For the record, I'm an unrealized-capital-gains-cel. I am unironically seething that "not selling all your shit" is considered some nefarious tax avoidance scheme.
It's such an insanely braindead take. It's useful in the sense that you know immediately whether someone is a full on r-slur or not, if this is something they are in favor of.
I always thought that when r-slurs on twitter talked about billionaire tax avoidance that there was some special loophole they were using that I never cared enough to research, but is it seriously them just complaining about the rich just letting their stock value grow rather than selling it?
The bigger issue is the tax system is letting the uber-rich exploit it to pay almost no relevant percentage of their income while working-class people pay a decent share of their income.
Something has to give. For too long these people have been shilling wars, government spending, financing anti-social safety net ghouls and de-regulation while paying not even close to a fair share.
Pizza somewhat has a point in that the uber rich are paying 25% which admittedly is more than I pay (which is none), but significantly less than the top brackets.
Capital gains = money you make on stonks and stuff.
Stocks are actually giving moneys to companys' balance sheets (equity - liabilities = assets). Companies can spend that money to grow their business, which makes them money, which makes shareholders money. If you own stocks, you are an owner. But as long as the you own stock and haven't "cashed out" yet, the company has cash, not you.
Realizing = selling and profiting gainz.
Before your capital gains realization, investments ain't money in your pockets, so how or why would you pay taxes on money you didn't make?
Bald Billionaire Daddy didn't sell anything. Hewillpay taxes in them...when he sells. Leave it to journalists to not understand this.
Yeah. A "wealth tax". All your network is your wealth and you have to give money to the government based on your network. If you have no liquid money to pay government then too bad, you have to sell them stonks (unless it's GME in which case it's ILLEGAL to sell) to get the money to pay the tax.
It's probably one of the more r-slurred ideas gaining traction in Western countries desperate to not end up like Greece. It's made into a wealth tax, where you are forced to pay a % of your net worth as taxes every year. Kind of based because a rich person who is forced to liquidate an asset to pay the tax then has to pay tax on their gains from selling it. Depending on the % it would also force shareholdercels to start selling off their company if it grows too much. In all likelihood though, it would just breed a whole generation of tax lawyers trying to work around it.
Isn't that also why the whole "net worth calculations" of 1%ers that chapoos jack off to is so meaningless? Because almost non (relatively) of their money is actually available to them to spend short-term? Not that they're not filthy rich, but NYC isn't littered with Scrooch McDuck style money vaults.
Also, none of this shit (including chapos) would exist in a lre-industrial society. Just saying.
No, I actually just know the system is dumb and allowing the wealthy to pay taxes when they want or not at all over long-periods of time is stupid.
There are solutions. It's complex, but it can be solved. And frankly I don't give a shit about the plight of the billionaire class or how draconian it seems.
These people have been waging class warfare for all of human history and anytime anyone tries to fight back we have to hear about how unfair it is.
Did you even read the article you linked? It just says to get rid of the step up in basis at death and to force the realization of gains at that time. This is a totally realistic proposal, but it still allows billionaires to defer taxation the current way.
People do pay them, just not many people inherit over $11 million. Your proposal just changes the name to inheritance and gift tax. The current estate tax forces the estate to pay tax on the assets transferred, which basically includes unrealized gains. It's why there is the step up in basis. Your are so financially illiterate.
The estate tax raised $8.5 billion in 2012 — less than 1% of the $1.2 trillion inherited that year.
The Walton family — which owns half of Walmart — has exploited a loophole in the estate tax to avoid paying $3 billion in estate taxes. This could increase by tens of billions in the future.
We're talking about likely hundreds of billions of dollars over the next 10 or so years if loop-holes are closed and the current plan goes through.
If they could just close all loopholes, they'd have done it. The problem is that there are usually good reasons for the financial vehicles that enable them.
This is such conspiracy kool-aid debunked by your own link. The loophole that the Waltons are using is a result of trying to close another loophole. If the rich controlled the government, then congress wouldn't be trying to close loopholes in the first place. And the point is that the government-blessed GRAT which was to replace the GRIT was easily abused as well.
Congress created the GRAT while trying to stop another tax-avoidance scheme that Covey developed. In 1984, Covey, a lawyer at Carter Ledyard & Milburn LLP in New York, publicized an estate-tax shelter he’d invented called a grantor retained income trust, or GRIT.
Covey figured out how to make a large gift appear to be small. He would have a father, for example, put investments into a trust for his children, with instructions that the trust should pay any income back to the father. The value of that potential income would be subtracted from the father’s gift-tax bill.
...
Covey studied the law and found an even bigger loophole. “The change that was made to stop what they thought was the abuse, made the matter worse,” he says.
I honestly can't tell if you're trolling or what. One of the strategies Biden is looking to close is:
Biden’s loophole-plugging playbook is evident in his proposed changes in how rich people’s capital gains on assets are taxed. The administration wants to raise the tax on capital gains to 39.6% after the first $1 million, making it the same as the rate on ordinary income. When combined with the existing 3.8% Medicare surtax on investment income, the total levy would rise to 43.4%, the highest since the 1920s outside of a blip in 1978. The problem he faces is that capital gains are notoriously hard to tax. They aren’t taxed until the asset is sold, unlike wages, which are taxed when earned. If you don’t sell before you die, you don’t owe any capital-gains taxes, and your heirs will be taxed only on gains that occur from the time they inherit.
1
So Biden wants to blow apart that time-honored asset-protection strategy by declaring that from now on, wealthy people won’t be able to erase capital gains by dying—what’s sometimes called the Angel of Death loophole. Under his plan, their heirs would owe tax on an asset’s gains from original acquisition to time of sale. Knowing that a tax is inescapable would cause people to stop postponing realization of capital gains, says John Ricco, associate director of policy analysis at the Penn Wharton Budget Model. That one change would turn Biden’s proposed capital-gains tax increase from a $33 billion revenue loser into a $113 billion revenue gainer, according to Ricco’s calculations. Including the estate tax, the Tax Foundation calculates, the federal government could eventually capture 61% of a $100 million capital gain.
It’s known as the stepped-up basis rule, or, as President Joe Biden called it this month, the “trust fund loophole,” and Biden’s American Families Plan aims to put an end to it for many people who inherit big estates.
The Sanders plan would also impose additional requirements on Grantor Retained Annuity Trusts (“GRATs”). A GRAT allows a grantor to shift outsized appreciation in the value of the funding assets to family members, often while making gifts with little to no value for gift tax purposes. The annuity paid by the GRAT would be required to be paid for a minimum of ten years and the remainder interest would be required to have a value equal to the greater of 25% of the contributed property or $500,000. This requirement would eliminate use of the “zeroed-out” GRAT.
The draconian regulations will come at some point.
How? Three comments ago you said the rich control the government and stop the closing of loopholes. Quit contradicting yourself. I like how you used the "just so you're aware" even though you are back to your usual strategy of just googling and spamming links you haven't read.
I love how you people are just incapable of nuanced thought, understanding changing dynamics or any of that.
The rich have controlled the government for a long time, but taxing the rich has grown increasingly popular now that the conservative base is also openly hostile towards them.
Meaning tax changes will be coming.
I didn't go back on anything, you seemingly didn't know how trust funds tied into all of this and thought they were completely different things.
You're not only financially illiterate, you have incredibly poor reading comprehension.
This is about as funny as when you tried to argue oversight of homeschooling was actually an attempt to dismantle homeschooling and kept fabricating hypotheticals and what-ifs to justify such an absurd stance.
The step up in basis and GRAT are two different things. Even though Biden calls it the "trust fund loophole," he's simply going after the step up in basis, which doesn't necessarily involve trust funds. This is hilarious. You really have no idea what you are talking about.
They are again, going after everything. Either way your belligerent ignorance was only tolerated here because I forgot you were the homeschool wacko.
I forgot to tag you as "mentally ill." Only reason this argument even started. That whole "the rich controlling the government is just a conspiracy" line got you upgraded to "absolutely insane."
Your national review link has four separate proposals, and you think this is going to combine into some unified policy. So ignorant.
And the rich controlling the government thing is hilarious, because your link shows the government has passed legislation to close loopholes. No one is denying that lobbying exists, but complete control is "mentally ill" "absolutely insane" tinfoil shit.
Yeah, honestly it is ignorant to think policies get merged in the negotiation process to secure votes of senators within a razor-thin majority, especially when said senator is also working on estate reform and is the chair of the senate budget committee.
And the rich controlling the government thing is hilarious, because your link shows the government has passed legislation to close loopholes. No one is denying that lobbying exists, but complete control is tinfoil shit.
This is genuinely such an absurd argument that it borders on "the sky is green."
They have complete control, or have had complete control of the federal government and state governments for much of modern history.
At one point in the 1980s the head of the EP was handing out exemptions so companies could keep producing leaded gasoline and had staffed her entire office with chemical execs.
You saw the same thing happen when Trump came into office - literally coal barons and people with active lawsuits against the EPA handed control. The democratic side hasn't been as bad, but literally whenever Republicans have control of the government the most unscrupulous and anti-public good people in the entire country are handed control.
This has been especially pronounced in the financial areas.
The IRS not even having enough funding to go after the wealthy is a prime example of this. This has gone well beyond simple lobbying.
This isn't a conspiracy, it's just reality at this point because by default the wealthy are the people being elected to office and they are going to look out for their own needs before the needs of any other class.
The whole Grover Norquist tax pledge bullshit might be another example of the wealthy capturing the government to a serious extent given such a large percentage of republicans signed it.
Yes, it is ignorant to think that it will get merged, and to act like the current administration is backing the Sanders proposal. You keep saying "they are going after everything," as though Sanders, Warren and the Biden admin are some unified front.
So the rich have complete control of government, except when they don't, but definitely when the Republicans are in power, which explains how the government tried to close a tax loophole in 1990 when there was a Republican president. Keep eating that lead paint.
If you genuinely think Sanders isn't going to get anything he wants given his position and the fact he's working on the bill with these people specifically, you are deluded.
So the rich have complete control of government, except when they don't, but definitely when the Republicans are in power, which explains how the government tried to close a tax loophole in 1990 when there was a Republican president. Keep eating that lead paint.
You are genuinely an insane person.
A) Dynamics shift. The rich have always controlled the government to an extent, even when democrats are in power, republicans just go mask off.
B) Bush fucking snuck into office promising not to touch taxes and had been involved in government during some of the deepest, most destructive tax cuts in history:
Blah blah about "no new taxes." So now the rich didn't control the government when there was a Republican president, and the government did try to close tax loopholes. Why didn't they just close all the loopholes? That's what you're saying they are going to do this time.
There are like 7 senate democrats including Sanders working on this.
The rich still controlled the government when that bill was passed.
The only difference is Bush got desperate and signed an agreement with democrats, which tbh, was still a net-gain for the rich due to the capital gains cap.
Though I am willing to admit this is way more complex than is possible to discuss in a coherent reddit convo and there's room for partisan football games.
For example - the rich still control the government, but one side resists the other side closing a loophole for reasons related to the daily political struggle.
I'm willing to admit the water has become incredibly muddy in the last 30 or so years due to the extreme rate of polarization.
But I think more so the Rich haven't adapted yet to the rapid shifts and they'll be back in some form of control soonish.
Likely via some kind of Trump model where they larp as populists while putting in place rich friendly policy. Which was the model historically to some extent.
And is anyone from the White House working with him? FYI Senator Whitehouse isn't from the White House, you might get confused by that.
So the rich completely controlled the government, but it wasn't under their complete control. Got it. But this time it's different. 👌 Your contradictions are hilarious.
I'm not being inconsistent. This is just fairly abstract and hard to explain in detail, so I leave things out under the assumption people are on the same page as I am.
It's a major flaw I have and something I've worked on changing for years with no success.
In my mind I understand how this works - I understand policy in general favors the wealthy and is steered towards that direction, but the wording I use is poor.
What would you propose we do? We already raised it from 15 to 20 percent (raising it 33 percent). Obviously it shouldn't be taxed as income, so tell me what the solution is?
Brainlet take. The collective wealth of billionaires only make up 2-3% of all the wealth in America. You only get to redistribute 2%, assuming all the money doesn’t go oversee beforehand, and completely destroy incentives to be innovative and acquire wealth in the USA
Everyone starts off as doing it for the money and then do it for the status after they get their wealth. Taxing billionaires into oblivion will barely increase government revenue and push established companies and startups oversees.
I am all for fixing those tax loopholes but don’t think that hundreds of billions over a period of time is anything more than a drop in the bucket when compared to the amount the governor spends. The majority of the nations wealth are in the hands of people in the 1-10M net worth range which are mostly retired professionals and small businesses owners that don’t need to exploit the current tax system
Yes which is why I am in favor of Biden’s infrastructure plan which is paid for by increased taxes. But those commies who think it will pay for free healthcare, college, and state mandated GFs are delusional
87 comments
79 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
For the record, I'm an unrealized-capital-gains-cel. I am unironically seething that "not selling all your shit" is considered some nefarious tax avoidance scheme.
42 AllAmericanHomo69 2021-06-09
This article was written by a financially illiterate r-slur
11 nybbas 2021-06-09
It's such an insanely braindead take. It's useful in the sense that you know immediately whether someone is a full on r-slur or not, if this is something they are in favor of.
8 Someone6271 2021-06-09
I always thought that when r-slurs on twitter talked about billionaire tax avoidance that there was some special loophole they were using that I never cared enough to research, but is it seriously them just complaining about the rich just letting their stock value grow rather than selling it?
1 [deleted] 2021-06-09
[deleted]
1 Intensive__Purposes 2021-06-09
What happens if stocks go down, and there are unrealized losses? Does the government cut them billion dollar checks?
-21 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
The bigger issue is the tax system is letting the uber-rich exploit it to pay almost no relevant percentage of their income while working-class people pay a decent share of their income.
Something has to give. For too long these people have been shilling wars, government spending, financing anti-social safety net ghouls and de-regulation while paying not even close to a fair share.
69 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
Pizza thinks unrealized capital gains are income.
11 quitsocmedia 2021-06-09
Pizza somewhat has a point in that the uber rich are paying 25% which admittedly is more than I pay (which is none), but significantly less than the top brackets.
28 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
When someone says "pay almost no relevant percentage," they aren't complaining that the capital gains tax rate is too low.
33 JanetYellensFuckboy 2021-06-09
I'll try to explain this as a financel:
Capital gains = money you make on stonks and stuff.
Stocks are actually giving moneys to companys' balance sheets (equity - liabilities = assets). Companies can spend that money to grow their business, which makes them money, which makes shareholders money. If you own stocks, you are an owner. But as long as the you own stock and haven't "cashed out" yet, the company has cash, not you.
Realizing = selling and profiting gainz.
Before your capital gains realization, investments ain't money in your pockets, so how or why would you pay taxes on money you didn't make?
Bald Billionaire Daddy didn't sell anything. He will pay taxes in them...when he sells. Leave it to journalists to not understand this.
7 Giulio-Cesare 2021-06-09
Wait what the fuck are there actually people saying we should pay taxes on stocks we haven't sold?
4 lickedTators 2021-06-09
Yeah. A "wealth tax". All your network is your wealth and you have to give money to the government based on your network. If you have no liquid money to pay government then too bad, you have to sell them stonks (unless it's GME in which case it's ILLEGAL to sell) to get the money to pay the tax.
3 Giulio-Cesare 2021-06-09
God I hate these people.
2 [deleted] 2021-06-09
[deleted]
31 JanetYellensFuckboy 2021-06-09
They said that to get Bernie Bros' votes, because Bernie Bros are the journalists of voters.
14 BroboxylicAcid 2021-06-09
What a simple and elegant truth.
15 AugustinesBitchBoy 2021-06-09
It's probably one of the more r-slurred ideas gaining traction in Western countries desperate to not end up like Greece. It's made into a wealth tax, where you are forced to pay a % of your net worth as taxes every year. Kind of based because a rich person who is forced to liquidate an asset to pay the tax then has to pay tax on their gains from selling it. Depending on the % it would also force shareholdercels to start selling off their company if it grows too much. In all likelihood though, it would just breed a whole generation of tax lawyers trying to work around it.
1 UncleTedsBackup 2021-06-09
Isn't that also why the whole "net worth calculations" of 1%ers that chapoos jack off to is so meaningless? Because almost non (relatively) of their money is actually available to them to spend short-term? Not that they're not filthy rich, but NYC isn't littered with Scrooch McDuck style money vaults.
Also, none of this shit (including chapos) would exist in a lre-industrial society. Just saying.
13 quitsocmedia 2021-06-09
Oh yeah pizza is just r-slurred.
1 [deleted] 2021-06-09
[deleted]
1 UncleTedsBackup 2021-06-09
Look man, I didnt buy a house yesterday. I should clearly pay taxes on my unrealised illiquid asset gains. What's so weird about that?
-1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
No, I actually just know the system is dumb and allowing the wealthy to pay taxes when they want or not at all over long-periods of time is stupid.
There are solutions. It's complex, but it can be solved. And frankly I don't give a shit about the plight of the billionaire class or how draconian it seems.
These people have been waging class warfare for all of human history and anytime anyone tries to fight back we have to hear about how unfair it is.
For example:
7 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
Did you even read the article you linked? It just says to get rid of the step up in basis at death and to force the realization of gains at that time. This is a totally realistic proposal, but it still allows billionaires to defer taxation the current way.
0 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
Thus taxxing unrealized gains.... at death.
4 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
We already have something like that called the estate tax. Maybe learn a little sweaty.
-1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
The estate tax is worthless.
4 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
Your proposal calls for estate taxes...
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
Are you illiterate by chance? The current iteration of estate taxes are worthless, people do not pay them.
Throwing draconian death taxes on unrealized gains along with closing of loopholes would be a real estate tax.
3 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
People do pay them, just not many people inherit over $11 million. Your proposal just changes the name to inheritance and gift tax. The current estate tax forces the estate to pay tax on the assets transferred, which basically includes unrealized gains. It's why there is the step up in basis. Your are so financially illiterate.
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
The super rich pay almost no estate tax, you are financially illiterate.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-the-ultra-rich-can-transfer-wealth-to-loved-ones-without-getting-hosed-by-gift-and-estate-taxes-2018-10-08
2 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
Your proposal has the same weaknesses idiot.
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
No, it doesn't, because it also involves closing all available estate tax loopholes and taxing the value of all assets.
https://americansfortaxfairness.org/tax-fairness-briefing-booklet/fact-sheet-the-estate-inheritance-tax/
The average rate paid is low currently:
We're talking about likely hundreds of billions of dollars over the next 10 or so years if loop-holes are closed and the current plan goes through.
3 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
OF COURSE, JUST CLOSE THE LOOPHOLES.
If they could just close all loopholes, they'd have done it. The problem is that there are usually good reasons for the financial vehicles that enable them.
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
Why do you think they would have done it dude? The rich own the government and have lobbied to keep said loopholes in place.
We live in a country that for years thought cutting taxes on the rich somehow increased economic growth and made poor people better off.
At one point congress threatened to make the real estate tax rate 0%.
Why? Because 0% would be more than they currently pay.
3 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
This is such conspiracy kool-aid debunked by your own link. The loophole that the Waltons are using is a result of trying to close another loophole. If the rich controlled the government, then congress wouldn't be trying to close loopholes in the first place. And the point is that the government-blessed GRAT which was to replace the GRIT was easily abused as well.
So much for closing loopholes.
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
I honestly can't tell if you're trolling or what. One of the strategies Biden is looking to close is:
1
It goes even further, but this is the start.
2 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
That's simply getting rid of the step up in basis, moron. That is a totally sensible strategy. Again, it doesn't stop what you are bitching about.
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
To an extent, it does. It reduces the cycle of generational wealth.
Either way, this is the start. The draconian regulations will come at some point.
Just so you're aware, this is also called the trust-fund loophole:
The plan specifically goes after all of this:
1 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
How? Three comments ago you said the rich control the government and stop the closing of loopholes. Quit contradicting yourself. I like how you used the "just so you're aware" even though you are back to your usual strategy of just googling and spamming links you haven't read.
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
I love how you people are just incapable of nuanced thought, understanding changing dynamics or any of that.
The rich have controlled the government for a long time, but taxing the rich has grown increasingly popular now that the conservative base is also openly hostile towards them.
Meaning tax changes will be coming.
I didn't go back on anything, you seemingly didn't know how trust funds tied into all of this and thought they were completely different things.
You're not only financially illiterate, you have incredibly poor reading comprehension.
This is about as funny as when you tried to argue oversight of homeschooling was actually an attempt to dismantle homeschooling and kept fabricating hypotheticals and what-ifs to justify such an absurd stance.
1 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
The step up in basis and GRAT are two different things. Even though Biden calls it the "trust fund loophole," he's simply going after the step up in basis, which doesn't necessarily involve trust funds. This is hilarious. You really have no idea what you are talking about.
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
They're going after everything.
You are profoundly illiterate.
1 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
This idiot thinks Sanders' proposal is part of Biden's plan. It isn't dummy.
1 [deleted] 2021-06-09
[deleted]
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
Biden and Bernie are both working on the reforms along with many other democrats.
Bernie's plan is also in congress and elements from both will likely be in the final law.
You're not smart.
1 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
That's not how legislation works dummy.
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
Ok this is clearly a topic you know nothing about.
1 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
Please tell me more about how step up in basis is a trust fund thing because Biden calls it the trust fund loophole.
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
They are again, going after everything. Either way your belligerent ignorance was only tolerated here because I forgot you were the homeschool wacko.
I forgot to tag you as "mentally ill." Only reason this argument even started. That whole "the rich controlling the government is just a conspiracy" line got you upgraded to "absolutely insane."
1 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
Your national review link has four separate proposals, and you think this is going to combine into some unified policy. So ignorant.
And the rich controlling the government thing is hilarious, because your link shows the government has passed legislation to close loopholes. No one is denying that lobbying exists, but complete control is "mentally ill" "absolutely insane" tinfoil shit.
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
Yeah, honestly it is ignorant to think policies get merged in the negotiation process to secure votes of senators within a razor-thin majority, especially when said senator is also working on estate reform and is the chair of the senate budget committee.
This is genuinely such an absurd argument that it borders on "the sky is green."
They have complete control, or have had complete control of the federal government and state governments for much of modern history.
At one point in the 1980s the head of the EP was handing out exemptions so companies could keep producing leaded gasoline and had staffed her entire office with chemical execs.
You saw the same thing happen when Trump came into office - literally coal barons and people with active lawsuits against the EPA handed control. The democratic side hasn't been as bad, but literally whenever Republicans have control of the government the most unscrupulous and anti-public good people in the entire country are handed control.
This has been especially pronounced in the financial areas.
The IRS not even having enough funding to go after the wealthy is a prime example of this. This has gone well beyond simple lobbying.
This isn't a conspiracy, it's just reality at this point because by default the wealthy are the people being elected to office and they are going to look out for their own needs before the needs of any other class.
The whole Grover Norquist tax pledge bullshit might be another example of the wealthy capturing the government to a serious extent given such a large percentage of republicans signed it.
1 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
Yes, it is ignorant to think that it will get merged, and to act like the current administration is backing the Sanders proposal. You keep saying "they are going after everything," as though Sanders, Warren and the Biden admin are some unified front.
So the rich have complete control of government, except when they don't, but definitely when the Republicans are in power, which explains how the government tried to close a tax loophole in 1990 when there was a Republican president. Keep eating that lead paint.
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
If you genuinely think Sanders isn't going to get anything he wants given his position and the fact he's working on the bill with these people specifically, you are deluded.
You are genuinely an insane person.
A) Dynamics shift. The rich have always controlled the government to an extent, even when democrats are in power, republicans just go mask off.
B) Bush fucking snuck into office promising not to touch taxes and had been involved in government during some of the deepest, most destructive tax cuts in history:
The bush tax cut also capped capital gains taxes at 28%, meaning the "tax increase" was likely a long-term gain for the wealthy.
Hint: Democrats also controlled congress when Bush agreed to this.
Funny enough, Bush making that deal with democrats led to the Republican rabid anti-tax revolution:
1 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
Who are "these people specifically?" Be specific.
Blah blah about "no new taxes." So now the rich didn't control the government when there was a Republican president, and the government did try to close tax loopholes. Why didn't they just close all the loopholes? That's what you're saying they are going to do this time.
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
There are like 7 senate democrats including Sanders working on this.
The rich still controlled the government when that bill was passed.
The only difference is Bush got desperate and signed an agreement with democrats, which tbh, was still a net-gain for the rich due to the capital gains cap.
Though I am willing to admit this is way more complex than is possible to discuss in a coherent reddit convo and there's room for partisan football games.
For example - the rich still control the government, but one side resists the other side closing a loophole for reasons related to the daily political struggle.
I'm willing to admit the water has become incredibly muddy in the last 30 or so years due to the extreme rate of polarization.
But I think more so the Rich haven't adapted yet to the rapid shifts and they'll be back in some form of control soonish.
Likely via some kind of Trump model where they larp as populists while putting in place rich friendly policy. Which was the model historically to some extent.
1 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
And is anyone from the White House working with him? FYI Senator Whitehouse isn't from the White House, you might get confused by that.
So the rich completely controlled the government, but it wasn't under their complete control. Got it. But this time it's different. 👌 Your contradictions are hilarious.
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
You have to just be intentionally illiterate.
1 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
You just don't like being called out on your inconsistency.
2 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
I'm not being inconsistent. This is just fairly abstract and hard to explain in detail, so I leave things out under the assumption people are on the same page as I am.
It's a major flaw I have and something I've worked on changing for years with no success.
In my mind I understand how this works - I understand policy in general favors the wealthy and is steered towards that direction, but the wording I use is poor.
Superlatives are my bane.
1 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
> claims the rich have complete control of government
> admits their control isn't complete
> this isn't being inconsistent
>"Superlatives are my bane."
😂🤣 Keep schizoposting.
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
You genuinely just can't read my man.
1 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
My summary is accurate, Mr. Superlatives.
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
Get the fuck out of here.
1 RickshawRandy 2021-06-09
No u.
14 Fletch71011 2021-06-09
What would you propose we do? We already raised it from 15 to 20 percent (raising it 33 percent). Obviously it shouldn't be taxed as income, so tell me what the solution is?
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
Abolish the billionaire class.
2 I_Shah 2021-06-09
Brainlet take. The collective wealth of billionaires only make up 2-3% of all the wealth in America. You only get to redistribute 2%, assuming all the money doesn’t go oversee beforehand, and completely destroy incentives to be innovative and acquire wealth in the USA
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
Gotta love when someone throws out "brainlet take" and thinks people that become billionaires do it for the money and not the status.
Do you think Bill gates needs another 10 billion dollars? Of course not.
He doesn't do what he does for more money.
This "innovation and motivation to acquire wealth" shit is likely the most fallacious and indefensible argument you clowns make.
1 I_Shah 2021-06-09
Everyone starts off as doing it for the money and then do it for the status after they get their wealth. Taxing billionaires into oblivion will barely increase government revenue and push established companies and startups oversees.
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
Fixing the tax exploits these people use is hundreds of billions of dollars over a period of time.
We aren't only talking about mega billionaires here.
1 I_Shah 2021-06-09
I am all for fixing those tax loopholes but don’t think that hundreds of billions over a period of time is anything more than a drop in the bucket when compared to the amount the governor spends. The majority of the nations wealth are in the hands of people in the 1-10M net worth range which are mostly retired professionals and small businesses owners that don’t need to exploit the current tax system
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
The amount of money they avoid in taxes is enough to repair every bridge/road in america over the next 10 years.
1 I_Shah 2021-06-09
Yes which is why I am in favor of Biden’s infrastructure plan which is paid for by increased taxes. But those commies who think it will pay for free healthcare, college, and state mandated GFs are delusional
1 UncleTedsBackup 2021-06-09
"Dude just abolish billionaires lmao"
"What do you mean"
"Dude. Abolish. Billionaires"
"Wtf is that supposed to look like"
"Abolish.billionaire."
"OK whatever pizza"
1 Exotic_Ad7433 2021-06-09
https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/dont-try-mark-market-capital-gains-tax-unrealized-gains-death-instead
Taxing unrealized gains on death.
39 PacificSpices 2021-06-09
BIG uh-oh.
11 JanetYellensFuckboy 2021-06-09
Just saw an ex-Deadspin writer tweet "They caught Moby Dick"...
34 offshoreredditaccnt 2021-06-09
RIP loveforbillionaires
27 JanetYellensFuckboy 2021-06-09
Seriously unjustly banned
11 SnapshillBot 2021-06-09
They targeted gamers. Gamers.
Snapshots:
I am just a simple bot, *not** a moderator of this subreddit* | bot subreddit | contact the maintainers
22 JanetYellensFuckboy 2021-06-09
Tax unrealized games
6 BroboxylicAcid 2021-06-09
Oh god yes.
1 UncleTedsBackup 2021-06-09
150% tax rate for bideo games when?
7 Pepperglue 2021-06-09
I thought we all know this already?
Unless we are going re-write the federal tax code, there is really nothing we can do about it. Good luck having our politicians doing that, though.
5 Desert_Knight 2021-06-09
Hey Siri, show me Michael Bloomberg's early life...Hmmm makes sense
1 seenten 2021-06-09
Is this a record?