Go Back  CorvetteForum - Chevrolet Corvette Forum Discussion > Off Topic > Politics, Religion & Controversy
Reload this Page >

Elizabeth Warren’s proposed ‘ultra-millionaire tax’

Politics, Religion & Controversy Politics | Religion | Controversy (Non-Corvette)

Elizabeth Warren’s proposed ‘ultra-millionaire tax’

 
Old 01-28-2019, 10:43 AM
  #21  
pdiddy972
CF Senior Member
 
pdiddy972's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jan 2014
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 11,286
Received 367 Likes on 243 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by rudutch View Post
She needs to lead by example

Her average net worth of $8.75 million, including her home, secures her a spot the Top 1% bracket in terms of wealth.

I want to see a $4M check written to the IRS with her signature on it

put up or STFU
Why would she need to cut a check for half her net worth when the tax being proposed is 2% of net worth of people over $50,000,000?

Playing D's A here, but what argument supports the idea of taxing work or productive activity (income tax), that also doesn't support taxing assets and wealth? We all already pay an asset/wealth tax in the form of property taxes on property not sold, so in what essential way is this idea proposed by Warren different?

Last edited by pdiddy972; 01-28-2019 at 10:56 AM.
pdiddy972 is offline  
Old 01-28-2019, 11:06 AM
  #22  
z06inVB
CF Senior Member
 
z06inVB's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2006
Location: Va. Beach VA
Posts: 7,917
Likes: 0
Received 208 Likes on 138 Posts
Default

How can these communists even be millionaires and billionaires? Shouldn’t they lead by example and turn over all “ surplus” money, property and other holdings to the state for redistribution?
z06inVB is offline  
Old 01-28-2019, 11:11 AM
  #23  
69L46
CF Senior Member
Support Corvetteforum!
 
69L46's Avatar
 
Member Since: Mar 2000
Location: In the heart of Bulldog territory..
Posts: 28,202
Received 53 Likes on 33 Posts
2015 C3 of Year Finalist
St. Jude Donor '15-'16-'17-'18-‘19
Default

Originally Posted by Slo Yelo C5 View Post
Because the US, this giant island, is about to tip over and capsize.

We've become a nation full of unfit people thanks to crazy lib policies over the past 3 decades. We are sinking into the abyss. While China, Russia, India, etc have more and more geniuses, we're becoming a country full of morons. They used to be a small percent of our population. But thanks to insane policies encouraging the poor to have excessive numbers of offspring they can't and don't raise properly (how can people with no financial means or resources except the government raise 7, 8, 10+ offspring?), combined with receiving genes from the shallow end of the pool,we're becoming a nation where the takers are the norm and the makers are shrinking below the majority of the country.

An economic disaster in the making. Once this canoe tips, that's it. We're just about there. Give it 5 more years...

Unfortunately, all too accurate. How millennials react to the "give me stuff/tax the rich" message will be a strong indicator of future direction.

Speaking of morons, at least with the entire country tipping over it will make Hank Johnson happy. He can refocus his comments away from Guam.
69L46 is offline  
Old 01-28-2019, 12:20 PM
  #24  
68/70Vette
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Jul 2004
Location: Torrance California
Posts: 25,793
Received 12 Likes on 10 Posts
Default

Our US Neo-Comms are such wimps with their 70%, 90% plans to tax the wealthy. The old traditional Comms, just taxed the wealthy at 100% and then executed them!

It's estimated that Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Mihn, Pol Pot, executed about 110 million people in the process of confiscating their wealth,.
68/70Vette is online now  
Old 01-28-2019, 12:24 PM
  #25  
VITE1
CF Senior Member
Support Corvetteforum!
 
VITE1's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jul 2004
Location: Port St Lucie FL Life is hard, Then you die, FL USA
Posts: 65,894
Received 44 Likes on 22 Posts
Cruise-In X Veteran
St. Jude Donor '08-'09-'10
Default

Originally Posted by vette6799 View Post
I don't like higher taxes or a tax on net worth, but the US and many other countries have amassed massive loads of debt. At some point, this will have to be addressed. It is easy to say cut spending, but you have to be damned careful that you don't create a recession and end up shooting yourself in the foot with a reduce revenue stream.
We either accept the fact that we will have a long mild recession due to the decrease in government spending and the reduction of the debt or sooner rather than later we go bankrupt and our money is worthless.
VITE1 is offline  
Old 01-28-2019, 01:13 PM
  #26  
vette6799
CF Senior Member
 
vette6799's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 1999
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 28,218
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
St. Jude Donor '11-'12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17-'18-'19
Default

Originally Posted by pdiddy972 View Post


Why would she need to cut a check for half her net worth when the tax being proposed is 2% of net worth of people over $50,000,000?

Playing D's A here, but what argument supports the idea of taxing work or productive activity (income tax), that also doesn't support taxing assets and wealth? We all already pay an asset/wealth tax in the form of property taxes on property not sold, so in what essential way is this idea proposed by Warren different?
You are correct in that we tax wealth. The difference might be in the amount of the dollars involved. A 2 percent tax on 50 mill is a million a year. Rich guys like Gates/Bezos could pay a billion or more. That might be an incentive to change their home address.
vette6799 is offline  
Old 01-28-2019, 01:26 PM
  #27  
vette6799
CF Senior Member
 
vette6799's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 1999
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 28,218
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
St. Jude Donor '11-'12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17-'18-'19
Default

Originally Posted by VITE1 View Post
We either accept the fact that we will have a long mild recession due to the decrease in government spending and the reduction of the debt or sooner rather than later we go bankrupt and our money is worthless.
What I would do is cap spending at this year's level and allow revenue growth to catch up which could happen in a hurry with a small tax increase. Ultimately you are looking at a reduction in per capita federal spending which will present its own set of problems.
vette6799 is offline  
Old 01-28-2019, 01:47 PM
  #28  
larrysb
CF Senior Member
 
larrysb's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2002
Location: $ilicon Vall€y CA
Posts: 8,659
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

The standard Democrat lie is: "You will get things and someone else will pay for it."

Everything in their playbook is a variant of that lie. Everything. The embellishment is how much you "deserve" what you want and how much they can demonize whoever is supposedly paying for it.
larrysb is offline  
Old 01-28-2019, 01:49 PM
  #29  
TxLefty
CF Senior Member
 
TxLefty's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 2014
Location: Plano (Gun Nut Central) Texas
Posts: 5,323
Received 63 Likes on 54 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by pdiddy972 View Post


Why would she need to cut a check for half her net worth when the tax being proposed is 2% of net worth of people over $50,000,000?

Playing D's A here, but what argument supports the idea of taxing work or productive activity (income tax), that also doesn't support taxing assets and wealth? We all already pay an asset/wealth tax in the form of property taxes on property not sold, so in what essential way is this idea proposed by Warren different?
So a "super federal property tax". I guess the fact that, as I understand it, the Feds don't have the constitutional power to levy such a tax might be one problem. Once they start coming for your stuff, in addition to your income, you are in trouble. I can see all sorts of abuses for that. We already pay direct taxes to the state. As stated before, we have a spending problem, not a taxing problem.
TxLefty is offline  
Old 01-28-2019, 01:52 PM
  #30  
68/70Vette
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Jul 2004
Location: Torrance California
Posts: 25,793
Received 12 Likes on 10 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Krystal View Post
A "Confiscation Tax" is actually a pretty HONEST proposal from Elizabeth Warren.

FINALLY an ULTRA LEFT Candidate without any reservations about revealing her "COMMUNIST LEANINGS".

I'm pretty split on this one. I'm having a tough time reconciling how Elizabeth Warren gets to this proposal. Is it an actual serious proposal or is it just an attempt to cast herself as the furthest Left Leaning Candidate to the many Millennial and older voters that have completely failed to grasp how Capitalism moved so much of the Globe's wealth to this country since the end of WW2? I'm not sure.

Either way though....

The most discouraging thing about this proposal is found in what it says about anyone who'd actually support the idea. To honestly WANT THIS......requires an American to have no understanding of how this country came to dominate the world's economy and attract so much more of the wealth in the world than any other country by far.

Our version of Capitalism is less than perfect and admittedly it doesn't distribute wealth evenly.......but it has still worked out better than any other attempt, anywhere in the history of the world. Government policy doesn't improve living Standards. MONEY and OPORTUNITY does. This is where Capitalism and a fierce PROTECTION of Private property rights give this country it's edge. Confiscation of Wealth is a Fundamental and very serious attack on Private Property protections. Without the Protections in law to "own" the desire to achieve it is lost. Make no mistake there is a HUGE difference between taxing an income or a sale when it happens and just taking a percentage of wealth at a certain level each year.

The saddest part and most damning of our public education system, concerning this proposal from Elizabeth Warren, is found in how so many people would actually support this idea.

To get there you have to completely miss out on any understanding of American economic history and you have to fail completely to understand why Communist policy in so many countries in the 20th century flat out FAILED.

A line comes to mind that covers this one pretty completely,

"those who fail to know history are doomed to repeat it" ........... The USA could easily head into this direction. The idea that it would work out any differently for us than it did for Communist wealth confiscating countries in the 20th century though is pure fantasy and foolish. Takes real IGNORANCE on the part of Citizens to even ask for it. Yet many willl.
Well written
68/70Vette is online now  
Old 01-28-2019, 01:59 PM
  #31  
SlothX311
CF Senior Member
 
SlothX311's Avatar
 
Member Since: May 2014
Location: Ohio
Posts: 568
Received 71 Likes on 58 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by VITE1 View Post
We don't have a tax rate /revenue problem. We have a spending problem. When do we address that issue?
Top 3 wealthiest individuals in the country own more accumulated wealth than the bottom 50%. How much revenue is enough?
SlothX311 is offline  
Old 01-28-2019, 02:04 PM
  #32  
ZumZum
CF Senior Member
 
ZumZum's Avatar
 
Member Since: Nov 2004
Location: Central Il
Posts: 11,642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by SlothX311 View Post
Top 3 wealthiest individuals in the country own more accumulated wealth than the bottom 50%. How much revenue is enough?
However much revenue they're able to generate. Who are you or anybody else to decide when a person has enough?
Making rich people poorer will do nothing to make poor people wealthier.
ZumZum is online now  
Old 01-28-2019, 02:10 PM
  #33  
SlothX311
CF Senior Member
 
SlothX311's Avatar
 
Member Since: May 2014
Location: Ohio
Posts: 568
Received 71 Likes on 58 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ZumZum View Post
However much revenue they're able to generate. Who are you or anybody else to decide when a person has enough?
Making rich people poorer will do nothing to make poor people wealthier.
Wasn't the GOP up in arms when the government (Obama) was bailing out big banks and American car brands deemed "too big to fail" yet paying their CEOs bonuses? Why is it okay for Jeff Bezos to acquire an insane amount of wealth while paying his employees an immoral wage?
SlothX311 is offline  
Old 01-28-2019, 02:20 PM
  #34  
69L46
CF Senior Member
Support Corvetteforum!
 
69L46's Avatar
 
Member Since: Mar 2000
Location: In the heart of Bulldog territory..
Posts: 28,202
Received 53 Likes on 33 Posts
2015 C3 of Year Finalist
St. Jude Donor '15-'16-'17-'18-‘19
Default

Originally Posted by SlothX311 View Post
Top 3 wealthiest individuals in the country own more accumulated wealth than the bottom 50%. How much revenue is enough?

In our society, the government doesn't get to determine that, in theory anyway.

And Warren's proposal has no meaningful fiscal impact, and she knows it. It's a shiny object for the collectivist crowd to grasp at.



69L46 is offline  
Old 01-28-2019, 02:21 PM
  #35  
pdiddy972
CF Senior Member
 
pdiddy972's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jan 2014
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 11,286
Received 367 Likes on 243 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by vette6799 View Post
You are correct in that we tax wealth. The difference might be in the amount of the dollars involved. A 2 percent tax on 50 mill is a million a year. Rich guys like Gates/Bezos could pay a billion or more. That might be an incentive to change their home address.
Except it's a tax on wealth only ABOVE 50,000,000. So the person with 50 million would pay 0.
pdiddy972 is offline  
Old 01-28-2019, 02:24 PM
  #36  
69L46
CF Senior Member
Support Corvetteforum!
 
69L46's Avatar
 
Member Since: Mar 2000
Location: In the heart of Bulldog territory..
Posts: 28,202
Received 53 Likes on 33 Posts
2015 C3 of Year Finalist
St. Jude Donor '15-'16-'17-'18-‘19
Default

Originally Posted by pdiddy972 View Post


Except it's a tax on wealth only ABOVE 50,000,000. So the person with 50 million would pay 0.

And when implemented, and the promised revenue windfalls fail to appear, what happens to that $50M threshold?
69L46 is offline  
Old 01-28-2019, 02:26 PM
  #37  
1%r
CF Senior Member
Support Corvetteforum!
 
1%r's Avatar
 
Member Since: Mar 2003
Location: Americans First
Posts: 74,631
Received 76 Likes on 54 Posts
St. Jude Donor '03 through '17

Default

Originally Posted by 69L46 View Post
In our society, the government doesn't get to determine that, in theory anyway.

And Warren's proposal has no meaningful fiscal impact, and she knows it. It's a shiny object for the collectivist crowd to grasp at.
yep plus we don’t have a revenue problem, we have spending problems.
1%r is offline  
Old 01-28-2019, 02:27 PM
  #38  
69L46
CF Senior Member
Support Corvetteforum!
 
69L46's Avatar
 
Member Since: Mar 2000
Location: In the heart of Bulldog territory..
Posts: 28,202
Received 53 Likes on 33 Posts
2015 C3 of Year Finalist
St. Jude Donor '15-'16-'17-'18-‘19
Default

Originally Posted by 1%r View Post


yep plus we don’t have a revenue problem, we have spending problems.
That's for damn sure.
69L46 is offline  
Old 01-28-2019, 02:32 PM
  #39  
ZumZum
CF Senior Member
 
ZumZum's Avatar
 
Member Since: Nov 2004
Location: Central Il
Posts: 11,642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by SlothX311 View Post
Wasn't the GOP up in arms when the government (Obama) was bailing out big banks and American car brands deemed "too big to fail" yet paying their CEOs bonuses?
I dunno, were they?

Why is it okay for Jeff Bezos to acquire an insane amount of wealth while paying his employees an immoral wage?
Immoral wage? Who are you to preach moral or immoral? Who's forcing these employees to work there?


ZumZum is online now  
Old 01-28-2019, 03:15 PM
  #40  
Gordon Shumway
CF Senior Member
 
Gordon Shumway's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 2008
Location: Ocala FL
Posts: 22,047
Received 9 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by pdiddy972 View Post


Why would she need to cut a check for half her net worth when the tax being proposed is 2% of net worth of people over $50,000,000?

Playing D's A here, but what argument supports the idea of taxing work or productive activity (income tax), that also doesn't support taxing assets and wealth? We all already pay an asset/wealth tax in the form of property taxes on property not sold, so in what essential way is this idea proposed by Warren different?
Property taxes are state/local taxes, not federal taxes.
Gordon Shumway is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Elizabeth Warren’s proposed ‘ultra-millionaire tax’


Contact Us - About Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: