Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MrMickeysMom

(20,453 posts)
Sun Nov 29, 2015, 01:24 AM Nov 2015

It's just ONE THING... Inequitable Distribution of Wealth, Stupid...

I wonder how many people are willing to talk about a wealth tax? I think it's high time we did...

One of the simplest of neutralizing the heat around here is to discuss the recognition of where we should be with wealth distribution. I say, it's WAY past time to establish a tax on wealth that is similar to those that exist in MOST European countries. It's a way of admitting that true democracy includes some democratic socialism. We've always operated that way when our government responded to the inequitable past. History has proven this already. And, when looking at the misuse of the budget, including its shortfalls, it's easy to figure out where the money has gone and how much money to redistribute.

A wealth tax would require the very wealthiest Americans (my definition is those worth millions of dollars) to pay taxes on their accumulated wealth, rather than enabling them to get richer without giving anything back to the society that makes their wealth possible. That kind of tax could raise tens of billions of dollars a year. It's fair. The other way that has been going on for FAR too long is NOT fair.

Here's something else... We can also reverse the inequitable distribution of wealth by closing loopholes in corporate taxes. If we eliminated tax breaks for corporations, corporate subsidies, and other forms of corporate welfare, we could save $125 billions a year.

Here's where some of that money could be applied to health care, education, social services and to balancing the budget.

Why this isn't on the mind of EVERY working family? Think of it.. elect a government that will look out for their interests and fight for a fairer distribution of wealth. This is no mystery. It's just one thing, but it's big in itself. Lots of posts here criticism "where the budge comes" from to do what you want to do to rectify social justice.

Or, maybe it ISN'T... because THAT is the message that is getting out.



7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
It's just ONE THING... Inequitable Distribution of Wealth, Stupid... (Original Post) MrMickeysMom Nov 2015 OP
I'd be happy to talk about a wealth tax. How about a 100% tax on all wealth over ... Scuba Nov 2015 #1
That's a good place from which to jump off... MrMickeysMom Nov 2015 #2
Property tax... ClarkeVII Nov 2015 #3
K & R Marty McGraw Dec 2015 #4
Well 1939 Dec 2015 #5
Wouldn't it be wonderful Marty McGraw Dec 2015 #6
That's because.... MrMickeysMom Dec 2015 #7
 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
1. I'd be happy to talk about a wealth tax. How about a 100% tax on all wealth over ...
Sun Nov 29, 2015, 07:08 AM
Nov 2015

... $100 Million? It fits with my other plan to tax and tax and tax them until they're only fabulously wealthy.

MrMickeysMom

(20,453 posts)
2. That's a good place from which to jump off...
Sun Nov 29, 2015, 09:47 AM
Nov 2015

In fact, I thought of cross-posting this in the economics forum, which I rarely visit (I really should...)

Digging further into some stuff, I'm by far not the first one to ask this, as there were posts from a 2003 ...QuestioningStudent (are you still out there? Are you no longer a student and never more a lurker of DU?) That question on DU asked about more options, and I'm more inclined to ignore non-income sources of options.

Hedge Fund Managers's ... There's a topic that's come up this year again. Last year, the Institutional Investor Alpha survey named the top HFM's and what they drew in: David Tepper, of Appaloosa Management, who made $3.5 billion; Stephen Cohen, of SAC Capital ($2.4 billion); John Paulson, of Paulson & Co. ($2.3 billion); and James Simons, of Renaissance Technologies ($2.2 billion).

I suppose using the 100% over the first 100 million would cramp their style, eh?


1939

(1,683 posts)
5. Well
Sat Dec 5, 2015, 10:30 PM
Dec 2015

If I was earning the "maximum wage" wage (and I am not as I am not a CEO, sports star, or rock star), if i was to approach the max before confiscatory tax levels began, I would say, that i didn't want more pay, I just wanted country club dues paid, shower and workout facility in my office, unlimited travel allowance with private jets, hot and cold running secretaries in my office, you know, just the tax deductible perks.

Marty McGraw

(1,024 posts)
6. Wouldn't it be wonderful
Sat Dec 5, 2015, 10:34 PM
Dec 2015

If the only thing tax deductible for a business would be money that is re-invested into said business; say improvements, wages, new hires, etc.?

yep a lot of the things that are allowed for tax deductions today are a joke.

MrMickeysMom

(20,453 posts)
7. That's because....
Sat Dec 5, 2015, 11:32 PM
Dec 2015

The business write the laws... via the legislators, by the courts...

TRULY, a corporate oligarchy... USA.CORP

We should change that...

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»It's just ONE THING... In...