Massachusetts passed a 4% millionaire's tax last year. Now every public school student is going to get free lunch

Gsus4 , 10 months ago

It’s easier to sell a tax hike if you know exactly where it’s going :)

theragu40 , 10 months ago

Unless you’re Waukesha, Wisconsin, where they specifically voted to stop giving kids handouts (i.e. free lunch). Because, you know, kids should work for their food or something instead of using their energy to learn.

Gsus4 , 10 months ago

probably the same people that say abortion is murdering kids…

richieadler , 10 months ago

I mean, cheap labor has to come from somewhere… Where do you find empoverished people to exploit if you don’t force births?

Gsus4 , 10 months ago

If you add underage labour liberalisation to that, you get a bingo!

richieadler , 9 months ago

I’ll raise you the most voted pre-candidate to president in my country, who said that people should be able to sell their own organs if they want to. (He plans to worsen things for workers in such a way that they would need to.)

Gsus4 , 9 months ago

Is this guy an ultraliberal moron or a pretend-conservative who says that but thinks abortion and prostitution should be illegal?

richieadler , 9 months ago

Strangely, both.

theragu40 , 10 months ago

Of course it is. But you know, kids lives only really matter up until they are born. At that point the kids, their parents and their livelihoods and happiness…all that can fuck right off.

affiliate , 10 months ago

kids just don’t want to work anymore these days. they’re too busy with their avocados and ipad games. meanwhile the child unemployment rates are at historical highs. won’t someone think of the economy?

theragu40 , 10 months ago

💀

MostlyBirds , 10 months ago

Waukesha County is by far the most conservative in the state, and has been playing a massive role in destroying our state’s democratic process for a few decades now.

Another fun fact about it is that they’ve been trying for years to glom onto the Lake Michigan watershed, which, geographically, it is not a part of. They want to straight up take our water, which they do not need, in exchange for nothing whatsoever of any real value.

theragu40 , 10 months ago

Yeah it’s a cesspool that way.

I live in the mke area and when looking for housing Waukesha was a tempting area because of how much more house you can get for the money, but I just don’t think I can handle living there. Not to mention I want my kids going to schools in a community that gives a shit about kids and their education.

jumperalex , 10 months ago

“It’s about time these kids had some skin in the game!”

-Some Republican Somewhere I’m sure.

Dark_Lords_Servant , 10 months ago

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?

GyozaPower , 10 months ago

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.

decadentrebel , 10 months ago

Is this the Steve Jobs $1 special??

snooggums , 10 months ago

Yes

Mindlight , 10 months ago (edited 9 months ago)

This.

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”

TheQuantumPhysicist , 10 months ago

deleted_by_author

Mindlight , 10 months ago (edited 10 months ago)

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.)

TheQuantumPhysicist , 10 months ago

deleted_by_author

Mindlight , 10 months ago (edited 10 months ago)

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?

TheQuantumPhysicist , 10 months ago

deleted_by_author

Mindlight , 10 months ago

Crawl back under your stone troll.

chronically_crazy , 10 months ago

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.

TheQuantumPhysicist , 10 months ago

deleted_by_author

girlfreddy , 10 months ago

@TheQuantumPhysicist @chronically_crazy

Trolls argue like this, with zero data or sources to back their oh-so-important opinions.

That's my proof you're a troll.

Get it yet?

solstice , 10 months ago

I’ve definitely noticed an awful lot of trolls on lemmy so far.

girlfreddy , 10 months ago

@solstice

When I first came over it was rare to see them. Now they're everywhere. :/

AA5B , 10 months ago

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”

Dark_Lords_Servant , 10 months ago

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.

Eccitaze , 10 months ago

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.

Dark_Lords_Servant , 10 months ago

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.

yiliu , 10 months ago

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).

FReddit , 10 months ago

That’s hilarious. Only the “little people” pay taxes.

Douchebag Trump hasn’t paid taxes in about a decade

TowardsTheFuture , 10 months ago

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.

solstice , 10 months ago

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)*/¯

davetapley , 10 months ago

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?).

solstice , 10 months ago

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.

All kinds really.

Dark_Lords_Servant , 10 months ago

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.

Hikiru , 10 months ago

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

sQuirrel21 , 10 months ago

Free school meals should be a given since our taxes should go to what our elected officials have so thoughtfully decided where to apply them. What no one rarely brings up let alone tries to solve is the disgusting and unsafe food that the local, state and fed officials decide to make available. There’s too much politics in cafeteria food. They should focus there budget in getting healthy food not the cheapest, uncles cousins or corporate friend contract.

Dark_Arc , 10 months ago

Yes, we 100% should be using our school kitchens as kitchens, not just reheating premade “GFS Food.”

ryathal , 10 months ago

GFS food would be an upgrade over what most are using.

Dark_Arc , 10 months ago

… what are they using?

ryathal , 10 months ago

Aramark and Chartwells are two of the biggest companies, they are custom designing menus to fit the minimum requirements as cheaply as possible. They are getting food in the same tier as bargain frozen dinners or prison.

Dark_Arc , 10 months ago

That’s roughly where GFS lies…

pinkdrunkenelephants , 10 months ago

Reason why #3648393847 why representative democracy simply does not work.

BloodForTheBloodGod , 10 months ago

When making that argument, you’ll want to add a few examples.

Otherwise people think you mean dictatorship.

pinkdrunkenelephants , 10 months ago

Switzerland has a direct democracy and they are doing perfectly fine.

BloodForTheBloodGod , 10 months ago

They’re in many ways not the best example.

Bo7a , 10 months ago

I would wager you have never been to Switzerland, or if you have, you never left the tourist traps to interact with the ‘real Swiss’.

I only lived there one year, but I can tell you right now, they are not ‘doing perfectly fine.’

Their pretty tourism industry hides some of the ugliest racism, faux-nationalism in the form of cantonal squabbling, sexism, anti-lgbt+, and a general dislike of anyone who does not conform exactly to their specific ways of living. Fuck Switzerland.

Bop , 10 months ago

I think you might be confusing representative democracy with capitalism.

pinkdrunkenelephants , 10 months ago

Nah, I mean representative democracy. Trusting someone else to work in your best interests never works. The only one who has your best interests in mind is you, if that.

Soggy , 10 months ago

People rarely have their own best interests in mind. People are short-sighted, undereducated, impulsive, prone to groupthink, and overestimate their ability and control.

steltek , 10 months ago

The vast majority (262 out of 351) of Massachusetts municipalities are direct democracy. A further 31 are near enough that it’s not hard to be elected if you run (my precinct has empty rep. slots every year).

Also in contrast to the rest of the US, there are no unincorporated areas (“county land”) in Massachusetts. Counties aren’t a useful demarcation here. Everything is a Town or a city.

pinkdrunkenelephants , 10 months ago

The rest of the U.S. needs to switch to something similar.

pedro , 10 months ago

I think what is missing is control over the representatives. When you elect someone, you give them your power, you should be able to take it back when they abuse it.

In a representative democracy, transparency and control are key and when this is not enforced, people tend to think the system is broken and does not work. It would work if that is fixed

pinkdrunkenelephants , 10 months ago

People shouldn’t be giving their power away at all, but fair.

FireTower , 10 months ago

I was curious about the budgeting implications because enacting a increase to revenue doesn’t necessarily mean increased spending would be covered. For any one to lazy to go off site, but also interested:

“$1 billion of the state’s record $56.2 billion fiscal budget for 2024 came from the state’s new 4% tax on millionaires.”

“State lawmakers agreed to put $523 million of revenue from the new tax toward education and put $477 million aside for transportation.”

Didn’t find the cost there but on one of their sources:

“A portion of that money will go toward the $172 million needed to provide free school meals, the State House News Service reported.”

DessertStorms , 10 months ago

So out of a billion extra dollars, they didn't even spend 20% on the kids (it's too early for me to do the calculation out of the total budget, but it'd be pitiful).
Which is great, but using them as a headline all things considered seems manipulative and like they're burying the lead.

Good for the kids, don't get me wrong, but somewhere along the way a lot more of that money has been spent on other things, and most likely is lining the pockets of the already rich and powerful.

So yeah, it's a great example of what a tiny hike in taxing the rich can do, but it not only doesn't come close to being enough, it also feels like another scam where good publicity hides a whole manner of sins going on behind the scenes.

wrath-sedan , 10 months ago

I mean all we know so far is that half of the new tax is going to education (and 172mil of that has already gone towards an excellent cause) and half is going to transportation. Of course skimming off the top is incredibly common, but I think it’s far too early to call the amount misspent.

zephyreks , 10 months ago

If they could line the pockets of the MBTA, that would be great thanks.

FireTower , 10 months ago

Sorry if my quoting gave off the wrong impression. I believe it meant that of the total 1 billion dollars 523 million will be spent on education. Of the 523 million to be spent on education 172 million will be used to pay for lunches. The remaining 351 million I would assume is being used for other educational expenses like new equipment or for salaries.

Perhaps there is miss management of the funds but I don’t think that it fair to conclude the 351 million has been misappropriated just based on this information.

jatone , 10 months ago

why spend more on something than you need to? plenty of others besides kids who could use the services the additional money will pay for.

Double_A , 10 months ago

4% of WHAT is taxed?

ilikekeyboards , 10 months ago

Yeah, most millionaires have no profit and they’re in the red. We need even more taxes on small aircrafts that are used for private charter, more taxes on purchasing and operating helicopters, taxes on the kerosene not used in military scope.

Taxes on luxury cars that only the billionaire’s afford. Every car over 150.000 USD should have a 100% tax to feed the homeless and the kids

rifugee , 10 months ago

Per the article, it’s an income tax on any income over a million dollars, so it’s essentially an additional state income tax bracket. So, if an entity makes exactly 1 million this year then they won’t pay any extra, but if they make 2 million, then they pay 4 percent on that additional 1 mill (40k), over whatever else they would owe before the additional tax.

Like all income tax, there are ways to avoid it or reduce your burden, but not every person/company goes to those lengths.

I personally think a wealth tax is fairer for society, but it’s pretty hard to implement and of course has a ton of very wealthy opposition.

Double_A , 10 months ago

I personally think a wealth tax is fairer for society

The most reasonable way I’ve seen so far is to assume that your wealth passively creates x% of extra income for you, and then tax that amount as income. That also simplifies the tax system, since you only need enter your assets, and not what exacts trades and profits you made.

Buelldozer , 10 months ago

The most reasonable way I’ve seen so far is to assume that your wealth passively creates x% of extra income for you, and then tax that amount as income.

I can make it simpler yet and close the Billionaire Income Loophole, where their “income” is taking out loans against value of their investments by simply taxing those loans. No need to value something, they’ve already done it when they took out the loan. If you borrowed 10 Million against a portfolio of 50 Million then you should be taxed on the 10 Million. That’s the value you assigned and the benefit you received.

This would also catch the “Buy, Borrow, Die” / Step-Up scheme that the ultra-wealthy use.

Compactor9679 , 10 months ago

Have to love when people say anything is “free”

piecat , 10 months ago

Good point! These kids should starve if their parents don’t work hard enough. Those millions and billionaires worked hard for their money!

Compactor9679 , 10 months ago

You mean to tell me that people who work in the US dont get enough money to buy food? Lol, you have not been outisde of the US have you?

jatone , 10 months ago

I’d ask if you understood how cost of living works; but clearly you don’t.

Kage520 , 10 months ago

We need different terms for people who HAVE a million dollars and people who MAKE a million per year. Lots of people will read this millionaire’s tax and think it will apply to them when they are nearing retirement since they finally have a million dollars after saving all their life.

abraxas , 10 months ago

That’s what the campaign to quash the bill did. That, and tried to convince people that they might have a single multi-million-dollar transaction in their life (like selling a large successful business) and have to pay an extra 4% on it.

Always a push to get the “temporarily embarassed millionaire” to support the reach. “Yeah, yanno. My little lawmowing operation that makes me $20,000 coild sell for over a million and then I’m fucked”

Hoomod , 10 months ago

Ah, the Philip J. Fry mentality

“someday I might be rich, and then people like me better watch their step”

Buelldozer , 10 months ago

We need different terms for people who HAVE a million dollars and people who MAKE a million per year.

We have them. The first is referred to as “Wealth” or “Worth” and the other is referred to as “Income”. Therefore what Mass instituted is called an Income Tax.

just_the_ticket , 10 months ago

It’s like the us is always 20 years behind the rest of the world when it comes to things that actually matter.

Bo7a , 10 months ago

I don’t know who said it. But one of my favorite lines about america goes: “America will always do the right thing. After it has tried everything else”

md5crypto , 10 months ago

Will simply drive more rich people out of the state.

Saneless , 10 months ago

They always say that and they never leave

A lot of bluster and blubbering about what would happen if so and so law passed. Never works. They’re still making plenty and once they’re done whining they stay put

coredev , 10 months ago

Revenue from the new income tax is earmarked for public school meals.

As the kids get free food now, some rich people must be left in the state. Maybe the ones with an actual heart?

Looking at this from a community perspective, rich people that don’t contribute to the community is kind of worthless anyway.

Sir_Kevin , 10 months ago

It’s not a free lunch. It’s just your taxes going to something you actually benefit from.

FlyingSquid , 10 months ago

Kids don’t pay taxes. It’s a free lunch.

kattenluik , 10 months ago

This comment is just an extreme lack of understanding of any tax system there is, which is wild.

FlyingSquid , 10 months ago

Something that is free for one person will necessarily cost money for another. But for the kids, it’s free.

DeletesItLater , 10 months ago

deleted_by_author

FlyingSquid , 10 months ago

Ok?

clunking , 10 months ago

deleted_by_moderator

GroggyGuava , 10 months ago

Your first sentence describes your own comment.

Nalivai , 10 months ago

Every time you complain, I will post a meme you wouldn’t understand and a comment mocking your boomer ass.

odbol , 10 months ago

This comment is just an extreme lack of understanding of millionaires

rambaroo , 10 months ago

Imagine being this fucking pedantic. This place is legit reddit 2.0 and that’s a bad thing.

Elivey , 10 months ago

For the children and the families of the children, it is free

I can’t believe you have the upvoted comment.

dragonflyteaparty , 10 months ago

Most of everything is free for kids. What’s your point?

prole , 10 months ago

No shit. It literally says where the money that pays for it comes from right in the headline.

rambaroo , 10 months ago

Yeah but le redditor needs to show us how much smarts he is.

Hacksaw , 10 months ago

I think the point of the comment was that in the last few decades the rhetoric has been: “Taxes bad” “Government provides free bus passes to underprivileged people” Always divorcing taxes from their positive effects on society. Maybe they were trying to fight that by directly uniting the fact that the government is just a coordinator, collecting taxes and using it to buy lunches for kids.

“4% tax on millionaires pays for breakfasts and lunches for all school children” unlike the above example, is a sentence that reminds people that taxes are what provides these many positive social benefits they recieve, not “the government”, not “for free”, and that taxes aren’t always “bad”.

Or maybe I’m projecting!

Sternout , 10 months ago

Of course it is free for the children.

lolcatnip , 10 months ago

“Nothing is free. Free isn’t actually a word!”

pythonoob , 10 months ago

Which I’m ok with

Naura , 10 months ago

So you’re implying that people regularly make $1,000,000 in annual income by working? Only about 150,000 people in the US make that much. It’s their money.

kiwwimix , 10 months ago

Let’s fucking goooo!!! I love my home state ❤️. I wish they did this sooner.

Mister_Haste Bot , 10 months ago

Same! We are lucky to be in one of the best states to live under the current political circumstances.

GiddyGap , 10 months ago

Mass is doing so many things right. There’s still a long way to go to get to European standards, but still doing a lot better than most states.

Reverendender , 10 months ago

My home state too! Too bad I can’t afford to live there

jimmydoreisalefty , 10 months ago

Thanks for the article, learning aboutnthe positives.

On another note…

In February, President Joe Biden urged lawmakers to pass his billionaires’ tax proposal, which would impose a minimum 20% tax on households with a net worth of more than $100 million.

It is a start, but may be too late in the game for the blue administration for 2024.

I have also heard of other positive things being pushed, in my bubble of politics.

Might be due to all the military conflicts around the world and union strikes, that are also starting to ramp up in the US.

Great post on the positive news. Thanks again!

Sami_Uso , 10 months ago

I think it’s fair to wonder why policy changes like those are being pushed so late into the presidents term. Seems like primaries and elections drive policy more than anything else.

jimmydoreisalefty , 10 months ago

Yes, you are right!

It is always the go-to for politicians, I see it workong less and less as more people get informed.

candybrie , 10 months ago

He’s been pretty busy. The Inflation Reduction Act, the Safer Communities Act, the CHIPS and Science Act, the American Rescue Plan (ARP) and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act is a decent list for the first 2 years in office. A lot isn’t super progressive but it’s unlikely the ideas you’re hearing about now will pass in their most progressive form either. But you have to start pretty far left to get anything even moderately left of center.

And, I know our election cycle makes it seem super late, but we’re like 5/8 of the way into his term. Just a bit over half way. In February it was pretty much half way.

Wahots , 10 months ago

Even smaller stuff like the Respect for Marriage Act. Small thing that got watered down by crazy religious stuff, but hey, it was a start, and bipartisan. We need more people working together.

For what it’s worth, a lot of the stuff the president campaigned on actually got done, which was very impressive.

Also got Justice Jackson through too, who seems to be pretty well grounded.

Etterra , 10 months ago

Good. Now slap a 0 to the end of that 4, and then double it.

AnonTwo , 10 months ago

I'm pretty sure at an 80% rate the millionaires would just spend the rate moving, out of state or out of country depending on how far reaching it was.

don , 10 months ago

That’s exactly how that would go.

CubbyTustard , 10 months ago

deleted_by_author

yoyogamer , 10 months ago

People found all sorts of loopholes to not pay that. Nobody paid that much taxes.

CubbyTustard , 10 months ago

deleted_by_author

yoyogamer , 10 months ago

So lemmy is just as stupidly socialist communist as reddit… got it…

prole , 10 months ago

Nobody paid that much taxes.

Do you have any evidence for that claim, or are you just stating it with certainty because it feels right to you?

Nobody paid 90% of their total income because that’s not how tax brackets work.

yoyogamer , 10 months ago

So lemmy is just as stupidly socialist communist as reddit… got it…

prole , 10 months ago

Because I know how taxes work?

idiomaddict , 10 months ago

Then we’d be rid of them at least

DessertStorms , 10 months ago

And nothing of value was lost...

Like, oh no, what would a state do without their money hoarding exploiters that alredy contribute less than the bare minimum???
And worse - if everyone decided to make these laws, where will the poor millionaires escape to then???

Oh, won't someone think of the millionaires!!!11

atzanteol , 10 months ago

And nothing of value was lost…

Except the taxable income you wanted to tax?

DessertStorms , 10 months ago

I don't want to tax, I want to eat.

prole , 10 months ago

You mean the money that we already aren’t getting?

prole , 10 months ago

Oh look, someone else who doesn’t understand how progressive tax brackets work. Their effective tax rate wouldn’t be 80%, only income above a certain (very high) number would be taxed at 80%.

don , 10 months ago

In other words, “Don’t provide children with free meals.”

wrath-sedan , 10 months ago

Made me curious what the total tax rate would be in Mass. Apparently it has a flat 5% income tax, plus 4% millionaires tax, plus federal rate for income over about 578k is 37%, so altogether it’s 46% for income over a mil in Mass.

Definitely think it should be higher for such wildly high income. Also disappointed to see for being a relatively progressive state Mass has a flat rather than progressive income tax.

zephyreks , 10 months ago

As your income increases, your ability to reduce taxable income also increases. The goal of the state is basically to target the lazy.

FlyingSquid , 10 months ago

Definitely think it should be higher for such wildly high income.

Higher, nothing. There should be a rate above which it’s taxed at 100%. No one needs to be as rich as Musk or Zuckerberg or Bezos.

BubblyMango , 10 months ago

And no millioneir will keep his money in a state where those are the tax rates. If you make it too high you literally get nothing.

FlyingSquid , 10 months ago

Awww. Too bad for them. What will we do without millionaires hoarding their wealth?!

uberkalden , 10 months ago

No, he’s saying they will keep it. Just in a way that mass gets literally nothing

FlyingSquid , 10 months ago

So either they will get a lot of money or things won’t be any different except millionaires won’t be there hoarding wealth?

I’m not seeing a downside yet.

doyoulikemyparka , 10 months ago

I think they mean the millionaires will find other ways to hoard it to avoid tax levels they won’t stomach. Fair? No. Reality? Probably.

FlyingSquid , 10 months ago

People make the same argument about not returning to the tax rates of the 1950s. I say let’s try it and find out.

pinkdrunkenelephants , 10 months ago

It would take massive and severe state action to deprive the rich of that wealth, and that money would still not find its way into the hands of the poor because the state, and corrupt bureaucrats within it, would take it for themselves.

The poor themselves would have to band together, organize, steal back all the resources from the rich, and distribute it amongst themselves fairly. And that won’t work without a deeply organized plan everyone in the group already agrees to, and even then it might not because the sociopaths and evil people among the poor – which comprises of a lot of them, sorry-not-sorry but it’s true – will just hoard all of those resources, creating a new ruling class.

Stuff like a ruling class is just the human condition because humanity is inherently evil. The non-evil humans will have to accept that reality is like this, figure out who is trustworthy and who is not, band together the like-minded, isolate themselves and pray a sociopath or evil person never infiltrates their ranks, figure out how to suss them out, and kill them.

Until humanity itself evolves to be more docile, it’ll never change.

doyoulikemyparka , 10 months ago

I … honestly would be up for this approach. When do you run for office, sir?

yoyogamer , 10 months ago

And yet you guys wonder why millionaires move to Texas. You increase the taxes above a certain number and they’ll take all their wealth, consumption and their taxes to another state.

Taxes should be sustainable. High taxes on rich people aren’t sustainable because they’ll leave taking whatever taxes they pay and whatever consumption they do which contributes to the economy.

FlyingSquid , 10 months ago

The wealth that they hoard? The consumption they import? Let me guess, they’re also “job creators.”

yoyogamer , 10 months ago

Who pays your salary?

FlyingSquid , 10 months ago

A corporation. Not a rich individual.

yoyogamer , 10 months ago

Who do you think created these corporations? Rich people with aim to make more money.

Capitalism pays your salary. Without capitalism and with theft of wealth via unfair taxation, your job won’t exist.

FlyingSquid , 10 months ago

Rich people do not need to exist for corporations to exist. Also, you think wage theft doesn’t happen under capitalism?

According to the Economic Policy Institute, wage theft costs U.S. workers as much as $50 billion per year — a number far higher than all robberies, burglaries and motor vehicle thefts combined.

inthesetimes.com/…/wage-theft-union-labor-biden-i…

All right! Go capitalism!

TeoTwawki , 10 months ago

The descriptor “free” misleads - this is exactly the type of thing taxes were always meant to pay for.

hglman , 10 months ago

It’s mad that children could some how not deserve or accumulate debt to eat. It’s even more mad that its exactly what happens.

Nevoic , 10 months ago

It’s also mad that this is also the case for adults. When you turn 18, you shouldn’t suddenly lose basic rights (like access to food and shelter), but that’s exactly what most capitalists want to happen (and so that’s how it works).

Goods with inelastic demand shouldn’t be driven by the profit motive. Food, healthcare, housing, etc. We can let luxury goods stay within the private sector for now since people don’t need them to survive, and come back to that conversation at a later date.

HawlSera , 10 months ago

This I have always hated the “FREE STUFF!” talking point and how the mainstream bought it.

I’m not talking about demanding some middle class guy be forced to buy me an Xbox, but rather I’m asking multiple billionaires start paying just a little more in taxes (instead of ya know… constant rebates for “cReAtInG JoBs”) so that little Timmy doesn’t die of untreated pediatric cancer.

MNByChoice , 10 months ago (edited 10 months ago)

[investmentnews.com/welcome-to-the-millionaires-ta…](An overview for those that don’t know anything about this.)

Edit: fixed the link An overview for those that don’t know anything about this.

a 4% surtax on individual earnings above $1 million. This new provision, which comes into effect from Jan. 1, 2023, will be layered over the preexisting 5% state income tax rate.

PRUSSIA_x86 , 10 months ago

Heads up, it’s supposed to be [text] then (link)

MNByChoice , 10 months ago

Thank you, that explains a lot.