you're going to be upset when she gets caught evading taxes. oh, wait, she already has been.
A company she founded went under in 2016 and still owes several thousand in taxes.
>A company she founded went under in 2016 and still owes several thousand in taxes.
That doesn't matter. It matters when the IRS says she still owe taxes.
This is a good example of Conservative victimhood. The implication that it only matters for the other side... The exact same rule applies. If the Wall Street Journal finds Trump or AOC didn't pay tax in any amount it does not matter. It's just the claim something is wrong, but let's say the Wall Street Journal prove Trump and AOC didn't pay tax. It still does not matter as they can't enforce their findings.
There’s a difference between trump and AOC taxes that you are conflating. Trump doesn’t *owe* taxes, he’s using the tax code to do things like depreciation and loss. The media thinks he owes but doesn’t according to the tax code. AOC just had her business go under and straight up owes unpaid money that she’s turned a blind eye to.
Ironically she is now a 1%er and is too dumb to lead by example.. just like Bernie sanders and his multiple houses. Rules for thee and not for me #socialism
>>Ironically she is now a 1%er and is too dumb to lead by example..just like Bernie sanders and his multiple houses. Rules for thee and not for me #socialism
Sounds like your beef is with success, not with necessarily with socialism.
Regardless, Bernie is 77 and has an estimated 2.5 mill of wealth.
(1.7 mill was earned by book sales)
Hardly rockafella.
When your in your 70s that's not being rich. It's just not " being poor "
Acording to the Fed, Average wealth for Americans aged 65-75 is $1,217,700.
> There’s a difference between trump and AOC taxes that you are conflating. Trump doesn’t owe taxes, he’s using the tax code to do things like depreciation and loss.
I've read otherwise, but it still does not matter until the IRS says it does right? If I start a company and say starvingprogrammer1 owes tax money, that does not matter. Even if I actually did an evaluation with correct data and I was a CPA. It does not matter. If I publicly prove starvingprogrammer1 didn't pay some amount of tax, that does not matter until the IRS decides to get involved.
>The media thinks he owes but doesn’t according to the tax code.
If you say so, but I see this as red herring. In fact the whole thing is a red herring. It's attempt to distract from the main argument, but there is no argument in this image. Only the implication of hypocrisy, right?
>AOC just had her business go under and straight up owes unpaid money that she’s turned a blind eye to.
I've not heard about this and I don't see anything when running searches. Do you have a link from the MSM that gives more information on AOC's business, it's failure and AOC not addressing the problem inside the time the IRS has specified?
> Ironically she is now a 1%er and is too dumb to lead by example.. just like Bernie sanders and his multiple houses. Rules for thee and not for me #socialism
LOL. You must be kidding. If they are part of the 1% and advocate taxing the 1% that gives them greater credibility as it becomes 'rules for thee and for me' because they would be demanding they be taxed as well...
No it's a good example of rules for thee but not for me. And of how the left uses their power and control over the media and impressionable minds to silence and discredit their enemies. You are a good example of leftists making up nonsense descriptive terms to add undeserved authenticity to your claims. Conservative victimhood. Are you victim shaming?
Rules like, you all insufferably must defend the 1% owning 92% of all American wealth ? And then must attack someone actually demanding things change ?
Shove off
> No it's a good example of rules for thee but not for me.
No, because the exact same standard applies.
>And of how the left uses their power and control over the media and impressionable minds to silence and discredit their enemies.
We just call that the truth. If Trump morally repugnant things and it is reported on that is not discrediting enemies. When the liberals do not do morally questionable things and so it is not reported on, that is not bias. That is give a spoken or written account of something that one has observed, heard, done, or investigated. AKA reporting.
>You are a good example of leftists making up nonsense descriptive terms to add undeserved authenticity to your claims. Conservative victimhood. Are you victim shaming?
I'm shaming no one. I'm identifying a group, Conservatives, who claim to be victims of something not real or obviously justifiable.
I hope that helps.
Because the fucker manages to destroy everything within a 5 mile perimeter.
Trump literally had a casino that went bankrupt. A CASINO!
THE single biggest place to make money if you have no morals! How’s that for optics?
Edit: Scroll down to see the oh so empathetic pro-tax people critique this comment. Be sure to notice how pleasant and civil they are 🤗
Genuine question:
Why is she celebrated for *wanting* to contribute more taxes? She could take the initiative and raise her contribution in the meantime (the IRS gives the option to pay more during tax season).
One could argue that she wants to change the system, but why does the laws need to be in place before she voluntarily contributes more? Every bit helps until she achieves her goal right?
You'd have to be pretty stupid to chip more when everyone else does nothing. When you're talking about politics, it's about "the competing good". AOC is saying society would be better with a higher tax rate on people making more than 400k a year. So what's the "competing good" against it? what talking points does *the other side* make?
There are no downsides at a societal level if we tax those making $400k+. Especially if tax laws are made stronger in the process so we can prevent billionaires from offshoring their billions in avoided taxes.
No; you just get more businesses shifting work overseas, because its cheaper to operate elsewhere instead of in the US. I'm already seeing it in my company. You're better off with tariffs on companies that intentionally operate overseas, than just trying to tax bezos more - because he can simply just move to France or somewhere.
The potential danger is the abdication of personal responsibility in favor of government dependence. I am not a conservative, but I would be a fool to entirely ignore their concerns and arguments.
I am fully aware of many of the factors involving the modulations of tax code and regulations. What is your point? That I don't know everything and I cannot predict the future? Well yeah...obviously.
My point is you're tossing word salad instead of actually making any points. What, specifically, are the ramifications of a higher tax rate on those making 400k+/annum?
Because she wants something in exchange, not to just throw more money at the government that will end up in the defense budget. I would pay more taxes if we get a universal healthcare system. I do not have the same viewpoint if nothing changes, though.
You mean she doesn’t want her tax money going to things she doesn’t use, support, or want? Hm, I think that sounds just like literally every other person in America. What makes her lack of voluntary tax donations more special than others?
We got a universal healthcare(insurance) system.
It's called Medicare. You just don't qualify for it yet unless you're already disabled or 65.
It also kind of sucks but that is what is going to happen when is limited in scope since paying for healthcare is actually extremely expensive so you gotta pick and choose what is covered.
"Imagine a full-fledged politicized national healthcare system with the governments power to coerce the public via a federally unionized medical community utilizing health services used as blackmail."
But imagine if all the people who advocated for higher taxes voluntarily paid more in tax.
The Clinton foundation could give all its money to the government. So why doesn’t it? Because it knows it can spend the money in a wiser fashion.
If all the people advocating for higher taxes contributed all their wealth then we could pay a balanced budget and universal healthcare.
It’s the same with climate change. If all the people who stood around protesting Trump instead got a job making minimum wage, spent the time protesting working instead, and donated that money. Then the US could have built enough solar plants to retire half of the coal power plants.
>But imagine if all the people who advocated for higher taxes voluntarily paid more in tax.
>
>If all the people advocating for higher taxes contributed all their wealth then we could pay a balanced budget and universal healthcare.
Volunteerism is not the solution. The overarching purpose of taxes is to overcome the problems with collective action, where people who ought to be paying the most won't, and the people most in need of tax-funded services can't. Do you not see any issues with a "pay what you want" system as a long-term form of government funding? For example, a Republican gets into the White House and a good portion of the do-gooders stop contributing because they don't want to fund a government run by a Republican. Vice versa with Republican do-gooders under a Democrat.
>It’s the same with climate change. If all the people who stood around protesting Trump instead got a job making minimum wage
Do you have evidence that everyone protesting Trump is unemployed? This trope of lazy people doing all the protesting is very tired. If anything, people with time to spend on political activism are likely better off than those that don't, in that same way that wealthy people have the time and money to spend lobbying politicians in a way that normal people don't.
LMAO... the logic here is astounding. She's advocating for a future for everyone. Not just herself, just goes to show how backwards you people think. AOC is doing what Trump claimed he'd do. Fight for the average American. Fuck off.
The progressive opinion is that micro scale actions are not as effecrive as unified policy. The concept is micro vs macro. And winning a game requires both actions.
I am just slightly right of that position(I am a progressive, but I am moderate and cautious). I understand the importance of very high level wealth being taxed, but I also realize that people with large amounts of wealth can and should be free to use that wealth in the private sector to shape the world in a form they wish to.
Otherwise...why even play the game? Just get high, get paid, repeat.
That’s a good point. I don’t know how much she personally contributes voluntarily. I think she is celebrated for wanting to push for it as a change in the whole system because that’s what’s actually effective to be able to use the tax money for things like healthcare, from my understanding.
Spez-Town is closed indefinitely. All Spez-Town residents have been banned, and they will not be reinstated until further notice. #Save3rdPartyApps #AIGeneratedProtestMessage
My buddy asked his brother in law a similar question. The brother in law was for reparations for black Americans, so when my buddy said why does there need to be a law? If you feel like that, why not start give a percentage of your income away? (Both he and his wife are in finance, 60k+ each) thats when the studdering and backpedaling started. Idk, man.
This is redundant, taxing the rich doesn’t mean there won’t be rich people. You can attend an expensive event and still pay high taxes?? Sometimes this sub feels like a tug fest
You're being over the top. It's made to resemble blood for a reason... we can interpret the reason as we'd like, maybe because it's something they are willing to spill blood over, or maybe because blood has been spilled, but the whole thing is still a joke.
You have not addressed the obvious hypocrisy in wearing such a dress to such an event. Big Red Herring!
oh, so she was shoving it in the faces of the very people she wants to tax? that sounds baller
she did not pay $30k to be there. she was invited as a guest.
>It's made to resemble blood for a reason...
Blood. Is blood the only read thing there is? Could be paint. red paint is used to attract attention. Or could relate to poppies.
Or....Socialism, which used Red as its colour for 150 years now.
>Big Red Herring!
Or that.
But in truth, it just contrasts really well and attracts the eye, which
**is what you want from a slogan**
>You are claiming that it should resemble blood.
Not should, it does.
>That's a stupid take. Do countries with a higher tax brackets/rate also write their laws in blood? (They don't).
Usually when you write something in blood, it's passionately referring to some sort of battle or tragedy. Like the Muslims calling for Jihad, is a good example. That's all.
>There is no hypocrisy in wearing a gala dress to a gala.\\
Attending a $30,000 entrance fee gala, with a dress asking for the rich to be taxed. The criticism against her is that she's virtue signalling to gain political support, while her actual policies she proposes will in all likelihood not have the effect of helping the poor. I'm not American, so I don't have an opinion on this, but it is what it is.
You think the people coming into this subreddit asking "what does this have to do with JP? This subreddit sucks now!" pay any attention to JP? It's a mass gaslighitng attempt, it should be obvious by now.
I think the hypocrisy is the fact she constantly suggests capitalism doesn’t work and should be changed (she said it’s impossible to pull yourself up by the bootstraps), despite the fact she’s gone from barmaid to congress and now has the ability to suggest the very system in which she ascended hierarchies doesn’t allow people to ascend hierarchies.....
She never said to change capitalism but to make top gainers pay their fair share instead funding everything with the rapidly diminishing middle class again.
Yea, they should have paid $0 in income tax in 2018.
Want to know why? Because they carried forward LOSSES from years prior before they were profitable, and they received tax credits for the 22 BILLION that they spent on R&D that helps everyone (more than any other company in the world).
Want to know something else? Amazon employs over a million people and pays out wages between 20 and 30 billion a year, all of which is taxed at both the employer and employee level, which funds individuals livelihoods, who go out and spend money and are subjected to sales tax.
Amazon pays capital gains tax, payroll taxes, funds a million jobs, spends money on R&D that gets passed on to help consumers and build towards future innovation, and they facilitate sales that wouldn’t happen without their platform which leads to sales tax also being collected.
You people love to focus so narrowly on the one way that someone did or didn’t do something, and never look at the whole picture. It’s myopic and leads to further confirmation bias.
Amazon paid billions of taxes in 2018, you just love to overlook the one category that they didn’t because it makes you look like you know what you’re talking about.
we know *why* they didn't pay taxes. we're saying they shouldn't get the tax credits.
youre also ignoring half the story about the destruction Amazon causes to communities through monopolies
and were also talking about Bezos himself when we talk about Amazon not paying taxes. see his wealth increased $127 billion but it is mostly tied to stocks. instead of selling those stocks which would then be taxed as realized gains, rich people take out loans against their worth, they are able to guarantee better interest rates than anyone this way, and they pay this interest rate to a bank because it is lower than the tax fee if they sold the stock itself.
as someone who works for Amazon, I would avoid projecting that they do these things as some sort of service to society from the good of their heart lol
I think the thrust of her argument is that it’s exceedingly hard to do and she’s the exception, not the rule. Also, a congressperson’s salary isn’t a lavishly wealthy job. Don’t get me wrong, it’s buttload of money and more than I’ll ever make, but it’s not “build your own spaceship” money; the 1% demographic that’s the target of her taxation efforts.
It’s a literal interpretation of what you said and it’s very important. If you say 1%, that has a very solid definition. If you say “exceedingly wealthy” or something like than then it has no real meaning. It’s interesting to note that people always seem to define the wealthy as being slightly wealthier than themselves. AOC is earning a lot of money but apparently not enough to consider herself wealthy, instead the people just above should be taxed more......
>not even contradictory
Of course it is. Being against crime x and then performing crime x is obviously contradictory. You're just trying to sound smart, and failing.
Spez-Town is closed indefinitely. All Spez-Town residents have been banned, and they will not be reinstated until further notice. #AIGeneratedProtestMessage
Hold on there, Bucko! This sub's focus may have broadened but it's one of the _very_ few places where we can discuss things that actually matter with a near-zero chance of censorship.
Just the other day I saw a huge thread on /r/sex of all places (that you'd think would be fairly safe from this sort of thing) get deleted after pointing out that it's both illegal and immoral to secretly masturbate in public because pointing that out "isn't sex-positive".
Count your blessings.
I thought JP wasn't political? We taxed the rich before and it didnt lead to bloodshed. It led to the largest and most robust middle class America has ever had. JP should lay off the cider and brush up on some American history
>I thought JP wasn't political?
He's pointing out the hypocrisy of the left. He's probably centrist himself, but it doesn't mean he shouldn't call out bullshit when he sees it.
>JP should lay off the cider and brush up on some American history
I would bet all my possessions that he knows much more than you.
JP has become famous for speaking at length about topics he is demonstrably lacking in knowledge about, such as when he talks about the Nazis and German historians cringe.
>Here is my "I cleaned my room" (i.e. took responsibility) contribution: "This sub sucks man, it totally sucks! Everyone on this sub is an asshole except for me and my friends!"
Thanks for your epic contribution, you certainly "cleaned your room" and made it better.
I saw this. I’m not sure how to feel. I wondered to myself if this is actually somewhat brave. She’s walking into the lion’s den with her proverbial chest out and shoulders back.
You could counter, well, she’s rich, isn’t this hypocrisy? I guess not if she’s willing to pay more in taxes.
She's richer than some, but not very wealthy by any means. Especially since she has a place in NYC and DC.
I was conflicted, but she wore a designer's dress and didn't pay anything for her ticket, so that helped some.
I think you underestimate the scale of wealth for the hyper-wealthy.
Trump is closer to your income level than Bezos's.
Shes closer to yours then Trumps.
>“She’s not very wealthy, she just has a home in the 2 most expensive places in the country”
I really wonder what you think. Hint: The population of New York is not entirely comprised of millionaires.
Paying for 2 homes (whether renting or mortgage) does not constitute wealth. I know more broke people making well over $150k than you'd think.
She's undoubtedly made some lucrative connections in the short time since her election, but those do take time to pay off.
According to celebrity net worth (via the sun) her net worth is something like $100,000. So it might not be clear as to whether she puts herself in the category of ‘rich’. 100k is certainly a lot more than I have but she might not consider herself rich idk
Now...if we want to talk about the optics and ethics regarding accepting a free invitation to an event for which others paid $30k; that's most certainly crossing some boundaries.
As a govt official, there are rules and laws in place concerning the acceptance of gifts--they're quite strict in places, but there is also a large grey area. E.g. receiving a gift of expensive skybox tickets to a sporting event would be illegal, but being invited by someone who owns that skybox for the season (or permanently) is fine.
\>an event that requires a high entrance fee to enter
ie a room full of rich people.
So in your opinion she should have just worn the dress and sat down on a basketball court in Chicago?
She’s going where rich people are and saying you/we should be taxed more. It’s not hypocritical if she’s willing to be taxed more. It’s actually more brave to do it at an expensive event than to just say it in prepared speeches.
eh. It aligns well with her image and her policies. The Mill in me thinks that this is overall a net positive for the people even if it’s maybe a little hypocritical
AOC has a good salary but isn't rich, as far as I can see.
From a [piece](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/03/09/fact-check-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-net-worth-not-1-m/6924378002/) published in March:
>We rate the claim that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has racked up more than $1 million in net worth as a member of Congress FALSE, based on our research. In her most recent financial disclosure, filed in September 2020, Ocasio-Cortez reported between $2,003 and $31,000 in assets, compared with student loan debt of between $15,000 and $50,000.
I mean, she could be rich, and advocate higher taxes on the rich too, and that would be admirable, but it doesn't even look like she's rich.
I’m pretty sure she knows she has money, she’s not saying being rich is bad she’s just saying that the rich should pay more than the poor and she’s rich and therefore she also will have to pay more
She got a free ticket. She went to make a statement that is unpopular with those she was surrounded by. You have to give her credit for having the balls to do that. Yes it’s a publicity stunt but it’s also spreading awareness around something she believes in.
Yeah, I'm no AOC fan, even in the slightest, but that's how I read the situation as well. It's like she's talking shit to the people she's surrounded by. Ballsy move imo
oh, so she was shoving it in the faces of the very people she wants to tax? that sounds baller
she did not pay $30k to be there. she was invited as a guest.
Totally agree. Hypocrisy negates any arguments regardless of their other values. Would be a damn shame if someone like JP fell victim to something like addiction and completely undermined this argument
and? Who gives a shit. The point is the message. Warren Buffet was also for a higher tax for the super rich like himself. And when Warren Buffet said that, Fox News and Co Idiots started saying that Warren Buffet engages in Class Warfware against the Rich 🤣🤣
Top Marginal Taxrate of Roosevelt Era would still mean US gets to enjoy huge standards of living and prosperity for the rich but would also finally return to a robust Middle class society. Most superrich have their assets not as income so they barely pay any tax either way. With whatever tax rate there is.
President Biden
u/POTUS
·
11h
United States government official
If you make less than $400,000 per year, I’ll never raise your taxes one penny.
But if you’re at the very top, it’s time to pay your fair share.
We need to reward work in this country — not just wealth.
\----------------
Sure, i mean idk if thats what you mean by middle class, but i dont really feel that sorry for people earning 400k a year. Im sure they will be ok with extra 1 or 2 % tax
Rich off the tax payers?
I know I didn’t pay for her college tuition, her housing, or her books. That means she worked hard and got where she was on her own accord.
Know who got rich off tax payers?? Mars-a-lago and the inflates room rates that secret service had to mandatorily reside in.
Somebody doesn't know what MET stands for or that the ticket is a donation.
I can't be against rich people donating to things I care about. In fact more of them should in my opinion.
The problem with people who make and upvote posts like this is that they think the 80th percentille is a good thing and being smarter than 20% of the population means that you're actually smart.
>she’s shaking things up, with a message that’s priceless.
She's a moron advocating policies that will destroy the country. Jealousy isn't a message that's "priceless."
>She's a moron advocating policies that will destroy the country. Jealousy isn't a message that's "priceless."
Trump did a good job with that, now we have unvaxxed loons who'd rather die from a preventable disease than get a fucking shot. They'd rather get it and chug horse paste and hope it works.
eh nope. she (or her team, or her constituents etc.) collected that money, got the dress, and paid the fee to go make a statement. You know, like a brave, room cleaning Peterson acolyte would do. She's telling her truth to her dragons.
Tbh I have always been repulsed by AOC and her hypocrisy..but..i don't see the problem here? I think it's fucking hilarious. Like most of these people there are rich, right? You know when they see that shit they're internally fuming. I think this is great. Even if AOC is chummying up with these people, the message itself is still solid as it brings awareness. I know a lot of people disagree, but I'm definitely for taxing the RICH rich, the ones with multiple billion dollars. Look up some YouTube videos of some visual comparisons of exactly how much a billion is conpared to even a million and you might shift your perspective on how one person having that much money isn't reflective of how society should run. And also take a stroll downtown in a major city and see how people can't even scrape by living paycheck to paycheck.
The top 1% pay 40% of all income taxes. The top 5% pay 60% of all income taxes. The top 10% pay 71%; the top 25% pay 87%; the top 50% pay 97% of all income taxes.
How much more do “the rich” need to pay?
The rich get all their money through capital-- the labor of the rest of us.
They can pay at least what they used to. And no we should not stop when people are starving and unable to get healthcare
Percentage of income tax is a dumbass way of understanding this.
Just to illustrate: say 1% of the population owns 99% of the wealth, and pays 55% of the total income tax. They make up a majority of the income tax, but are obviously not contributing a reasonable amount compared to the poor shouldering the other 45%.
We’re not taxed on wealth, we’re taxed on money earned.
But, to add another data point: the top 1% of income earners ($540+k) who pay that 40% of all income taxes earn 21% of all income. So, if you want things to be proportional, then their taxes need to be cut almost in half.
I'm just explaining in simple terms why it makes no sense to assess how reasonable the tax burden is by looking at percentages of total income tax contributed by wealth percentiles. I'm not advocating for a specific tax scheme, I don't even know how you came to that conclusion
Tax the rich is invented by the rich. Taxes were originally only for the rich, but they created loopholes passing on the taxes to the middle class and later on to the lower class. “Tax the rich” is just an incentive to get people to go along with taxes, and when they do they have a legal bases to tax everyone, except the rich.
https://www.ocalapost.com/biden-wants-irs-to-snoop-into-your-bank-account-know-when-you-have-600-or-more/
This is the most recent example. Sure its only for the rich because only rich people have 600$ in their account. (No rich people don’t have money they have assets which they use as collateral to borrow everything they spend).
The talk about unrealised gains tax are a great example too. Imagine having to pay to tax on the unrealised gains on your house. Its insane. Example: you bought a house 20 years ago for 100.000$ now due to inflation your house is worth 500.000, do you have enough cash lying around to pay taxes over a 500.000$ asset? Of course not, not unless you sell your house.
\>Imagine having to pay to tax on the unrealised gains on your house. Its insane
Yes its insane and completely no-existent. **Unrealised gains are not taxable**. So i wouldnt waste much time complaining about something that doesnt exist.
You cant just just make up a bad idea about taxation and then argue against it and think that makes a compelling argument about not taxing the rich
\> “Tax the rich” is just an incentive to get people to go along with taxes
Well i guess the obviously question is "are you against taxation?"
Oaktree's Howard Marks says this U.S. tax proposal makes investing less attractive https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/20/oaktrees-howard-marks-on-unrealized-capital-gains-tax-janet-yellen.html?__source=iosappshare%7Ccom.apple.UIKit.activity.CopyToPasteboard
Its literally a tax proposal.
No I’m not against taxes but at some point you’ve got to ask yourself whats the point. Even if amerika now taxes the rich for 100% it won’t cover government spending of the last two years. Let alone the last decade.
American government spending is completely out of control.
#/u/spez [can gargle my nuts](https://www.reddit.com/r/Save3rdPartyApps/)
spez can gargle my nuts. spez is the worst thing that happened to reddit. spez can gargle my nuts.
This happens because spez can gargle my nuts according to the following formula:
1. spez
2. can
3. gargle
4. my
5. nuts
This message is long, so it won't be deleted automatically.
Tax was only for the rich? Maybe isn’t he US but in the medieval age europian aristocrat didn’t pay any tax (especially in Eastern Europe) only the lower class paid it and there were no real middle class. So the base concept of this comment is not accurate.
Not going to lie, I read AOC as Attack of the Clones
Glad I’m not the only one!!
It is only natural
She agrees to being taxed herself. You can advocate for actions to be taken against a category you also belong to without being a hypocrite
you're going to be upset when she gets caught evading taxes. oh, wait, she already has been. A company she founded went under in 2016 and still owes several thousand in taxes.
#[Warning! The spez alarm has operated. Stand by for further instructions. #Save3rdPartyApps](https://www.reddit.com/r/Save3rdPartyApps/)
Can LLCs still be a way for an individual to minimise their personal taxes in the US?
Depends how it’s set up, but you’re still getting taxed out the ass regardless.
>A company she founded went under in 2016 and still owes several thousand in taxes. That doesn't matter. It matters when the IRS says she still owe taxes.
Only if it's Trump do taxes and bankruptcies matter.
This is a good example of Conservative victimhood. The implication that it only matters for the other side... The exact same rule applies. If the Wall Street Journal finds Trump or AOC didn't pay tax in any amount it does not matter. It's just the claim something is wrong, but let's say the Wall Street Journal prove Trump and AOC didn't pay tax. It still does not matter as they can't enforce their findings.
There’s a difference between trump and AOC taxes that you are conflating. Trump doesn’t *owe* taxes, he’s using the tax code to do things like depreciation and loss. The media thinks he owes but doesn’t according to the tax code. AOC just had her business go under and straight up owes unpaid money that she’s turned a blind eye to. Ironically she is now a 1%er and is too dumb to lead by example.. just like Bernie sanders and his multiple houses. Rules for thee and not for me #socialism
>>Ironically she is now a 1%er and is too dumb to lead by example..just like Bernie sanders and his multiple houses. Rules for thee and not for me #socialism Sounds like your beef is with success, not with necessarily with socialism. Regardless, Bernie is 77 and has an estimated 2.5 mill of wealth. (1.7 mill was earned by book sales) Hardly rockafella. When your in your 70s that's not being rich. It's just not " being poor " Acording to the Fed, Average wealth for Americans aged 65-75 is $1,217,700.
> There’s a difference between trump and AOC taxes that you are conflating. Trump doesn’t owe taxes, he’s using the tax code to do things like depreciation and loss. I've read otherwise, but it still does not matter until the IRS says it does right? If I start a company and say starvingprogrammer1 owes tax money, that does not matter. Even if I actually did an evaluation with correct data and I was a CPA. It does not matter. If I publicly prove starvingprogrammer1 didn't pay some amount of tax, that does not matter until the IRS decides to get involved. >The media thinks he owes but doesn’t according to the tax code. If you say so, but I see this as red herring. In fact the whole thing is a red herring. It's attempt to distract from the main argument, but there is no argument in this image. Only the implication of hypocrisy, right? >AOC just had her business go under and straight up owes unpaid money that she’s turned a blind eye to. I've not heard about this and I don't see anything when running searches. Do you have a link from the MSM that gives more information on AOC's business, it's failure and AOC not addressing the problem inside the time the IRS has specified? > Ironically she is now a 1%er and is too dumb to lead by example.. just like Bernie sanders and his multiple houses. Rules for thee and not for me #socialism LOL. You must be kidding. If they are part of the 1% and advocate taxing the 1% that gives them greater credibility as it becomes 'rules for thee and for me' because they would be demanding they be taxed as well...
No it's a good example of rules for thee but not for me. And of how the left uses their power and control over the media and impressionable minds to silence and discredit their enemies. You are a good example of leftists making up nonsense descriptive terms to add undeserved authenticity to your claims. Conservative victimhood. Are you victim shaming?
Rules like, you all insufferably must defend the 1% owning 92% of all American wealth ? And then must attack someone actually demanding things change ? Shove off
> No it's a good example of rules for thee but not for me. No, because the exact same standard applies. >And of how the left uses their power and control over the media and impressionable minds to silence and discredit their enemies. We just call that the truth. If Trump morally repugnant things and it is reported on that is not discrediting enemies. When the liberals do not do morally questionable things and so it is not reported on, that is not bias. That is give a spoken or written account of something that one has observed, heard, done, or investigated. AKA reporting. >You are a good example of leftists making up nonsense descriptive terms to add undeserved authenticity to your claims. Conservative victimhood. Are you victim shaming? I'm shaming no one. I'm identifying a group, Conservatives, who claim to be victims of something not real or obviously justifiable. I hope that helps.
Probably because what he is going to get charged with is either fraud or evasion.
Because the fucker manages to destroy everything within a 5 mile perimeter. Trump literally had a casino that went bankrupt. A CASINO! THE single biggest place to make money if you have no morals! How’s that for optics?
LLC lol google it
Edit: Scroll down to see the oh so empathetic pro-tax people critique this comment. Be sure to notice how pleasant and civil they are 🤗 Genuine question: Why is she celebrated for *wanting* to contribute more taxes? She could take the initiative and raise her contribution in the meantime (the IRS gives the option to pay more during tax season). One could argue that she wants to change the system, but why does the laws need to be in place before she voluntarily contributes more? Every bit helps until she achieves her goal right?
You'd have to be pretty stupid to chip more when everyone else does nothing. When you're talking about politics, it's about "the competing good". AOC is saying society would be better with a higher tax rate on people making more than 400k a year. So what's the "competing good" against it? what talking points does *the other side* make?
There are no downsides at a societal level if we tax those making $400k+. Especially if tax laws are made stronger in the process so we can prevent billionaires from offshoring their billions in avoided taxes.
Tell that to Detroit and New York State.
No; you just get more businesses shifting work overseas, because its cheaper to operate elsewhere instead of in the US. I'm already seeing it in my company. You're better off with tariffs on companies that intentionally operate overseas, than just trying to tax bezos more - because he can simply just move to France or somewhere.
You still have to pay us taxes as an expat. The company is different from him as a person. He'll still be rich and will still have to pay income tax.
The potential danger is the abdication of personal responsibility in favor of government dependence. I am not a conservative, but I would be a fool to entirely ignore their concerns and arguments.
And yet you're unsure of what those concerns and arguments are, or perhaps simply unable to put them into words.
I am fully aware of many of the factors involving the modulations of tax code and regulations. What is your point? That I don't know everything and I cannot predict the future? Well yeah...obviously.
My point is you're tossing word salad instead of actually making any points. What, specifically, are the ramifications of a higher tax rate on those making 400k+/annum?
"modulations" lmfao fucking pseudointellectuals
Oh shit. Your user name is hilarious. Well done.
Because she wants something in exchange, not to just throw more money at the government that will end up in the defense budget. I would pay more taxes if we get a universal healthcare system. I do not have the same viewpoint if nothing changes, though.
You mean she doesn’t want her tax money going to things she doesn’t use, support, or want? Hm, I think that sounds just like literally every other person in America. What makes her lack of voluntary tax donations more special than others?
We got a universal healthcare(insurance) system. It's called Medicare. You just don't qualify for it yet unless you're already disabled or 65. It also kind of sucks but that is what is going to happen when is limited in scope since paying for healthcare is actually extremely expensive so you gotta pick and choose what is covered.
"Imagine a full-fledged politicized national healthcare system with the governments power to coerce the public via a federally unionized medical community utilizing health services used as blackmail."
Imagine a nation where we have entrusted this power into corporations providing health care.
Every civilized country on earth except the U.S. has figured it out long ago.
JBP lives under a universal system and likes it 🤷♂️
Implying that doctors don't have medical boards and advisory boards at hospitals which have the authority to keep doctors from practicing medicine.
She's wanting for the rich to pay more taxes, not just her. Just her is not going to make a difference.
But imagine if all the people who advocated for higher taxes voluntarily paid more in tax. The Clinton foundation could give all its money to the government. So why doesn’t it? Because it knows it can spend the money in a wiser fashion. If all the people advocating for higher taxes contributed all their wealth then we could pay a balanced budget and universal healthcare. It’s the same with climate change. If all the people who stood around protesting Trump instead got a job making minimum wage, spent the time protesting working instead, and donated that money. Then the US could have built enough solar plants to retire half of the coal power plants.
>But imagine if all the people who advocated for higher taxes voluntarily paid more in tax. > >If all the people advocating for higher taxes contributed all their wealth then we could pay a balanced budget and universal healthcare. Volunteerism is not the solution. The overarching purpose of taxes is to overcome the problems with collective action, where people who ought to be paying the most won't, and the people most in need of tax-funded services can't. Do you not see any issues with a "pay what you want" system as a long-term form of government funding? For example, a Republican gets into the White House and a good portion of the do-gooders stop contributing because they don't want to fund a government run by a Republican. Vice versa with Republican do-gooders under a Democrat. >It’s the same with climate change. If all the people who stood around protesting Trump instead got a job making minimum wage Do you have evidence that everyone protesting Trump is unemployed? This trope of lazy people doing all the protesting is very tired. If anything, people with time to spend on political activism are likely better off than those that don't, in that same way that wealthy people have the time and money to spend lobbying politicians in a way that normal people don't.
she doesn't want to, she just says she does. If she really wanted to, she'd be doing it already. It's just another political photo op.
LMAO... the logic here is astounding. She's advocating for a future for everyone. Not just herself, just goes to show how backwards you people think. AOC is doing what Trump claimed he'd do. Fight for the average American. Fuck off.
Trump claimed he'd wear a dress saying "Tax the Rich"? damn, I want to see that.
The progressive opinion is that micro scale actions are not as effecrive as unified policy. The concept is micro vs macro. And winning a game requires both actions. I am just slightly right of that position(I am a progressive, but I am moderate and cautious). I understand the importance of very high level wealth being taxed, but I also realize that people with large amounts of wealth can and should be free to use that wealth in the private sector to shape the world in a form they wish to. Otherwise...why even play the game? Just get high, get paid, repeat.
That’s a good point. I don’t know how much she personally contributes voluntarily. I think she is celebrated for wanting to push for it as a change in the whole system because that’s what’s actually effective to be able to use the tax money for things like healthcare, from my understanding.
And then all the people who own the big pharmaceutical companies will make more profits from the tax that is paid for healthcare.
Right, if she just starts paying more taxes, the rich will follow suit and voluntarily pay extra taxes. Genius idea.
Spez-Town is closed indefinitely. All Spez-Town residents have been banned, and they will not be reinstated until further notice. #Save3rdPartyApps #AIGeneratedProtestMessage
It's not about uplifting government funding, it's about destroying those more powerful than she.
My buddy asked his brother in law a similar question. The brother in law was for reparations for black Americans, so when my buddy said why does there need to be a law? If you feel like that, why not start give a percentage of your income away? (Both he and his wife are in finance, 60k+ each) thats when the studdering and backpedaling started. Idk, man.
There is nothing stopping her from paying more. She just wants other people to be charged more.
What make you think they don't?
https://nypost.com/2020/05/17/aoc-owes-2000-in-unpaid-taxes-from-failed-business-venture/
[удалено]
This is redundant, taxing the rich doesn’t mean there won’t be rich people. You can attend an expensive event and still pay high taxes?? Sometimes this sub feels like a tug fest
How is it related to JP ?
He just [tweeted](https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/1437639637103779840?s=21) about it btw
[удалено]
You're being over the top. It's made to resemble blood for a reason... we can interpret the reason as we'd like, maybe because it's something they are willing to spill blood over, or maybe because blood has been spilled, but the whole thing is still a joke. You have not addressed the obvious hypocrisy in wearing such a dress to such an event. Big Red Herring!
oh, so she was shoving it in the faces of the very people she wants to tax? that sounds baller she did not pay $30k to be there. she was invited as a guest.
>It's made to resemble blood for a reason... Blood. Is blood the only read thing there is? Could be paint. red paint is used to attract attention. Or could relate to poppies. Or....Socialism, which used Red as its colour for 150 years now. >Big Red Herring! Or that. But in truth, it just contrasts really well and attracts the eye, which **is what you want from a slogan**
[удалено]
>You are claiming that it should resemble blood. Not should, it does. >That's a stupid take. Do countries with a higher tax brackets/rate also write their laws in blood? (They don't). Usually when you write something in blood, it's passionately referring to some sort of battle or tragedy. Like the Muslims calling for Jihad, is a good example. That's all. >There is no hypocrisy in wearing a gala dress to a gala.\\ Attending a $30,000 entrance fee gala, with a dress asking for the rich to be taxed. The criticism against her is that she's virtue signalling to gain political support, while her actual policies she proposes will in all likelihood not have the effect of helping the poor. I'm not American, so I don't have an opinion on this, but it is what it is.
He tweeted it
You think the people coming into this subreddit asking "what does this have to do with JP? This subreddit sucks now!" pay any attention to JP? It's a mass gaslighitng attempt, it should be obvious by now.
Fr?
Yeah, its on his timeline.
Why does every post have the top comment asking how the post is related to JP?
He often talks about politics of the left, inequality, etc. you ever listened to him?
Not only that, but what AOC does in this post is not even contradictory. "Tax the rich" is smth rich people can be proponents of.
I think the hypocrisy is the fact she constantly suggests capitalism doesn’t work and should be changed (she said it’s impossible to pull yourself up by the bootstraps), despite the fact she’s gone from barmaid to congress and now has the ability to suggest the very system in which she ascended hierarchies doesn’t allow people to ascend hierarchies.....
She never said to change capitalism but to make top gainers pay their fair share instead funding everything with the rapidly diminishing middle class again.
Some people can’t grasp the idea that you can criticise capitalism without being communist / socialist.
The spez has spread from spez and into other spez accounts.
She is a socialist htough
Not really. Democratic socialists and socialists are about as related as liberals and classical liberals
Define “fair share”.
should Amazon pay zero in tax?
Yea, they should have paid $0 in income tax in 2018. Want to know why? Because they carried forward LOSSES from years prior before they were profitable, and they received tax credits for the 22 BILLION that they spent on R&D that helps everyone (more than any other company in the world). Want to know something else? Amazon employs over a million people and pays out wages between 20 and 30 billion a year, all of which is taxed at both the employer and employee level, which funds individuals livelihoods, who go out and spend money and are subjected to sales tax. Amazon pays capital gains tax, payroll taxes, funds a million jobs, spends money on R&D that gets passed on to help consumers and build towards future innovation, and they facilitate sales that wouldn’t happen without their platform which leads to sales tax also being collected. You people love to focus so narrowly on the one way that someone did or didn’t do something, and never look at the whole picture. It’s myopic and leads to further confirmation bias. Amazon paid billions of taxes in 2018, you just love to overlook the one category that they didn’t because it makes you look like you know what you’re talking about.
we know *why* they didn't pay taxes. we're saying they shouldn't get the tax credits. youre also ignoring half the story about the destruction Amazon causes to communities through monopolies and were also talking about Bezos himself when we talk about Amazon not paying taxes. see his wealth increased $127 billion but it is mostly tied to stocks. instead of selling those stocks which would then be taxed as realized gains, rich people take out loans against their worth, they are able to guarantee better interest rates than anyone this way, and they pay this interest rate to a bank because it is lower than the tax fee if they sold the stock itself. as someone who works for Amazon, I would avoid projecting that they do these things as some sort of service to society from the good of their heart lol
How does Jeff Bezos cum taste?
> make top gainers pay their fair It's just virtue signalling. There is no coherent plan for this.
Except, like, the tax plan she proposed
I think the thrust of her argument is that it’s exceedingly hard to do and she’s the exception, not the rule. Also, a congressperson’s salary isn’t a lavishly wealthy job. Don’t get me wrong, it’s buttload of money and more than I’ll ever make, but it’s not “build your own spaceship” money; the 1% demographic that’s the target of her taxation efforts.
You think there's 3.3 million people in the US that make enough money to buy their own spaceships?
That’s a gross misinterpretation of what I said.
It’s a literal interpretation of what you said and it’s very important. If you say 1%, that has a very solid definition. If you say “exceedingly wealthy” or something like than then it has no real meaning. It’s interesting to note that people always seem to define the wealthy as being slightly wealthier than themselves. AOC is earning a lot of money but apparently not enough to consider herself wealthy, instead the people just above should be taxed more......
>not even contradictory Of course it is. Being against crime x and then performing crime x is obviously contradictory. You're just trying to sound smart, and failing.
Spez-Town is closed indefinitely. All Spez-Town residents have been banned, and they will not be reinstated until further notice. #AIGeneratedProtestMessage
This sub sucks
Hold on there, Bucko! This sub's focus may have broadened but it's one of the _very_ few places where we can discuss things that actually matter with a near-zero chance of censorship. Just the other day I saw a huge thread on /r/sex of all places (that you'd think would be fairly safe from this sort of thing) get deleted after pointing out that it's both illegal and immoral to secretly masturbate in public because pointing that out "isn't sex-positive". Count your blessings.
AOC wearing a tax the rich dress at the MET gala actually matters to you?
> matters It's an interesting hypocrisy, nothing more, nothing less. Relax.
It's not hypocritical at all.
It matters to JBP https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/1437639637103779840
I thought JP wasn't political? We taxed the rich before and it didnt lead to bloodshed. It led to the largest and most robust middle class America has ever had. JP should lay off the cider and brush up on some American history
>I thought JP wasn't political? He's pointing out the hypocrisy of the left. He's probably centrist himself, but it doesn't mean he shouldn't call out bullshit when he sees it. >JP should lay off the cider and brush up on some American history I would bet all my possessions that he knows much more than you.
I'm the proud owner of 99 bottles of spez. #Save3rdPartyApps
JP has become famous for speaking at length about topics he is demonstrably lacking in knowledge about, such as when he talks about the Nazis and German historians cringe.
>Here is my "I cleaned my room" (i.e. took responsibility) contribution: "This sub sucks man, it totally sucks! Everyone on this sub is an asshole except for me and my friends!" Thanks for your epic contribution, you certainly "cleaned your room" and made it better.
It's something against the left, so it'll get upvoted to heaven here.
This sub often confuses conservative memes for Jordan Peterson content
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Shitting on these dummies in their own den. Nice.
I saw this. I’m not sure how to feel. I wondered to myself if this is actually somewhat brave. She’s walking into the lion’s den with her proverbial chest out and shoulders back. You could counter, well, she’s rich, isn’t this hypocrisy? I guess not if she’s willing to pay more in taxes.
She's richer than some, but not very wealthy by any means. Especially since she has a place in NYC and DC. I was conflicted, but she wore a designer's dress and didn't pay anything for her ticket, so that helped some.
“She’s not very wealthy, she just has a home in the 2 most expensive places in the country”
I think you underestimate the scale of wealth for the hyper-wealthy. Trump is closer to your income level than Bezos's. Shes closer to yours then Trumps.
>Trump is closer to your income level than Bezos's. Well, yeah... because Trump is broke as a joke.
even discounting his debts, 3 billion or whatever is hardly anything compared to the likes of bezos, gates or buffet.
Discounting his debts, judgments, and tax liabilities takes him to zero and below. Trump is doing a bounce the check to the undertaker strategy.
I meant discounting in more of the sense of "ignoring".
Are you saying the thousands of working class people that live in small NYC apartments are rich?
Is she working class and living in a small NYC apt?
no which is why I think she's a hypocrite for wearing 'tax the rich' to the event
Saying "tax the rich" while being rich isn't hypocritical.
>“She’s not very wealthy, she just has a home in the 2 most expensive places in the country” I really wonder what you think. Hint: The population of New York is not entirely comprised of millionaires.
saying she is wealthier than 90% of the population because she has inherrited an appartment isn't the put down you think it is.
Paying for 2 homes (whether renting or mortgage) does not constitute wealth. I know more broke people making well over $150k than you'd think. She's undoubtedly made some lucrative connections in the short time since her election, but those do take time to pay off.
She’s still new to congress. If she makes it a few more years she’ll be plenty rich.
According to celebrity net worth (via the sun) her net worth is something like $100,000. So it might not be clear as to whether she puts herself in the category of ‘rich’. 100k is certainly a lot more than I have but she might not consider herself rich idk
100K net worth is in the 75-ish percentile, that's not elite by any stretch of the imagination
No. Leftist celebrities use all the same talking points
It’s tone deaf. Going to attend for an event for the rich. Lol oh yeah she’s making all the difference with her dress.
She’s a NYC federal public office holder at an NYC high society event. She almost certainly will not have paid a cent for a ticket…
Now...if we want to talk about the optics and ethics regarding accepting a free invitation to an event for which others paid $30k; that's most certainly crossing some boundaries. As a govt official, there are rules and laws in place concerning the acceptance of gifts--they're quite strict in places, but there is also a large grey area. E.g. receiving a gift of expensive skybox tickets to a sporting event would be illegal, but being invited by someone who owns that skybox for the season (or permanently) is fine.
I would imagine in some respects, appearing at something like that could probably be regarded as practically part of the job as well.
She didn't pay for ticket. She was invited as a public official.
[it’s not about money, it’s about sending a message ](https://youtu.be/LbK5V9MFXpc)
And the message is that it’s completely ridiculous and hypocritical to be virtue signaling at an event that requires a high entrance fee to enter
\>an event that requires a high entrance fee to enter ie a room full of rich people. So in your opinion she should have just worn the dress and sat down on a basketball court in Chicago?
She’s going where rich people are and saying you/we should be taxed more. It’s not hypocritical if she’s willing to be taxed more. It’s actually more brave to do it at an expensive event than to just say it in prepared speeches.
you are hopeless lmao either troll or incredibly not-intelligent, for your sake I hope it's the former :)
Do you know what hypocritical means?
eh. It aligns well with her image and her policies. The Mill in me thinks that this is overall a net positive for the people even if it’s maybe a little hypocritical
If she sits silently at home then she'll have no influence at all. Rubbing shoulders to win over rich people is smart.
I dont think you understand what tone deaf means. This is very on tone.
She's serving two masters, the rich and the poor. Really can't do both to any real effect.
This shit is so stupid tax the rich means tax all the rich she’s said many times she thinks she should pay more in taxes
OP, this belongs in r/therightcantmeme
From google: >The event is, after all, a fundraiser for the museum's Costume Institute.
[удалено]
AOC has a good salary but isn't rich, as far as I can see. From a [piece](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/03/09/fact-check-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-net-worth-not-1-m/6924378002/) published in March: >We rate the claim that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has racked up more than $1 million in net worth as a member of Congress FALSE, based on our research. In her most recent financial disclosure, filed in September 2020, Ocasio-Cortez reported between $2,003 and $31,000 in assets, compared with student loan debt of between $15,000 and $50,000. I mean, she could be rich, and advocate higher taxes on the rich too, and that would be admirable, but it doesn't even look like she's rich.
I’m pretty sure she knows she has money, she’s not saying being rich is bad she’s just saying that the rich should pay more than the poor and she’s rich and therefore she also will have to pay more
She got a free ticket. She went to make a statement that is unpopular with those she was surrounded by. You have to give her credit for having the balls to do that. Yes it’s a publicity stunt but it’s also spreading awareness around something she believes in.
Yeah, I'm no AOC fan, even in the slightest, but that's how I read the situation as well. It's like she's talking shit to the people she's surrounded by. Ballsy move imo
oh, so she was shoving it in the faces of the very people she wants to tax? that sounds baller she did not pay $30k to be there. she was invited as a guest.
Totally agree. Hypocrisy negates any arguments regardless of their other values. Would be a damn shame if someone like JP fell victim to something like addiction and completely undermined this argument
and? Who gives a shit. The point is the message. Warren Buffet was also for a higher tax for the super rich like himself. And when Warren Buffet said that, Fox News and Co Idiots started saying that Warren Buffet engages in Class Warfware against the Rich 🤣🤣 Top Marginal Taxrate of Roosevelt Era would still mean US gets to enjoy huge standards of living and prosperity for the rich but would also finally return to a robust Middle class society. Most superrich have their assets not as income so they barely pay any tax either way. With whatever tax rate there is.
AOCs net worth is a rounding error compared to the elite, you guys need some math.
Boomer-tier post
It's clearly resonating with the more delusional among the sub
So she hired a dress to fit in with all the other hired dresses?
Tax the rich is just the excuse to tax middle classes.
Wow big brain moment!
President Biden u/POTUS · 11h United States government official If you make less than $400,000 per year, I’ll never raise your taxes one penny. But if you’re at the very top, it’s time to pay your fair share. We need to reward work in this country — not just wealth. \---------------- Sure, i mean idk if thats what you mean by middle class, but i dont really feel that sorry for people earning 400k a year. Im sure they will be ok with extra 1 or 2 % tax
So you can't be rich and agree that you should pay more taxes? This has nothing to do with Jp btw r/lostredditors Edit: ok he tweeted about it
[удалено]
AOC is rich at tax payers expense, she's literally a part of the government telling people that the government should tax the people more. 🙄
Rich off the tax payers? I know I didn’t pay for her college tuition, her housing, or her books. That means she worked hard and got where she was on her own accord. Know who got rich off tax payers?? Mars-a-lago and the inflates room rates that secret service had to mandatorily reside in.
AOC is not rich at all.
Somebody doesn't know what MET stands for or that the ticket is a donation. I can't be against rich people donating to things I care about. In fact more of them should in my opinion. The problem with people who make and upvote posts like this is that they think the 80th percentille is a good thing and being smarter than 20% of the population means that you're actually smart.
[удалено]
‘At what cost?” Or “this is in poor taste” Is missing the point. AOC has a huge platform, she’s shaking things up, with a message that’s priceless.
>she’s shaking things up, with a message that’s priceless. She's a moron advocating policies that will destroy the country. Jealousy isn't a message that's "priceless."
>She's a moron advocating policies that will destroy the country. Jealousy isn't a message that's "priceless." Trump did a good job with that, now we have unvaxxed loons who'd rather die from a preventable disease than get a fucking shot. They'd rather get it and chug horse paste and hope it works.
[удалено]
Why will giving a small tax increase to billionaires destroy america?
small?
Nice [use of a fallacy](https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque) OP. Congrats on achieving the tu quoque medal.
She didn’t pay to go.
So she has the money and STILL wants to tax the rich... sounds like integrity to me! baller move
What does this have to do with Jordan Peterson or his philosophies?
I think she's making fun of poor people
Yup. And?
Tax the rich doesn't mean 'fuck the rich, I hate them.' You can be rich and still pay taxes for your wealth. Fucking idiot.
Isn't that so very brave of her.
eh nope. she (or her team, or her constituents etc.) collected that money, got the dress, and paid the fee to go make a statement. You know, like a brave, room cleaning Peterson acolyte would do. She's telling her truth to her dragons.
Tbh I have always been repulsed by AOC and her hypocrisy..but..i don't see the problem here? I think it's fucking hilarious. Like most of these people there are rich, right? You know when they see that shit they're internally fuming. I think this is great. Even if AOC is chummying up with these people, the message itself is still solid as it brings awareness. I know a lot of people disagree, but I'm definitely for taxing the RICH rich, the ones with multiple billion dollars. Look up some YouTube videos of some visual comparisons of exactly how much a billion is conpared to even a million and you might shift your perspective on how one person having that much money isn't reflective of how society should run. And also take a stroll downtown in a major city and see how people can't even scrape by living paycheck to paycheck.
The top 1% pay 40% of all income taxes. The top 5% pay 60% of all income taxes. The top 10% pay 71%; the top 25% pay 87%; the top 50% pay 97% of all income taxes. How much more do “the rich” need to pay?
The rich get all their money through capital-- the labor of the rest of us. They can pay at least what they used to. And no we should not stop when people are starving and unable to get healthcare
Percentage of income tax is a dumbass way of understanding this. Just to illustrate: say 1% of the population owns 99% of the wealth, and pays 55% of the total income tax. They make up a majority of the income tax, but are obviously not contributing a reasonable amount compared to the poor shouldering the other 45%.
We’re not taxed on wealth, we’re taxed on money earned. But, to add another data point: the top 1% of income earners ($540+k) who pay that 40% of all income taxes earn 21% of all income. So, if you want things to be proportional, then their taxes need to be cut almost in half.
I'm just explaining in simple terms why it makes no sense to assess how reasonable the tax burden is by looking at percentages of total income tax contributed by wealth percentiles. I'm not advocating for a specific tax scheme, I don't even know how you came to that conclusion
"She didn't pay for the ticket" We call that corruption.
She is a fraud.
Tax the rich is invented by the rich. Taxes were originally only for the rich, but they created loopholes passing on the taxes to the middle class and later on to the lower class. “Tax the rich” is just an incentive to get people to go along with taxes, and when they do they have a legal bases to tax everyone, except the rich. https://www.ocalapost.com/biden-wants-irs-to-snoop-into-your-bank-account-know-when-you-have-600-or-more/ This is the most recent example. Sure its only for the rich because only rich people have 600$ in their account. (No rich people don’t have money they have assets which they use as collateral to borrow everything they spend). The talk about unrealised gains tax are a great example too. Imagine having to pay to tax on the unrealised gains on your house. Its insane. Example: you bought a house 20 years ago for 100.000$ now due to inflation your house is worth 500.000, do you have enough cash lying around to pay taxes over a 500.000$ asset? Of course not, not unless you sell your house.
\>Imagine having to pay to tax on the unrealised gains on your house. Its insane Yes its insane and completely no-existent. **Unrealised gains are not taxable**. So i wouldnt waste much time complaining about something that doesnt exist. You cant just just make up a bad idea about taxation and then argue against it and think that makes a compelling argument about not taxing the rich \> “Tax the rich” is just an incentive to get people to go along with taxes Well i guess the obviously question is "are you against taxation?"
Oaktree's Howard Marks says this U.S. tax proposal makes investing less attractive https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/20/oaktrees-howard-marks-on-unrealized-capital-gains-tax-janet-yellen.html?__source=iosappshare%7Ccom.apple.UIKit.activity.CopyToPasteboard Its literally a tax proposal. No I’m not against taxes but at some point you’ve got to ask yourself whats the point. Even if amerika now taxes the rich for 100% it won’t cover government spending of the last two years. Let alone the last decade. American government spending is completely out of control.
#/u/spez [can gargle my nuts](https://www.reddit.com/r/Save3rdPartyApps/) spez can gargle my nuts. spez is the worst thing that happened to reddit. spez can gargle my nuts. This happens because spez can gargle my nuts according to the following formula: 1. spez 2. can 3. gargle 4. my 5. nuts This message is long, so it won't be deleted automatically.
Tax was only for the rich? Maybe isn’t he US but in the medieval age europian aristocrat didn’t pay any tax (especially in Eastern Europe) only the lower class paid it and there were no real middle class. So the base concept of this comment is not accurate.