There has always been an underclass and always will be.
same thing with Musk. He moved to America with nothing but his backpack on his back and a couple million in African blood diamond money he got from his daddeh. Totally self made!
There has always been an underclass and always will be.
I was making fun of your crack baby analogy.
same thing with Gates his pops was a ing lawyer, it's funny how all these startups, seemed to start up in garages when nowadays having a garage you can work out of is a ing luxury itself
No doubt, but it doesn't really seem necessary for the underclass to live hand to mouth when Bezos is worth over $100 billion. Do you really think Bezos would have worked less hard using his rich parent's money to build Amazon if the resulting wealth was only $25 billion as oppose to $100 billion?
Don't really get the joke. My mom is a lawyer (now a judge) and gave me every opportunity in the world. I'm by no means saying I'm personally hard done by.
one of the dumbest arguments i hear is that the right thinks the rich will just stop working if they get taxed more, no they won't they're greedy and they'll keep working because the only think they would like more than 1 billion dollars is 1 billion and 1 dollar
So you want to confiscate his Amazon stock?
Nope just tax the out of it.
Frankly I would love it if Democrats had the balls to ins ute a one-time wealth tax of 90% of earnings over a certain amount since March 2020 and redistribute it as stimulus.
It's just not fair amirite?
How do you tax his stock?
No, I'm saying have a society where less of the surplus-value is going to the stockholder (thus his stock is inevitably worth less). Higher wages for workers, higher corporate taxes, etc. Definitely not saying confiscate stock.
I also think there needs to be better protections in place for compe ion. An example - there was a family-owned business called diapers.com that was widely used for diaper orders. Amazon started undercutting it on pricing by selling diapers at a rate that was unprofitable (but Amazon can afford to lose the money) until diapers.com went out of business. Then the price of diapers on Amazon went back up. I don't view the foregoing as some kind of risk-taking entrepreneurial spirit to be respected. IMO at that point you're just being a greedy pig. Temporarily selling diapers at a loss just so you can squash a small business that sells diapers like a bug ads no value to society.
if bezos gave every employee on his books 100k he'd be left with the same amount of money he started the year with.
You still aren't getting it. His net worth is mostly in his company stock he owns.You can't tax it if he doesn't sell it. Its not income.
Is that a serious question?
A good start might be a corporate tax code that doesn't allow Amazon to pay absolutely no taxes every year. Seems like a fair place to start.
^Making a joke sarcastically mocking my argument because he has no counter-argument.
Sure you can. I pay taxes on my house every year without selling it.
Amazon's corporate taxes have nothing to do with the stock Bezos owns. So yeah a serious question, how do you tax someone for owning stock?
It's not really a joke. Your argument is it's just not fair. True I have no counter argument to the world just isn't fair.
As of September, US billionaires' wealth had increased by over $800 billion since the start of COVID. Tax that at 90% and you can give over $7000 to the poorest 100 million adults in the country.
So you're saying a corporate tax system that requires Amazon to pay higher corporate taxes every year wouldn't shrink the value of Amazon stock? Do you not know how stock is valued?
The "how do you tax stock" is a total strawman argument (you could actually impose a wealth tax on stock but that's not my point). Bezos stock is worth what it's worth because of how much surplus-value goes to the stockholder vs. other stakeholders. If more surplus-value was going towards workers, the government (via taxes), vendors, etc. the stock would inherently be worth less.
That's not my argument. My argument is that yeah nothing is ever going to be perfectly fair but the degree to which it's currently unfair is unnecessary and is an overall detriment to society.
The "you just don't think it's fair" argument can be applied to literally any discussion where one side is advocating for changing something. It's lazy.
Their "HoW dO yUo TaX StOcK!?!?!" strawman was equally lazy.
Eyup. The Republican party has gone so far to the right, it cannot come back.
The fact that they ignored the study that they themselves commissioned about why they are slipping with just about all demographics says volumes.
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)