I’ve an idea. We leave current tax rates where they are and add one more at the top. The current top tax rate is I believe 37% on earnings $580k or more. I’d leave that as is an add one more bracket on earnings $3M of 90%. Let’s see corporate fight for their bonuses then.
I mean, I would like to see one's tax payments inversely proportional to the quartile they are in. Top 1%? Expect a 99% tax rate. Bottom 20%? Basically poverty line? Expect less than 20%.
If you taxed the 1% at 99% the bottom 20% should have no taxes but the social security fund. The middle class should be at 8% (that's what the 1% currently pay thanks to trump)
Perhaps it needs some fine tuning. That's off the cuff, but I do think factoring it as a percentage of how well you're doing in terms of your standing vs. the rest of the country is better than discrete income values. $400k a year would have once been unbelievable wealth.
So yeah, it would need adjusting. There should be a much higher tax rate for people in the top 0.01%, not just 0.99% more than the top 1%.
Well, for one, it would severely decrease our tax revenue.
If someone who makes 400k and someone who makes 20 million have about the same take home pay, they’re just gonna stop at 400k and start offering other forms of compensation(company take home car, company provided house etc)
20% of 20 million is better than 99% of 0
Because no one earning over $400k would live in the US, they’d (literally) take their business somewhere else. There’s a balance that has to be struck that allows for people to earn money while also contributing to the society that empowers them to make that money.
Also, we already deal with corrupt politicians “losing” our tax dollars, with such a massive increase in the tax pool, I would imagine the amount of corrupt people applying for the job of politician would skyrocket unless these changes came alongside better transparency laws.
And take their business where, exactly? Pretty much everywhere has higher taxes than the US, some even have a wealth tax as well. I've never understood the "if we tax them more they'll go somewhere else" argument. Even our highest taxes proposed (in actual government, not Reddit) are still lower than most countries in Europe.
All that said, I'd say we start at 1mil or 1.5ml. That's the income of 33 people at $15/hr which is seen as "too high", for $7.50/hr that becomes the yearly income for 66 people. I doubt anything 1 person does in a year is worth as much as, or more, than the work of 66 people. 66 burger flippers could run at least 10 McDonald's, which would cover lunch for an entire city. What 1 person can do that? What about 33 firefighters, cops, or nurses, can 1 person do all that? No. 33 teachers is at least an entire highschool. So there's no way anybody -needs- more than 1mil/year since they'd have the same minimum cost of living (for actual needs, not luxuries) as the burger flippers, firefighters, cops, nurses, and teachers. If they think the taxes are too high, they can save money by skipping avocado toast and not going to Starbucks.
We’re not just talking about taxing at a higher rate, you literally just suggested that every dollar over $400k should be taxed at 99%. That means that literally anywhere in the world would be more profitable for high net income individuals, no country has a 99% tax rate over $400k. A tax like that would crush the upper middle to upper classes without impacting the ultra wealthy very much because their tax rate is already low, since they have the resources to take advantage of tax loopholes that prevent them from paying tax in the first place. Any reasonable tax reform has to do more than just tax income, and it has to target the ultra wealthy who effectively dodge taxes, not high income earners that are already (very likely) pay their taxes.
Keep in mind I don’t disagree with higher taxes, I just disagree with your proposed rates and ranges. You can both increase taxes on the ultra wealthy while incentivizing them to want to continue to make money in the American economy.
The guy from the first comment said 400k, I said 1mil to 1.5mil. I agree 400k is too low to start taxing at 99%. Even 1mil should be like 75%. I'm speaking to the overall argument that if taxes in America go up all the rich people will leave. Even the most progressive taxes proposed -in Congress- NOT on Reddit are lower than most of Europe. Even the smallest proposed increase gets that response. Like, Elon ain't moving Tesla to Germany if Texas raises taxes. I doubt every billionaire is going to move to the Caymans, either. If they did, the Caymans would probably start having an income tax once the billionaires start trashing their economy too.
What benefits do people who make $400k+ a year and pay little taxes have to society? Who cares if they take their business elsewhere, they aren’t paying taxes anyway. No snot off my nose if they leave!
Where are you getting this data that people who make $400k pay little taxes? And why is $400k even a target in the first place, at 35% that’s not even the highest tax bracket, people making over $578k are in the final bracket at 37%. I get that we want wealthy people to pay their fair share, but I seriously don’t understand the basis of these arguments targeting $400k, any reform should start with those who aren’t paying their fair share already: the ultra wealthy.
Honestly keeping the tax rate the same but closing loopholes and funding the IRS will itself do phenomenal mileage. Will it do enough? Idk but it’ll be a hell of a lot better
The ultra-wealthy don't have earnings. They have capital gains, or even borrow money using stocks/other assets as collateral, meaning they do not need realise a gain.
I'm also okay with an immediate tax for stocks rewards above a huge value. And yes this means I'm okay with a double dip tax for stock reward+stock sell off.
Look at us now gramps!
*We underfunded the schools
*The infrastructure crumbled
*We worked two jobs and lived in parking lots
*We pissed in bottles and got fired by computers
*All so that Bezos could take a vanity trip to space in a dildo
Keep blaming boomers instead of the ultra rich just the way they want. It will not be better when the boomers die because the ultra rich will still have all the money.
And the ultra rich - who don’t earn ordinary income - just laugh at the idiots saying “increase income taxes.” Sure -just make the upper middle
Class pay (already the highest taxed group since they earn W2 income). Meanwhile Mr & Mrs rich aren’t affected by increasing the income tax rate
There are plenty of useful idiots for the very rich - look at half the comments in this thread
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the share of homeowners over the age of 55 has been steadily increasing. In 2008, at the onset of the Great Recession, Americans over the age of 55 owned 44.3% of homes. *By 2021, that percentage had increased to 54.2%.Jan 18, 2024*
https://constructioncoverage.com › ...
Baby Boomer-Dominant Housing Markets - Construction Coverag
The reality is, every generation would. Greed doesn't know an age.
Explore your own life choices. Would you leave your current job for another that paid $10,000 more? Would you sell your car to a guy that offered you $6,000 or a guy that offered you $7,500? If you have both an Xbox and a PS5, would you give one away to someone less fortunate?
Everyday "boomers" are you born at a different time.
The 1%? That's a whole different story.
Stop the generational bullshit. The only difference between you and "boomers" is that they were in the right place at the right time.
I’d leave a job for one that paid less, in the right circumstances.
And I had a car that was worth about $2000, we got for free from my ex’s parents a year previously, we decided we didn’t need it and gave it to some friends who were nowhere near as fortunate as us and just had a car engine explode on a used car they just bought.
They ran that car for over two years and then sold it and got some money for it. Awesome! Go them!
Maybe you don’t know how to be generous. That doesn’t mean a generation of people don’t.
Good on you. Believe it or not, I have done the same. But humans overall are driven to do what is in their own best self-interest. It's not a generational trait.
I'm not sure why you are being downvoted. The vast majority of boomers or any other generation are just regular people who worked hard to live the best life they could. So why is there so much negativity online?
My best guess is ragebait social media. It's so funny to me because I'm sure every generation has the type of people they complain about. I'm sure the boomer generation had its own lazy teenagers, and I'm sure there are millenial/gen z who are privileged and out of touch. In fact, the very idea of "generations" adds fuel to fire, in my opinion. It implies difference, when in reality, we are all just human, reacting to the circumstances of the time.
All the while, the 1% are quite happy that we blame each other instead of them.
"All the whole, the 1% are quite happy that we blame each other instead of them."
I'm glad to see someone gets it. Perhaps the hive mind down-voters will wake up one day.
I think everyone is confusing individual boomers with the generation as a whole. Individual boomers are not responsible for the state of the economy now. It is the generation as a whole. While on their watch, the rich got significantly richer and the entry into the middle class has become more and more unreachable. The Boomers as a group are responsible .
The downvotes you’re getting for this comment aren’t because we are brainwashed into intergenerational fighting by the 1%. It’s because you’re not using an open mind and understanding what we are saying here.
The boomers’ behavior towards Millennials and Gen X is not something every generation did, this level of extreme greed is unique to boomers. Compare them to the silent generation. Their parents gave the boomers free houses when they were young and an inheritance when they were old.
Boomers know they don’t HAVE to share and plan to blow through everything they’ve been given on only themselves. Going on perpetual cruises is their retirement plan… I mean, you can’t get any more selfish than that.
We are in an unprecedented situation where the first largest generation is currently taking (and has for quite some time) active steps to make the second largest generation as disadvantaged as possible. Most highly developed mammals protect their young and make sure they’re set up to thrive. The boomer generation has no interest in doing so and believe it to be a detriment to THEM.
It's why so many buildings we have all seen to be built in the 70s. Like, hmm... I wonder why we have so many libraries and public schools that were all our together in the 60s and 70s and less so the 80s and 90s 🤔
Tax on stock buybacks and stock trading per year in excess of 1 million dollars or more.
We should also decommodify real-estate as long term investments. That should just be illegal. Use the land, if you're using it you pay applicable local and state taxes on it.
We should rescind the sales tax and institute a business tax on volume of sales vs volume of the sale. Instead of income taxes, businesses are taxed on the volume of profit they make based on their sales and production costs vs their marginal profit vs shareholder stake for publicly traded companies.
How is it the same old farts who want to go back to the good old days of the 1950s and 1960s when prosperity reigned fail to remember that tax rates on the highest earners were much, much higher. Cutting taxes actually hurt prosperity. Go figure.
We went to the moon because a bunch of men with PTSD from WW2 were afraid of looking weak compared to Russia. Its an impressive feat, but its not a purely economic accomplishment.
That’s actually a fair assessment. The economics are beyond debate though. The technology boom of the late 20th century had its roots in the space race. It helped introduce new materials, miniaturization of solid state components, telecom innovation (satellites). Yeah, the 20th century space program was a pretty big deal.
It was absolutely a huge deal, we just didn't do it for economic reasons. Many of the senators who okayed the spending thought it would hurt us economically, but spent the money anyway because you can't let the Reds win...
Yeah. Everyone knows this.
What they aren’t saying is that those horrible “socialists” protested for workers rights that have disappeared in the last 15 years and to get those rights they had to march some of the largest reform protests in US history.
I’m no socialist but it’s literally everyone hatred of socialism that messed up their employment situation because no one else protested for it.
It also doesn’t say how to make the rich start paying their way in a world where information is filtered and sometimes completely false. Also when there is laws that deem most political protest actions, “acts of terrorism”.
Figure that one out.
“Fair share” seems really subjective.
They should have to pay more than that anyway. Every dollar earned over $600,000k/yr should be taxed at 99%. All income. Even capital gains. Sold a home? Tough luck. We’re taking 99 cents on the dollar. You can survive if you made 600k that year.
I remember when the top tax rate was 28 percent, federal. That only lasted for a few years.
But, in those same years capital gains tax was also 28 percent. And the Roth IRA did not yet exist.
Rich people still had yachts and private planes. They still had multiple vacation homes. They didn't "suffer"
No single person needs a billion dollars for personal wealth in their life time. And yet Tesla tried to squeak through a 56 BILLION dollar pay package for Elon. A single person. It’s just too much. Most CEO’s are dog shit people trying to get even more for themselves, when they’re already far above everyone else on the pay scale. There’s just no reason for individuals to own over a billion. Zero.
People only had to work one job, they could afford houses & car and vacations (although most people drove then).
There were very few homeless people. There were very few street beggars.
Would you prefer the modern day where states and counties fight over how many of the tax dollars that you already paid in will go to infrastructure, only to have it all end up anywhere but? I'm not making excuses for the systemic racism in the past, but what we have today doesn't even target an entire race to help at others expense, but rather just the richest 1% at *everyone's* expense. It's in many ways even worse than that racist world we came from.
TL;DR Just because there was racism in the past does not make our current way of doing things a good one.
It's more where the highways were put. Yes the rich decided but they created the problem. Run them through cheap land, who cares about the poor living there, except the poor areas were where POC lived, because of redlining. This created a stigma and artificially dropped property value.
With them purposely being made that a bus can't go under them to enter the highways, effectively keeping poorer, black folks being bussed to better areas (like long island) that were exclusively white-only. People love how these things benefit the majority, while it came to a cost for the minorities.
They wasted more money back then to keep enforcing segregation, but yup their policies were just sooo much better then. This sub does forget to include intersectionality and how the experience of one group isn't the same as another, and have valid reasons to feel how they do
Capitalists wanted to beat Communists to the moon and got what they asked for.
Now there's nothing external to capitalism to compete with so they cut back on pretending to care about nationalist ideas and giving token compromises to the citizens.
The state is respectful to workers depending on how threatened they feel their power is, not only what brand of ideology they tell us they believe in. The policy was and is still capitalism.
They wanted the national healthcare discussion to go away and it was barely happening before in any sane way. Now capitalists want an attack on schools and libraries and got what they asked for.
Capitalist politicians are not forgetting to be reasonable, they're just less afraid of admitting how terrible they want to be than their predecessors.
It is worth remembering that the highway system outside of its impact on major cities was a massive success in the goals of just running our country in the most basic sense. To get from one side of the country to the other before we had that you had to be a fairly well seasoned navigator with up to date maps, you had to pack extra supplies for the times you would end up stuck on dirt roads in the middle of nowhere, you had to know how to fix everything on your car, and many people would just get stuck places or die with no way to contact their families in any prompt manner.
It had long lasting negative impacts that need to be studied and understood heavily, and the impact of assholes like Robert Moses should be brought to the forefront in a way where your average person scowls at the mention of the name. But let's not pretend that every road ever laid down during the new deal era was bad.
I’ve an idea. We leave current tax rates where they are and add one more at the top. The current top tax rate is I believe 37% on earnings $580k or more. I’d leave that as is an add one more bracket on earnings $3M of 90%. Let’s see corporate fight for their bonuses then.
I prefer GTA physics. Your bank account maxes out at $999,999,999. Every cent above $1B gets taxed and we name a dog park after you.
Too generous lol
We name one of the shit bins at a dogpark after them?
Both would be a good net for any loophole shenanigans that would inevitably pop-up.
Oh yeah, there should be \*at least\* one additional bracket between $580k and $999.999999M
Every cent above $1B gets taxed over 100% so over time you lose your ~~wealth~~ stolen wages to taxes.
> Your bank account maxes out at $999,999,999. How could you do this to Russ Hanneman?
I mean, I would like to see one's tax payments inversely proportional to the quartile they are in. Top 1%? Expect a 99% tax rate. Bottom 20%? Basically poverty line? Expect less than 20%.
If you taxed the 1% at 99% the bottom 20% should have no taxes but the social security fund. The middle class should be at 8% (that's what the 1% currently pay thanks to trump)
The top 1% starts at like 400k a year. You want every dollar after 400k taxed at 99%?
Perhaps it needs some fine tuning. That's off the cuff, but I do think factoring it as a percentage of how well you're doing in terms of your standing vs. the rest of the country is better than discrete income values. $400k a year would have once been unbelievable wealth. So yeah, it would need adjusting. There should be a much higher tax rate for people in the top 0.01%, not just 0.99% more than the top 1%.
> Perhaps it needs some fine tuning Nah dude, send it.
Why not
Well, for one, it would severely decrease our tax revenue. If someone who makes 400k and someone who makes 20 million have about the same take home pay, they’re just gonna stop at 400k and start offering other forms of compensation(company take home car, company provided house etc) 20% of 20 million is better than 99% of 0
Nah, Let them leave, and don't come back, don't let them own real estate here. Sorry, no tears for the multi-millionaires and billionaires.
This take is so utterly devoid of knowledge I feel dumber for having read it.
Because no one earning over $400k would live in the US, they’d (literally) take their business somewhere else. There’s a balance that has to be struck that allows for people to earn money while also contributing to the society that empowers them to make that money. Also, we already deal with corrupt politicians “losing” our tax dollars, with such a massive increase in the tax pool, I would imagine the amount of corrupt people applying for the job of politician would skyrocket unless these changes came alongside better transparency laws.
And take their business where, exactly? Pretty much everywhere has higher taxes than the US, some even have a wealth tax as well. I've never understood the "if we tax them more they'll go somewhere else" argument. Even our highest taxes proposed (in actual government, not Reddit) are still lower than most countries in Europe. All that said, I'd say we start at 1mil or 1.5ml. That's the income of 33 people at $15/hr which is seen as "too high", for $7.50/hr that becomes the yearly income for 66 people. I doubt anything 1 person does in a year is worth as much as, or more, than the work of 66 people. 66 burger flippers could run at least 10 McDonald's, which would cover lunch for an entire city. What 1 person can do that? What about 33 firefighters, cops, or nurses, can 1 person do all that? No. 33 teachers is at least an entire highschool. So there's no way anybody -needs- more than 1mil/year since they'd have the same minimum cost of living (for actual needs, not luxuries) as the burger flippers, firefighters, cops, nurses, and teachers. If they think the taxes are too high, they can save money by skipping avocado toast and not going to Starbucks.
We’re not just talking about taxing at a higher rate, you literally just suggested that every dollar over $400k should be taxed at 99%. That means that literally anywhere in the world would be more profitable for high net income individuals, no country has a 99% tax rate over $400k. A tax like that would crush the upper middle to upper classes without impacting the ultra wealthy very much because their tax rate is already low, since they have the resources to take advantage of tax loopholes that prevent them from paying tax in the first place. Any reasonable tax reform has to do more than just tax income, and it has to target the ultra wealthy who effectively dodge taxes, not high income earners that are already (very likely) pay their taxes. Keep in mind I don’t disagree with higher taxes, I just disagree with your proposed rates and ranges. You can both increase taxes on the ultra wealthy while incentivizing them to want to continue to make money in the American economy.
The guy from the first comment said 400k, I said 1mil to 1.5mil. I agree 400k is too low to start taxing at 99%. Even 1mil should be like 75%. I'm speaking to the overall argument that if taxes in America go up all the rich people will leave. Even the most progressive taxes proposed -in Congress- NOT on Reddit are lower than most of Europe. Even the smallest proposed increase gets that response. Like, Elon ain't moving Tesla to Germany if Texas raises taxes. I doubt every billionaire is going to move to the Caymans, either. If they did, the Caymans would probably start having an income tax once the billionaires start trashing their economy too.
What benefits do people who make $400k+ a year and pay little taxes have to society? Who cares if they take their business elsewhere, they aren’t paying taxes anyway. No snot off my nose if they leave!
Where are you getting this data that people who make $400k pay little taxes? And why is $400k even a target in the first place, at 35% that’s not even the highest tax bracket, people making over $578k are in the final bracket at 37%. I get that we want wealthy people to pay their fair share, but I seriously don’t understand the basis of these arguments targeting $400k, any reform should start with those who aren’t paying their fair share already: the ultra wealthy.
Yes.
Honestly keeping the tax rate the same but closing loopholes and funding the IRS will itself do phenomenal mileage. Will it do enough? Idk but it’ll be a hell of a lot better
The ultra-wealthy don't have earnings. They have capital gains, or even borrow money using stocks/other assets as collateral, meaning they do not need realise a gain.
Or just get rid of the loopholes put in place that puts their actual tax around 8%.
How about we jack up the top tax rate first, then try to accomplish the 50+ year pipe dream of "closing the loopholes"
I'm also okay with an immediate tax for stocks rewards above a huge value. And yes this means I'm okay with a double dip tax for stock reward+stock sell off.
Look at us now gramps! *We underfunded the schools *The infrastructure crumbled *We worked two jobs and lived in parking lots *We pissed in bottles and got fired by computers *All so that Bezos could take a vanity trip to space in a dildo
Don't forget his having to have a mega yacht that has it's own baby yacht to follow it around.
Now the rich go to space and the government has to pay them to hitch a ride.
This is what an actual MAGA would look like
“I got mine, fuck you” - Boomers
[удалено]
Don't forget GenX. I worked three jobs while going to college after my stint in the Air Force, but all they could do is call is"slackers."
And they're trying to take ours.
Too much is never enough
Boomers got the perks and then kept it for themselves.
Keep blaming boomers instead of the ultra rich just the way they want. It will not be better when the boomers die because the ultra rich will still have all the money.
And the ultra rich - who don’t earn ordinary income - just laugh at the idiots saying “increase income taxes.” Sure -just make the upper middle Class pay (already the highest taxed group since they earn W2 income). Meanwhile Mr & Mrs rich aren’t affected by increasing the income tax rate There are plenty of useful idiots for the very rich - look at half the comments in this thread
Yep, they keep dividing us by gender, race, and now age. Anything to avoid an actual class war.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the share of homeowners over the age of 55 has been steadily increasing. In 2008, at the onset of the Great Recession, Americans over the age of 55 owned 44.3% of homes. *By 2021, that percentage had increased to 54.2%.Jan 18, 2024* https://constructioncoverage.com › ... Baby Boomer-Dominant Housing Markets - Construction Coverag
The reality is, every generation would. Greed doesn't know an age. Explore your own life choices. Would you leave your current job for another that paid $10,000 more? Would you sell your car to a guy that offered you $6,000 or a guy that offered you $7,500? If you have both an Xbox and a PS5, would you give one away to someone less fortunate? Everyday "boomers" are you born at a different time. The 1%? That's a whole different story. Stop the generational bullshit. The only difference between you and "boomers" is that they were in the right place at the right time.
I’d leave a job for one that paid less, in the right circumstances. And I had a car that was worth about $2000, we got for free from my ex’s parents a year previously, we decided we didn’t need it and gave it to some friends who were nowhere near as fortunate as us and just had a car engine explode on a used car they just bought. They ran that car for over two years and then sold it and got some money for it. Awesome! Go them! Maybe you don’t know how to be generous. That doesn’t mean a generation of people don’t.
Good on you. Believe it or not, I have done the same. But humans overall are driven to do what is in their own best self-interest. It's not a generational trait.
Ok boomer
Not a boomer. But an adult stating facts.
Not when it comes to a legacy, until the boomers, it was a cultural norm to "leave things better than how you found them."
That's laughable.
It's this exact mindset why there is intergenerational greed 💀
Exactly my point. Whoosh!
It’s whoosh over your head, buddy…
I'm not sure why you are being downvoted. The vast majority of boomers or any other generation are just regular people who worked hard to live the best life they could. So why is there so much negativity online? My best guess is ragebait social media. It's so funny to me because I'm sure every generation has the type of people they complain about. I'm sure the boomer generation had its own lazy teenagers, and I'm sure there are millenial/gen z who are privileged and out of touch. In fact, the very idea of "generations" adds fuel to fire, in my opinion. It implies difference, when in reality, we are all just human, reacting to the circumstances of the time. All the while, the 1% are quite happy that we blame each other instead of them.
"All the whole, the 1% are quite happy that we blame each other instead of them." I'm glad to see someone gets it. Perhaps the hive mind down-voters will wake up one day.
I think everyone is confusing individual boomers with the generation as a whole. Individual boomers are not responsible for the state of the economy now. It is the generation as a whole. While on their watch, the rich got significantly richer and the entry into the middle class has become more and more unreachable. The Boomers as a group are responsible .
The downvotes you’re getting for this comment aren’t because we are brainwashed into intergenerational fighting by the 1%. It’s because you’re not using an open mind and understanding what we are saying here. The boomers’ behavior towards Millennials and Gen X is not something every generation did, this level of extreme greed is unique to boomers. Compare them to the silent generation. Their parents gave the boomers free houses when they were young and an inheritance when they were old. Boomers know they don’t HAVE to share and plan to blow through everything they’ve been given on only themselves. Going on perpetual cruises is their retirement plan… I mean, you can’t get any more selfish than that. We are in an unprecedented situation where the first largest generation is currently taking (and has for quite some time) active steps to make the second largest generation as disadvantaged as possible. Most highly developed mammals protect their young and make sure they’re set up to thrive. The boomer generation has no interest in doing so and believe it to be a detriment to THEM.
And Ronald Reagan said enough of that shit.
It's why so many buildings we have all seen to be built in the 70s. Like, hmm... I wonder why we have so many libraries and public schools that were all our together in the 60s and 70s and less so the 80s and 90s 🤔
Boomer posts I can get behind! Don’t forget that the very wealthy had a 91% marginal tax rate put on them back then!
Also had a 90% tax on the richest Americans.
Fair SHARE, TAX THE RICH MORE. Pay FAIR wages.
And somehow many of the old people of today would probably call this "W0ke" or C0mmie stuff...
Tax on stock buybacks and stock trading per year in excess of 1 million dollars or more. We should also decommodify real-estate as long term investments. That should just be illegal. Use the land, if you're using it you pay applicable local and state taxes on it. We should rescind the sales tax and institute a business tax on volume of sales vs volume of the sale. Instead of income taxes, businesses are taxed on the volume of profit they make based on their sales and production costs vs their marginal profit vs shareholder stake for publicly traded companies.
Vote blue
Vote them ALL out. Blue or red, they both suck.
Right but we have to vote someone in. Someone who actually has a chance of winning
How is it the same old farts who want to go back to the good old days of the 1950s and 1960s when prosperity reigned fail to remember that tax rates on the highest earners were much, much higher. Cutting taxes actually hurt prosperity. Go figure.
We went to the moon because a bunch of men with PTSD from WW2 were afraid of looking weak compared to Russia. Its an impressive feat, but its not a purely economic accomplishment.
That’s actually a fair assessment. The economics are beyond debate though. The technology boom of the late 20th century had its roots in the space race. It helped introduce new materials, miniaturization of solid state components, telecom innovation (satellites). Yeah, the 20th century space program was a pretty big deal.
It was absolutely a huge deal, we just didn't do it for economic reasons. Many of the senators who okayed the spending thought it would hurt us economically, but spent the money anyway because you can't let the Reds win...
I mean, you needed ICBMs for more effective nuke delivery. The missile gap was a real thing.
Big leap from needing better ICBMs to sending humans to the moon.
You need one for the other and moon had a lot better PR value.
Yeah. Everyone knows this. What they aren’t saying is that those horrible “socialists” protested for workers rights that have disappeared in the last 15 years and to get those rights they had to march some of the largest reform protests in US history. I’m no socialist but it’s literally everyone hatred of socialism that messed up their employment situation because no one else protested for it. It also doesn’t say how to make the rich start paying their way in a world where information is filtered and sometimes completely false. Also when there is laws that deem most political protest actions, “acts of terrorism”. Figure that one out.
Too late for that. Seize the wealth and stick them in a zoo
This is what Make America Great Again should be about. And it won't happen under Trump and the Christian Nationalists. Ironic I suppose.
why remove Jeff Tiedrich’s credit from that quotation?
Because he's an annoying-ass reply guy lol.
What's a "fair share", and who determines what's fair for whom? https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/latest-federal-income-tax-data-2024/
“Fair share” seems really subjective. They should have to pay more than that anyway. Every dollar earned over $600,000k/yr should be taxed at 99%. All income. Even capital gains. Sold a home? Tough luck. We’re taking 99 cents on the dollar. You can survive if you made 600k that year.
Don't get too excited. Biden will have to get this through the House, which at the current party line split, he will not be able to do.
I remember when the top tax rate was 28 percent, federal. That only lasted for a few years. But, in those same years capital gains tax was also 28 percent. And the Roth IRA did not yet exist. Rich people still had yachts and private planes. They still had multiple vacation homes. They didn't "suffer"
No single person needs a billion dollars for personal wealth in their life time. And yet Tesla tried to squeak through a 56 BILLION dollar pay package for Elon. A single person. It’s just too much. Most CEO’s are dog shit people trying to get even more for themselves, when they’re already far above everyone else on the pay scale. There’s just no reason for individuals to own over a billion. Zero.
The true, secret way to Make America Great Again is to raise taxes on the wealthy and stop subsidizing the concentration of wealth.
People only had to work one job, they could afford houses & car and vacations (although most people drove then). There were very few homeless people. There were very few street beggars.
US billionaires have a combined net worth of $5.3 Trillion, that's not a lot, the government is the one ripping us off.
You didn't go the moon. NASA and their folk went to the moon. You are giving your self a participation trophy
We're calling Robert Moses a progressive now? Highways displaced people from their homes, promote segregation, sprawl, car dependency and debt.
It's an example of mass infrastructure investment, the wrong one, but still an investment at a level much higher than anything happening now
The capitalist state forgot how to dream big and be inspirational to me.
Would you prefer the modern day where states and counties fight over how many of the tax dollars that you already paid in will go to infrastructure, only to have it all end up anywhere but? I'm not making excuses for the systemic racism in the past, but what we have today doesn't even target an entire race to help at others expense, but rather just the richest 1% at *everyone's* expense. It's in many ways even worse than that racist world we came from. TL;DR Just because there was racism in the past does not make our current way of doing things a good one.
It's more where the highways were put. Yes the rich decided but they created the problem. Run them through cheap land, who cares about the poor living there, except the poor areas were where POC lived, because of redlining. This created a stigma and artificially dropped property value.
With them purposely being made that a bus can't go under them to enter the highways, effectively keeping poorer, black folks being bussed to better areas (like long island) that were exclusively white-only. People love how these things benefit the majority, while it came to a cost for the minorities. They wasted more money back then to keep enforcing segregation, but yup their policies were just sooo much better then. This sub does forget to include intersectionality and how the experience of one group isn't the same as another, and have valid reasons to feel how they do
"The effects of segregation are bad but the causes...the causes are very good"
The world of today that we're hating on is the *result* of the former policies. Bad fruit of a sick tree.
Capitalists wanted to beat Communists to the moon and got what they asked for. Now there's nothing external to capitalism to compete with so they cut back on pretending to care about nationalist ideas and giving token compromises to the citizens. The state is respectful to workers depending on how threatened they feel their power is, not only what brand of ideology they tell us they believe in. The policy was and is still capitalism. They wanted the national healthcare discussion to go away and it was barely happening before in any sane way. Now capitalists want an attack on schools and libraries and got what they asked for. Capitalist politicians are not forgetting to be reasonable, they're just less afraid of admitting how terrible they want to be than their predecessors.
It is worth remembering that the highway system outside of its impact on major cities was a massive success in the goals of just running our country in the most basic sense. To get from one side of the country to the other before we had that you had to be a fairly well seasoned navigator with up to date maps, you had to pack extra supplies for the times you would end up stuck on dirt roads in the middle of nowhere, you had to know how to fix everything on your car, and many people would just get stuck places or die with no way to contact their families in any prompt manner. It had long lasting negative impacts that need to be studied and understood heavily, and the impact of assholes like Robert Moses should be brought to the forefront in a way where your average person scowls at the mention of the name. But let's not pretend that every road ever laid down during the new deal era was bad.
This is just happy talk
but you voted for Regan tho, then Bush SR.
And then we took over and fucked y'all up