You are only browsing one thread in the discussion! All comments are available on the post page.

Return

netburnr ,
@netburnr@lemmy.world avatar

Itā€™s funny because the rich donā€™t pay taxes.

tdawg ,

They do if you have taxes on captial gains :)

IDontHavePantsOn ,

Canā€™t get taxed if you never cash out.

tdawg ,

Most tax programs which apply to capital gains apply to the sell and exchange of the stock. Dividends are also taxed (at least here in the states). So yes, you get taxed no matter what you do unless itā€™s a net loss

ScrotusMaximus , (edited )

Thatā€™s why the quiet part is to borrow against the assets in perpetuity. No tax on money you take out in loans using your investments as collateral! This is effectively a home equity loan for the rich. Now, you canā€™t keep paying interest on your growing loans forever. Why, ScrotusMaximus, that would be unsustainable! Not to mention that baby faced intern fresh out of grad school with 300k of student loans to be repaid keeps pointing out your interest only loan to his supervisor and posting on Work Reform.

So move onto step two! You and your other insider buddies are going to do a little pump and dump action. For this phase of the plan we are going to crash the market, and write off the impaired value of our investments and debt. Scrotus, that sounds complicated, you might say. Sure, maybe for a peasant such as yourself, it might be. All we have to do is make our investments worth less on paper! A little bad press, some failed deliveries, an enshittified platform, a war breaks out on the wrong people. Nothing is actually changing hands. That would be silly. This has the added intentional bit of killing off the bank or investors we owe money to, figuratively of course. Weā€™re not actually killing anyone, mind you. That would be a crime and as we all know crime is only for the poors.

A year or two passes. We are on our yacht living off the loan money. We are in the final phase of our plan: no one bought the snake oil, the enshittified apps arenā€™t making ad revenue and that war sure hurt that new market. Our investments are worthless and we canā€™t borrow anymore money to pay for the yacht diesel or scantily clad deck boys. Gosh darn it, Scrotus, now what?

It just so happens the bank that loaned us money had to be bought out by JPAmerica Bank with taxpayer bailout money thanks to the votes from our friends šŸ˜‰ in government, and good news! Theyā€™re willing to work with us to refinance the loans because an investor bought our shitty debt for pennies on the dollar! What a sucker, amirite?

No tax on loans! The poor hate this one trick

This message brought to you under an Apache MIT BSD license to distribute.

Edit: An instead of a

tdawg ,

How do you feel about limiting loans against assets and total wealth based taxes?

In general I try to avoid talking about these things because people get touchy and act like the situation is hopeless. Captial Gains taxes does have an affect and it does improve the situation. And obviously what you brought up are clear concerns with how it is often setup today. So Iā€™m interested in how we could continue to make things better in that regard

unfreeradical , (edited )
@unfreeradical@lemmy.world avatar

Iā€™m just spitballing here, but maybe the solution is just, like, you know, tax the richā€¦?

I mean, really tax them, you know, all in, no bars, just get in there, and tax the hell right out of them.

Whadā€™ya say? Think it might work?

tdawg ,

Yes thatā€™s why I said ā€œtotal wealth based taxes.ā€ If you want to make a meaningful contribution to the conversation maybe actually read what other people are talking about

unfreeradical , (edited )
@unfreeradical@lemmy.world avatar

I get it. You want dialogue, discussion, and deliberation. Nothing hasty.

There are lots of angles to consider, and one thing for sure is no one ever gave them much thought.

Perhaps it would take at least two more decades of development and planning to achieve any kind of tax code that is more sensible and equitable than the one currently in place.

Serinus ,

Iā€™m not really in favor of a wealth tax. Maybe, if we really need to claw back our mistakes, but I think there are better approaches.

A tax on loans based on wealth seems great though. If you have the wealth, why are you borrowing? What are the legitimate uses of secured loans?

Capital gains taxes should be higher than payroll taxes. Always and forever.

Marginal tax rates exist for a reason, and itā€™s absurd that we stop progressive taxation after $700k. The difference between making $800k/year and making $15m/year is ridiculous. At $800k/year you at least want to make the business last for a decade. After you cash out for $15m in a year, are you really accountable to anyone?

vagrantprodigy ,

Exactly why dividends need to be mandatory for profitable companies if we are not going to change the tax system.

PsychedSy ,

The top 1% pays 42% of taxes.

Chetzemoka , (edited )

They pay 42% of INCOME taxes, which are only 40% of the annual federal tax receipts. Which means their income tax only amounts to about 17% of the overall tax receipts. Their FICA contributions are capped and they pay no FICA on anything over about $140,000. FICA tax accounts for 25% of overall federal tax receipts. The majority of remaining tax receipts are consumption taxes and property taxes, both of which are regressive and impact lower income citizens more.

taxfoundation.org/ā€¦/us-tax-revenue-by-tax-type-20ā€¦

www.bench.co/blog/tax-tips/fica-tax

www.investopedia.com/terms/r/regressivetax.asp

PsychedSy , (edited )

Fair correction. So, youā€™re saying they do pay taxes?

Edit: do you consider corporate taxes part of the 1%, or nah?

unfreeradical ,
@unfreeradical@lemmy.world avatar

Thatā€™s the truth, 110%.

steakmeout ,

Keep shifting the goalposts. Thatā€™s how you win, right? Howā€™s that boot leather taste?

PsychedSy ,

Iā€™m not the one that shifted them. What was the comment I first replied to? Iā€™ll wait.

steakmeout ,

The top 1% pays 42% of taxes.

Your statement implies that the top 1% pay 42% of all taxes, which is untrue. When called out on your lie of omission you cried like a bitch and tried to shift the goalposts to seem like you didnā€™t lie.

PsychedSy ,

The comment I replied to said the rich donā€™t pay taxes. What was important is that the rich pay a lot of taxes. I forgot a word and when it was pointed out I told them it was a fair correction.

Their analysis counted all federal receipts. 13% of federal tax receipts were corporate taxes. So they implied that the rich pay less than they do of all federal receipts and I was curious if they would respond to me asking.

No goalpost shift. The point was the rich pay taxes. They reminded me I forgot a word and I accepted the correction like an adult.

You people are fucking wild.

steakmeout ,

You accepted the correction and then added your own edit asking about corporate taxes - the implication being that person who corrected you isnā€™t being honest. Projection.

PsychedSy ,

No. They counted 1% income tax liability vs total federal receipts and I was curious if they considered that. Itā€™s a separate issue. My point was rich people pay taxes, and they do. A lot of taxes.

You fuckinā€™ kids are something else.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • ā€¢
  • random
  • [email protected]
  • All magazines
    •