AOC: A Society With Billionaires Cannot Be Moral

[Canvas]

A good portion of the richest people in the world didn’t really produce anything of value. They inherited their wealth or made a lot of money on the stock market. Most weren’t tech pioneers.

And most of pioneers didn’t become billionaires having “advancing the common good and general welfare of humanity” as their top concern. They got rich by being cutthroat, even some of the ones who had the best ideas.

The ones who did that, like the people who created synthetic insulin and sold the patent for $1, are the exception, not the rule (they also didn’t get rich off it, obviously).

 

[JonNC]

We have? I disagree.

Do, you do think that the top 20% isn’t paying enough, even though they pay 85% of all income taxes?
How much more should they have to pay?

Everyone who drives pays some kind of fuel tax, right? Or does that depend on the state?

Some states more some less, but that doesn’t respond to my question. People of wealth are ineligible for WIC, for example. Should they also be ineligible to use interstates, for example?
It is the difference between the general welfare and individual welfare.

Yeah, but it’s nice to dream a little.

Article V. Makes dreams come true. :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:

 

[OneSheep]

Do you propose we do away with the mortage interest deduction (which by the way I favor being eliminated)? The charitable donation deduction?

I’m not sure about complete elimination of those, but both of them are misused. I’d grow weary getting into those details though.

 

[OneSheep]

Do, you do think that the top 20% isn’t paying enough, even though they pay 85% of all income taxes?
How much more should they have to pay?

Good point, but I think the problem is not so much with the income taxes, but that shareholder’s profits are not taxed enough. Why aren’t those scaled? Why aren’t capital gains taxes scaled? With the lowering of the corporate tax rate, they should have closed a lot of Cayman Islands-type loopholes, but I don’t think they did. What appeared to happen in Trump’s plan was a net gain for big corporations.

It’s not “trickling down” fast enough. Where we are headed is a generally poorer society, and the most vulnerable are hurt the most.

Have you noticed that there are more homeless people? It would be a disservice to simply give them money. Most need either mental health care or addiction rehab. Are we going to get all the churches to pay for that? What about all those who don’t belong to churches, do they get to pay nothing, even though all of society benefits?

Priorities. AOC is addressing priorities.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Have you noticed that there are more homeless people? It would be a disservice to simply give them money. Most need either mental health care or addiction rehab. Are we going to get all the churches to pay for that? What about all those who don’t belong to churches, do they get to pay nothing, even though all of society benefits?

I don’t know if there are more homeless people or not. They have always been difficult to truly count, from the “hobo jungles” of 1935 to the streets of San Francisco now. I don’t think anyone knows the numbers.

But it’s not going to do any real good to do much for a good number of the homeless because they’re insane or addicted or both, and won’t stay put. An excessive view of “human rights” in recent decades has put people on the street that really should be in supportive institutions. But there’s probably no going back now.

 

[JonNC]

Good point, but I think the problem is not so much with the income taxes, but that shareholder’s profits are not taxed enough.

So, you want to tax at a hire rate an average worker’s retirement? That’s what you’re talking about here.

With the lowering of the corporate tax rate, they should have closed a lot of Cayman Islands-type loopholes, but I don’t think they did. What appeared to happen in Trump’s plan was a net gain for big corporations.

You realize we lowered them from among the highest in the world to middling. Big corporations are me, with my 401k and IRA, and millions others like me. Big corporations are workers who are finally beginning to see increases in wages, along with tax cuts. Big corporations are lower unemployment rates, meaning more people working. Big corporations are retired people depending on the income from them.
Somehow I don’t see big corporations as the problem.

It’s not “trickling down” fast enough. Where we are headed is a generally poorer society, and the most vulnerable are hurt the most.

That’s three year old news, with record food stamp rolls, and record low labor participation rates, and stagnant wages.

Have you noticed that there are more homeless people?

Source.

Most need either mental health care or addiction rehab. Are we going to get all the churches to pay for that? What about all those who don’t belong to churches, do they get to pay nothing, even though all of society benefits?

If government gets out if the way, maybe they can. By your own words, government isn’t doing it.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Let me tell you about private vs. government “charity.” I volunteer at a HOME for homeless mothers and their children. It is not a shelter. Nursing care, social services, volunteers, etc. are provided there. Our parish cooks homemade meals and serves them. There are very strict rules that the mothers need to follow - no cell phones, no rudeness, etc. A few months ago there was a young mother with preemie newborn twins and a special needs 7 year old. The 7 year old was clearly on her last nerve and she lost her temper. I sat down and talked to her and held one of her babies so she could eat. Another volunteer took over and entertained the 7 year old.

The next time I went, I noticed this mother was gone. I was told she found an apartment, section 8. How in the world is this helping her? She has no job, no support, but she has an apartment. How does she even get to the grocery store?

 

[qui_est_ce]

Where we are headed is a generally poorer society, and the most vulnerable are hurt the most.

Well, this poorer society has more cars, more cell phone, more air conditioning, more running water than any other society in the history of man.

 

[marybobo]

No need to wait. One can find it in Venezuela and Cuba right now.

My son and some of his friends who have yachts in the same marina are planning a trip to Cuba this summer with some legal Cubans who are friends of theirs. I am sure they would be happy to transport you there free of charge but without transportation back.

 

[marybobo]

Her “priorities” will bankrupt the nation. But I’m not sure she thinks that far in advance.

 

[marybobo]

Just wait. That will come next if the Dems gain power.

 

[GKMotley]

Big corporations and careful investments there-in, and such like were most certainly what enabled me to provide for the long term care that my aunts and mother needed in their old age. Thank God for that.

 

[GKMotley]

And what is it that one often finds in the details?

 

[OneSheep]

So, you want to tax at a hire rate an average worker’s retirement? That’s what you’re talking about here.

Sure, if a shareholder is earning over, say, 10, 20,30, percent on their shares, why not tax those incrementally higher percentages? I don’t think retirees would take a hit at all. Do you know any retirees making over 10%? Take me to their broker.

This is all just talk, but I think there is some validity toward the objective of having less concentration of wealth. If it is in the hands of extremely generous people, of which I know a few, that is fine. I don’t have all the answers, but what I see is the danger of having great wealth in the hands of few. For one thing, it gives them more power to buy politicians.

Somehow I don’t see big corporations as the problem

Well, for one thing we have corporations like Walmart and Amazon killing the small guys. They are given great favors by politicians, favors not extended to smaller players. It is unjust. You’ve got companies like Haliburton, Bechtel, and others getting a big “in” with certain administrations. And what the heck happened with our anti-trust laws? Sure, sometimes they are applied, but we’ve definitely missed a few. And what about corporations being “people” (immortal, of course) that the courts decided have the same rights to make political donations as private individuals?

Shoot, did you pull my string? Sorry about that. I spent 20 years of my life running a small business. We always paid our bills on time, but the big guys who owed us money used us as their loans, to “manage” their cash flow. Trump did the same to plenty of contractors, I hear.

Source.

There is an uptick, according to the BBC. It sure seems like we have a lot more where I live.

 

[OneSheep]

Her “priorities” will bankrupt the nation. But I’m not sure she thinks that far in advance.

Which of her priorities will do that? She is talking about reducing spending on our bloated military. Sure, her proposed tax rate is way out. It’s a starting point for her, I think, something to whittle down.

Taxing in itself is not a “priority”. Social justice is a priority, and our Church agrees with this objective. Do you?

 

[OneSheep]

And what is it that one often finds in the details?

Devilish economists and accountants.

 

[GKMotley]

There you go.

 

[ProVobis]

Her “priorities” will bankrupt the nation. But I’m not sure she thinks that far in advance.

We are $22 trillion in debt already. At what point will we be in default? When do we tell China, Japan et al we can’t make the interest payments?

 

[JonNC]

Sure, if a shareholder is earning over, say, 10, 20,30, percent on their shares, why not tax those incrementally higher percentages?

Why tax them at all?

I don’t think retirees would take a hit at all. Do you know any retirees making over 10%? Take me to their broker.

Give the progressives a chance.

This is all just talk, but I think there is some validity toward the objective of having less concentration of wealth.

You’re welcome to your opinion. Mine is it is authoritarian for government to decide who gets to keep their property.

If it is in the hands of extremely generous people, of which I know a few, that is fine. I don’t have all the answers, but what I see is the danger of having great wealth in the hands of few. For one thing, it gives them more power to buy politicians.

Again, this is a zero-sum view. I prefer that lots of people have great wealth.
I kind of like Walter E. Williams ‘ view of this kind of “social justice “:

“But let me offer you my definition of social justice: I keep what I earn and you keep what you earn. Do you disagree? Well then tell me how much of what I earn belongs to you - and why?“

Well, for one thing we have corporations like Walmart and Amazon killing the small guys.

People shop there. Do you think government should punish them for being successful?

They are given great favors by politicians, favors not extended to smaller players. It is unjust.

On this we agree. Most of these breaks come at the local and state level.

You’ve got companies like Haliburton, Bechtel, and others getting a big “in” with certain administrations

Like Solyndra.

And what about corporations being “people” (immortal, of course) that the courts decided have the same rights to make political donations as private individuals?

Corporations are legal fictions, made up of people. Like labor unions, corporations should have the right to participate in our country’s elections.

Shoot, did you pull my string? Sorry about that.

Never apologize for speaking out. We may disagree but you do speak with grace and courage.
Good for you!

 

[marybobo]

Good question. My point exactly. Seems to me that those in favor of this either can’t count or they are indulging in wishful thinking.