
Jun 19, 2026 11:47 AM
GullahGullahIslander
28582
901
14
knupauger
Tax what exactly? Their wealth only exists as valuation, not as a balance in a bank account. You can't tax what doesn't exist.
blzrdphoto
These numbers have 3-4x since 2022 also.
Thorketil
There's a reason why Peter Thiel, Elon Musk, and all the other multibillionaires from Silicon Valley want to abolish democracy and introduce technocracy: to secure and maximize profits from the exploitation of workers.
Kenbamazingbutprobablywontbe
And look at them. Clearly infinite wealth makes you so happy. Not a twisted scrooge mcduck.
Mgxr44
I think we’re beyond “taxing”
ac0lyte
allergictocantaloupe
It's worse than that. One of the minimum wages has been at $7.25 since 2009. The lowest minimum wage is arguably $0, you could also argue that the minimum wage is less than $0. "Prisoners" can be forced to work for free (because of the loophole baked into the 13th Amendment). Independent contractors can lose money on work, there's no law that says they have to be compensated for expenses.
bripi
in no way do you make your point
Picklediddly
One word: Guillotine
NoMoreMorons
LerryV2
Its been $7.25 since 2009
SalmonMax
Yeah, and it's easy to lose track of, but what 7.25 MEANS, in terms of buying power, has continued to decrease. This is not 'stagnation' of minimum wage, it's a constant decline that is masked by the apparent value remaining the same.
Breadfordloaves
$7.25 today is worth just $4.62 in 2009.
Inflation is a silent tax on working people who don't own the assets.
rezpawner
Nah. We're way past taxing. It's choppy-choppy time. Send a message.
imyourrealdad
Fuck tax, EAT THE RICH
breakingcode
slightlybrokenegg
Seizing of ass and sets
GrimleyGraves
EAT the rich (I especially like em with tartar sauce)
EternalStudent07
Yeah, the idea that we can only be taxed on what we just earned is a decision, a choice.
soulseekbob2320
ELIMINATE 1 page per month of the current tax code until it is Under 1,000 pages. (It's currently Over 2,600 pages) Yes, it's tiny, but it's a start ! FYI : Some pages will automatically negate several other pages so it won't take 100+ years.
Grimlinnan
NunyaBizness
3 50 cr
BeaverOnFire
HurkWurk
how about fire your congressmen, who have the power to raise minimum wage and havent?
PSFE43X
That worth is in equity so you can't tax it. It's literally unrealized gains. The messed up part is they can use that as collateral for loans, then spend THAT money to live a luxurious lifestyle, all while looking (from a tax perspective) like they have little taxable wealth. But "Tax the rich" is catcher than, "raise corporate taxes, close lending loopholes, and fix the IRS."
sfrinlan
Agreed. At the end of the day, everyone can't be experts in everything. We can know that they're not playing fair, and that that should be corrected. We can demand that people who do know and who have power do something about it. And if they don't and things get bad enough, people with nothing to lose start killing people who have a lot to lose under the theory that at some point, something will give. But, like the French Revolution, if we get to that, it'll be brutal and chaotic.
nqwazi
If we took 50% of the wealth they stole their lifestyle would not change in the slightest.
Whitebeardthepirate
seven words: mob up, make them do it yourselves
Resistance1000
When the revolution begins, the mob will search for those three on Day 1.
Whitebeardthepirate
it'll be simple: look for the heavily fortified bunkers with a private army half the size of the us armed forces guarding it. except musk. you'll have to travel deep into south africa to find him hiding behind enough walls to make an african warlord jealous
NullSecc
Hunt the richest, tax the remaining.
Raikupath
Capitalism doing what capitalism does. Time to get rid of that shitty ass system.
nuxi7
trippingthelightfantastic
ApostaticPastafarian
In addition to the other replies.
Using how much the US spends to help anyone poorer than a multu-millionaire is a poor metric for "a large (or ever reasonable) amount of money"
OmgOptimized
Since taxes fund social services which disproportionately go to everyone, you don't really need to bracketize the tax at all. You just tax everyone for their assets and give out services equally to each person. And absolutely do not provide cuts or loopholes to anyone ever. That still represents a huge wealth transfer from top to bottom with very low administative overhead. If you must, cut the lowest income tax bracket or provide some basic income, to compensate. That's also low-admin.
floatationman
I would point out that if such a tax were applied to everyone, the average homeowner would be charged an extra $15k a year. That's gonna be a tough pill to swallow for an already shrinking middle class. Means testing is appropriate for such taxes.
OmgOptimized
How would you feel if the tax was instead distributed equally as a cash contribution? Most, especially the worst off, would be net receivers of cash, and there would be a gradual transition where people start being net payers, no step change.
Having a bracket at all invites all kinds of legal battles about definitions and therefore greatly funds rule creep, as I explained in another response.
floatationman
I sounds like there would a way to do it without making it a regressive tax, but it would be hard. The vast difference in home costs in CA vs KS would mean entirely different reimbursement rates based on HCOL areas. And that doesn't even get into the difficulties of the 20% of apartment renters.
OmgOptimized
I tend to rather view it as a rearrangement of the economy. You change tax flow, that'll update market prices to match. But there needs to be some kind of transition mechanism.
Renters are a non-issue though: Landlords pay more tax and will pass that on to the renters, who can now afford it thanks to lowering of other taxes or those direct contributions.
DrSparken
a minimum of 100m is probably reasonable for minimising the admin overhead; if it didn't have a minimum, you'd have to evaluate everyone in the country for how much their possessions are worth to tax them a total of $40 for it. Whereas if someone is worth even close to 100m you know about it and can catch all the major contributors to it (and anyone worth that much can pay an accountant)
OmgOptimized
I disagree: simply evaluating who should be evaluated requires data, processes, and people to execute them, and once you have data, applying the tax is automated and thus close to free. People close to the limit will fight get under it, because it's worth $3M per year. No limit means whatever technicality they use to get down to $99.8M is instead only worth 3% of whatever net worth reduction they achieve, not $3M. That's a fight that would also require admin and lawyers, and it funds rule creep.
rainbowblow
Better yet tax him the full 49% that me and my hubby pay for being in a high tax bracket (ps still not high enough to buy a house though)
SnailsAgainstTungstenSpheres
Math isn't your thing eh?
rainbowblow
Actually got a maths degree. Thinking isn’t your thing hey
pandemicmodedad
Thats because half your money is going to taxes. 49% is quite steep for someone who can't even accord a house.
DarkZalgo
49% is also impossible because all of your income can't be taxed at that rate.
idothingsheren
How? If you're in America, your effective tax bracket can't be 49% . Your marginal bracket is only 49% if you make more than $750k per year as a married couple in a high state income tax state (federal = 37% marginal at joint married income over 750k, California's marginal tax rate is 11% on income over 860k for married couples)
rainbowblow
Spot the world revolves around me American 🤦♀️ I’m not American
DarkZalgo
Kinda what the other dude said. How can you be in the absolute highest tax bracket and be unable to afford a house? I'm in the third tax bracket and I'm closing on a house in ten days for ~$600K. Per the HUD definition of affordable housing you need to make $200K per year to afford the median house in the most expensive state in the country. And that's FAR beneath the top marginal tax rate for income.
rainbowblow
Cause i don’t live in America. I live in Sydney one of the most expensive cities in the world. You couldn’t even buy a 2bdrm as for $600k here
rainbowblow
Apartment *
RandomQuack
Seize their assets while we're at it.
MiserableBustard
"Taxing the rich" is trying to fill a bucket that has no bottom, they don't pay most taxes thanks to loopholes. Bucket stays empty no matter how much you increase its size. Which is why democrat politicians love that slogan, they get to pretend to be rebels while using the same loopholes.
Overhaul the IRS. Close the loopholes.
ImAGrower
We'd have to tear down the current system and people involved and then work on correct taxing. Also, we need to start pushing for a cap on profits that a corp/company can acquire a year and anything over that goes directly back to increasing workers' pay and better benefits and so on. As well as a bunch of other things to get some of the balance back and make people's lives better.
LadyGreybird
I've always interpreted "tax the rich" as closing the loopholes and strategies they use to minimize their taxes
companydysprosium
Same, it's included as part of the process. Like defunding the police, it's redistribution of burden and create a better system.
DarthFutuza
Yes, but unfortunately you have to say this specifically and be careful about communicating it because otherwise someone will take the short slogan as campaign/talking point and not actually address, understand, or fix the problem because slogans are easier to understand and share than the actual solution.
Darkspire
Not an accident. Need to punish the obfuscators as well.
TheMomaw
Two step solution:
* Tax non-productive assets as well as income. The tiering on assets can be MUCH higher than the tiers on income so we don't accidentally include retirement, savings, and mortgages on primary homes.
* Force capital gains tax to be paid on any asset when it used as collateral or trade.
soThatWasThat
Need to overhaul the stock markets as well.
YouAlreadyMutedMe
Exactly! Congress has to rewrite the Tax Code before we can see any progress. Unlikely they will though as it would impact THEM too much!
mrsparkle001
It will be a cold day in hell before congress rewrites the tax code to make the rich pay. Not happening in our lifetimes.
GrimleyGraves
Tall order considering the oligarchs are the ones the wrote the damn things in the first place.
Farfel8088
Congress keeps cutting the budget for the IRS - everybody hates the tax man so it's a politically popular move. But the wealthy don't just use 'loopholes' - they also use illegal and convoluted arrangements to hide what they are doing, but the IRS does not have the money or personnel to conduct the extensive investigations to enforce the law. So while Ernie is glad that the IRS doesn't have the manpower to catch the couple of grand in his flea market income, the top 1% get to steal billions.
mohavewolfpup
501c3 scams for starters would go a long way shutting that loop hole also. All income levels love to engage in those. Hit up your local 501c3 (start with animal rescue frauds) and 99% of them have their hand out for donations and no easy way to see their 990/990ez documents unless you dig on the irs website
Farfel8088
I volunteered for a local animal rescue and Humane Society for years and we worked hand in glove with a bunch of similar organizations. I don't know how difficult it is to cheat; we never tried and I know the people we worked with were straight up as well. I'm sure there are 501C3 scams, but there is also a lot of misunderstanding of what they do and how they do it.
mohavewolfpup
One I worked for only started filing their 990s after some other (frankly equally corrupt) folks started coming after them. But they were always a year and beyond late filing them. Never did accounting worth a damn. Always begging for receipts to make up filing their forms. Gas, cleaning supplies and so forth. They were banned in two counties for shelter pull rights, so went out of state down to the Mexico border just about instead for their stock, umm animals to save. So so much more
SalmonTheWise
Biden increased IRS budget, then all the billionaires lined up behind Trump who gutted it.
Farfel8088
But over time, there has been a decline - nobody loves the tax man. https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-tax/the-need-to-rebuild-the-depleted-irs
GuitarGeorge
If the tax rates increases for the super wealthy, what would you like the money spent on?
sfrinlan
I think food, housing, and healthcare are at the top of that list.
GuitarGeorge
Thank you for responding. Also, sensible answers. Also paying off the deficit would be smart.
sfrinlan
I'm not an economist, so grain of salt, but I'm not sure if you pay off a deficit, per se. I believe that's a gap between how much we're spending and how much we're collecting. That said, I also don't know how much of our national debt is worth paying off. I know debt works differently at the national scale than it does at a personal level, but I'm not an expert enough to know if it would be worth paying that down vs. ensuring people are fed, housed, and cared for.
LionelOu
One word: unionize.
hakunamatatamotherfucker
Where I am we did. They bought the leader and nothing changed. Or they blackmail and harass them until they quit.
fformulaa
Rise up! Take the power back!
Get together and we building a fire
Clear smoke and it's taking us higher
Hands up, everyone is one
If you see yourself making it
You're seeing the sun
Metropolis on the edge of control
They take our money, but they won't take our soul
Fuck that, ain't gon' do it no mo'
Won't do what we told and we ain't gonna fold
We go
shorey66
*euthanise
rusrsdude
Select better politicians
Resistance1000
CNChapeL
Amazon employees at one of the (then) many distribution centers in Quebec did that a few years back. Amazon pulled stakes from the province entirely costing about 2000 jobs
CNChapeL
source:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/amazon-warehouse-closures-quebec-1.7438078
LionelOu
You can't unionize piecemeal, you can't even unionize per company. You need to unionize per industrial segment, or even larger. If one amazon warehouse unionizes, they shut it down, if an entire company unionizes they can hire workers through a secondary company. If an entire segment of worker unionizes they need to work with you. If logistics workers unionize then it does not matter if it's amazon or a secondary company, they need to work with the union.
SergeyPrkl
This is why EVERYONE needs to do it. Then they can't pick.
thedtp
Two words: wood chipper.
Gestalt7
Remember: TGIF
Toes
Go
In
First
TheMershedPerderder
Curious as to why- optimized experience for the chipped?
PrecogFrogOnALog
While i appreciate the sentiment, at this point, i don't even care which end goes in first anymore. They just need to go in.
Gestalt7
noWhiteHorseHereJustBatturuPrinsu
NunyaBizness
Stuntman will do anything for movie credits
Iamjacksunuesedtrainstation
Four words: unionize wood chipper operators
YouRadicalizedMe
Pitch forks
PantsAreForTheWeek
What do ions have to do with anything?
thricebakedxyz
No, I think meant onions.
TheMershedPerderder
Nerd.
HeadJamistan
Hey.... no need to get salty in water......
HenryLongfellowIII
Using high voltage and a near vacuum would work too.
HeadJamistan
Now that's just simply sublime.
ElbowDeepInSaintCelestine
Can't do that, I'm claustrophobic.
gtotherizzle
People throw that around like it's an easy thing to do
TheWhiteBarry
And like it actually accomplishes anything other than lining the pockets of the union organizers. Two of the last four UAW presidents went to jail for fraud. Meanwhile auto workers are worse paid than ever and experiencing job cuts all over the place.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-edmi/pr/former-international-uaw-president-gary-jones-sentenced-prison-embezzling-union-funds
LionelOu
It is never enough to just set up the institution, if you want something useful out of it you need to spend the time to follow up. You need to go to the meetings, follow up on results, stand for elections, and monitor any leadership. If you don't do that, then the employers will find the people that are easy to handle and make sure they rise to the top. The union is not done the moment it is set up, it is a living organization that needs its members to function properly.
PicassoCT
People forget that the last time unions had power, the Soviet union sat at the table
SergeyPrkl
It also is easy. Just need everyone to do it at the same time.
LionelOu
Easy? Of course it's not fucking easy, the entire point is that is effective and therefore very much worked against. If you haven't done it, it will cost blood. If you have done it, it will be attacked by lobbying and law making. But it is either that or hope that employers will give you crumbs from the table so you don't starve to death.
PantsAreForTheWeek
We don't say it like it's easy, we say it like it's nesecary.
MadamPuddifoot
Necessary.
PantsAreForTheWeek
Thanks bud! That one's one of my weaknesses, eh?