A European here. Aside from going in the right direction, I have a question: Don’t the rich already pay most of their earnings as taxes? So the problem is not that they are not getting taxed, but rather that they avoid paying them through loopholes? Or is that a billionaire problem?
Yeah. The problem is that the richest people have many loopholes to avoid paying taxes. Getting a minimal salary and then just taking loans against their assets is one of them.
And to add to it. If you were making 10 million dollar and someone approached and said that they could make it so that you keep 1 million in taxes if you pay them 100 thousand you would most likely be one of the ones doing it.
If you make enough money you can afford hiring people to find new ways to keep your expenses down. Tax is an expense as any other to many rich people.
“After all, you made your fortune without getting any help so why should your earnings go to p1eople who use the system”
What do you propose the government should limit/stop spending on to reach over 0.5% of the real yearly earnings of Gates, Musk, Bezos, the Waltons and all their billionaire friends?
(Note that I’m not even asking about if the actual real yearly earnings of millionaires.)
What I know or don’t know is irrelevant . You came with unsubstantiated claims and I asked you to own up to your claims.
So let’s try it once more: what exactly do you suggest the government stop spending money on each year to reach savings equivalent of 0.5% of the real yearly earnings of Gates, Musk, Bezos, Waltons and their friends?
If you want to change this person’s mind, perhaps you would have better luck providing actual evidence or examples of government waste, rather than insulting them.
While true …. We have different income tax brackets where those with a higher income pay a higher percentage, for federal tax. However Massachusetts had a flat tax rate on income: we all pay the same percentage. Now that state tax will be more progressive, at least to the extent that rich people have “income”
Thanks for your answer to my question! Simple and to the point, without getting into politics, like a few others have. I had a more general knowledge from a few years ago, so a specific for this case helped.
Again, thank you and the others who took their time to answer me.
Part of it is loopholes, but an equally big part is that we tax the way the rich earn their money differently. Most working- and middle-class earners make their money from a wage or salary, which is taxed as income. However, the rich make almost all of their money through dividends on stocks, low- or no-interest loans backed by assets, and selling stocks through the market or companies (that they have a seat on the board) doing stock buybacks. All of the income made from the above are taxed differently as “capital gains tax,” which is usually taxed at a much lower rate than income.
Thanks for your answer to my question! More specific answers like this one really help reinforce what the other told me. I also appreciate you not going into politics, like a few others have.
Capital gains tax isn’t ‘much’ lower, it’s like 5% lower, depending on the bracket.
Loans make it possible to avoid taxes–temporarily. You eventually have to pay off the loan, at which point you’ll pay taxes. Of course, if you’re making more from your investments than you’re paying in interest (and with plenty of collateral, you can get lower-interest loans), it makes sense to just pay the interest and never the principal of the loan. Of course, if loan interest rates shoot up (which they now have), this can suddenly stop working.
And right now, there is a loophole related to carrying loans–but it requires you to die. When you die, your heir is allowed to sell assets to pay off your loans without paying capital gains tax (or not as much? I don’t quite remember).
Even ignoring every singly loophole, we tax the ways the rich collect and store their wealth at a much lower percent than actual income. Meaning even if the rich didn’t dodge taxes, they end up paying much less % wise.
Adding in loopholes they pay nothing or next to nothing.
Don’t let anyone tell you high income earners don’t pay tax. I’m a CPA (tax) and most of my individual clients are high and ultra high net worth.
One of my biggest clients is a group of four hedge fund managers in NYC for example. They earned about $50 million each in the last few years. Idk what their net worths are but I’d imagine it’s at least a few hundred million each. They pay at least 37% federal, plus investment income tax (Obamacare), plus 10% to the state of NY plus NYC. It’s a lot and winds up being over $25 million a year. I don’t shed any tears for them because they are left with $25 million to play with (each, per year), which they should be able to scrape by on.
You can certainly argue it should be higher or lower or whatever but there’s this idea out there that wealthy people don’t pay tax and it’s just absurd. Also frankly it makes my job harder because people think I’m a magic anti tax wizard that just makes it go away, I’m just sitting here like you made a fuckton of money and owe a fuckton of tax, what’s the question? ¯*(ツ)*/¯
Do you ever get a sense of whether your clients ‘get’ just how disproportionate there income is compared to the median?
According to this $50 million puts them comfortably in top 1%, receiving median annual US income in just under two hours (if my math is good: (40*52)*(46,001/50000000) = 1.91?).
Yeah it’s really hard to see that in the context of kids literally starving.
Regarding your question, it’s a mix. I would say many if not most understand they are extremely successful and fortunate. The variance is how out of touch they are. Some are incredibly generous, while others are grumpy or miserable. Some actually want higher taxes, some are Scrooge types.
I once had an UHNW individual who consistently donated so much to charity that he exceeded deduction limits. I had to research ways to optimize his giving, which was refreshing.
Then there was a trust fund beneficiary worth at least $100 million, a really nice guy who lived modestly, bought the whole office lunch and dressed casually. Very down to earth. We were in the process of setting up a charity trust for him before I left that firm.
Other end of the spectrum, I had a paranoid and unstable client who repeatedly pushed us to do unethical and illegal things, making everyone uncomfortable. We fired him even though he was a ~100k/yr client for us. Easy decision.
Thanks for the answer to my question! I did not really look into this for a few years. And those that I did were when I really got into US politics. Thankfully I did 180 on that, but my knowledge from that time is untrustworthy to say the least.
Your answer really clarified and added a lot rather than repeating what others said, along with it being from a professional, which is well appreciated. So again, thank you and the others for taking the time to answer my question.
The issue is more likely that taxes aren’t being used in ways that benefit the public, like they are in other countries. But also many Americans don’t want that because grrr filthy socialism
“I’m poor so I’m not responsible for stealing luxury goods and bear spraying minimum wage security guards.”
I grew up poor. I didn’t do this. Your comment is dripping with the implicit accusation that poor people are basically just animals. Incapable of controlling themselves when they see nice handbags.
Poverty doesn’t affect everyone the same. To try to discount the fact that poverty increases crime just because you aren’t a criminal is ignoring the complexity of humanity.
To say that this particular crime was caused by poverty also ignores the complexity of humanity.
We can all speculate until we’re blue in the face, but I agree that lessening poverty will lessen crime of most types.
Stealing from wealthy corporations is an extremely valid and morally acceptable form of protest. Hell, it’s a morally good thing to do even if it’s not meant as a protest.
I’m not going to defend assaulting the guards, though, except in the case of self-defense. Store security guards have no business using force against shoplifters, and most company policies align with that fact.
i feel bad for the employees who had to deal with it and clean up after and the guards that got assaulted. i dont feel bad for the above store level managers and execs who have to deal with this shit.
There was also needless destruction. I can see breaking a glass case to grab some watches, but it appears that there was also destruction for the sake of destruction (at least in the video I watched).
Some people dont seem to grasp how all of this works. They seem to think the insurance fairy will pay for the damages and not the businesses (and finally the customers).
You know, because obviously I'm a complete moron who has never had an intelligent thought in their life, in your estimation, I'd never thought about that...
Of course premiums will go up. Insurance agencies are predatory scumbags, too. But I still have a hard time feeling sorry for luxury brands having to pay slightly higher premiums than they were before. Shockingly, its still just things.
I know some people put the value of things over all else, but I find that to be a shortsighted and selfish way of thinking.
Who actually gives a fuck about corporate property being destroyed? These companies commit more theft from their workers than all other theft combined. They objectively deserve this.
You know someone is a shit person when they equate income with value as a human being.
Even if that were a valid take, almost every working poor person contributes more to society than nearly any rich person does, and would therefore still have more human worth.
Feel free to explain why it’s not objectively a good act to steal from the entities that themselves commit the overwhelming majority of theft, intentionally, systematically, and forcefully hold the majority of the worlds working population either in actual slavery, poverty, or at least unjustifiable and extreme financial insecurity that technically isn’t poverty because government definitions of poverty are patently absurd, and and who are actively and knowingly driving us towards towards the collapse of the environment and the greater part of biological life itself.
I’ll give you a hint: you’re actually just wrong by any standard that values human life in any way.
Everybody has different needs, but imo if you work as a security guard for a place like this AND take it seriously you not only signed up for violence but you deserve it. These companies are robbing us blind of good health, personal space and time on the planet- why defend that?
TFA even mentions that one of the getaway cars was a BMW. Undoubtedly, there were both impoverished people and people who jumped at an opportunity involved.
Making people respond like you just did is the only reason they included the BMW part. I’m in California and there are pages and pages of early to mid 2000s BMWs available near me for less than $5k, which is significantly less than I paid for my car that no one would ever look at and think I’m rich.
If poverty was driving crime rates, then most of the world (as most countries are much much poorer than the US) would be a crime infested shit hole. Somehow that’s not true at all. US crime is not related to poverty in any way.
All you have to do is look at the crime statistics and income statistics for cities across North America. Cities that have lower GDPs (less money, less opportunity) generally have higher crime rates. If despair is high, people will act out of desperation. What you are wilfully ignoring is the fact that “countries that are poorer than the US” also are drastically different culturally than the US. Almost nowhere else on Earth has the same kind of income disparity that the US has. You can’t take a developing nation where 50% of people live in poverty, and compare it to a developed nation where no one needs to live in poverty but are forced to do so by manipulated housing and job markets.
Of course poor people aren’t “basically just animals”, the OP didn’t imply that. What the OP is saying is that when genuine opportunity doesn’t exist, some people will find their own opportunity and/or weigh the consequences of their actions differently.
Wealth and income disparity have consequences and this is one of them. Public unrest is another eventual outcome. Something needs to be done about it or something will be done about it.
“Already, wealthy visitors have contributed to exorbitant house prices, buying land and property in a place where homeownership is out of reach for many permanent residents. Famous billionaires Peter Thiel and Jeff Bezos both have homes in Maui. Oprah Winfrey is the island’s largest landowner.”
Oh for fucks sakes. We have people who were wrongly imprisoned and spent decades in jail and they get a couple of hundred Gs and this lady is awarded $1.2B because someone saw her hoo-ha. We really have fucked up morals. The award amount is so obnoxious that I’m almost glad she’ll never see a dime of it. This is just a mockery of justice.
I think it’s an absurd ruling as well, but I don’t feel bad for the douchebag in question. I don’t really understand how they came up with the numbers. 1 billion in punitive damages? Based on what? Crazy.
But I’m fine with the guy being financially ruined for it. He deserves that much.
He posted her real name and address along with those videos and pics of her, which is basically opening her up to being attacked. He also threatened her job prospects and threatened to continue harassing her for the rest of her life. I agree that there should be more paid out to wrongly imprisoned people, but this was more than just having her hoo-ha shown.
That doesn’t mean this case is no big deal. Poor woman.
I do agree that the large amount is silly because the guy is probably not a billionaire. Hopefully they will increase punishments for corporations and rich people-- oh wait, they won’t. That’s fucked up, but not related to this case
You can call out the hypocrisy without minimizing her suffering. “They saw your bits, so what” is a ridiculous response to having your private sex videos shared with everyone you know
That was a really good article. I think all the corrupt assholes in Marion must be feeling some regret because people are digging into everything now and there’s nothing they can do to stop it.
banning all major social media from city owned devices would be better
TikTok is a massive confidentiality hazard, but the only major difference between it and facebook is who its sending a live feed of every click, step and toilet break to
news
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.