How Will the Rich Rule Without Money?

[Andylusion]

Then you can't complain that wealthy people have all the wealth. You can't say cake is bad for you, and then turn right around, and complain rich people own all the cake, and they need to share it.

I never said rich people need to share the stock market; rich people need to have their unearned income taxed at a much higher rate than people who earn their money by providing goods and services that grow the economy as opposed to those who strangle GDP with concentric coils of debt.

Exclusive: How Private Debt Strangles Growth, Stokes Financial Crises, and Increases Inequality | naked capitalism

But when you post graphs about the wealthy and poor.... the stock market wealth, is that wealth. You have posted dozens of graphs about how much wealth the rich have, and contrasted that with how much wealth the poor have.

The stock market, is that wealth. The vast vast majority of the wealth the that wealthy have, is shares in companies.

That $90 Billion that Warren Buffet has, is all in stocks. He doesn't own $90 Billion in houses, or cars, or gold bars, or some vault like Scrooge Mcduck.

Now as for increasing taxes on unearned income...

Then you are just going to give them incentive to invest elsewhere.

As I said before, one of the reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they are investors. Because they are investors, they are going to put their investments where ever there is a good ROI.

My point is... increasing taxes on investments, will result in lower investment. Lower investment means, less jobs, and less wealth for the country.
If you are ok with that, then knock yourself out.

Regardless, my view is that government already has so much money, and people are worse off today, than in the past.
Better to have private people with the money, making products and building the economy.

 

[georgephillip]

Then you can't complain that wealthy people have all the wealth. You can't say cake is bad for you, and then turn right around, and complain rich people own all the cake, and they need to share it.

I never said rich people need to share the stock market; rich people need to have their unearned income taxed at a much higher rate than people who earn their money by providing goods and services that grow the economy as opposed to those who strangle GDP with concentric coils of debt.

Exclusive: How Private Debt Strangles Growth, Stokes Financial Crises, and Increases Inequality | naked capitalism

But when you post graphs about the wealthy and poor.... the stock market wealth, is that wealth. You have posted dozens of graphs about how much wealth the rich have, and contrasted that with how much wealth the poor have.

The stock market, is that wealth. The vast vast majority of the wealth the that wealthy have, is shares in companies.

That $90 Billion that Warren Buffet has, is all in stocks. He doesn't own $90 Billion in houses, or cars, or gold bars, or some vault like Scrooge Mcduck.

Now as for increasing taxes on unearned income...

Then you are just going to give them incentive to invest elsewhere.

As I said before, one of the reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they are investors. Because they are investors, they are going to put their investments where ever there is a good ROI.

My point is... increasing taxes on investments, will result in lower investment. Lower investment means, less jobs, and less wealth for the country.
If you are ok with that, then knock yourself out.

Regardless, my view is that government already has so much money, and people are worse off today, than in the past.
Better to have private people with the money, making products and building the economy.

But when you post graphs about the wealthy and poor.... the stock market wealth, is that wealth. You have posted dozens of graphs about how much wealth the rich have, and contrasted that with how much wealth the poor have.

Private wealth that comes from inflicting record levels of debt on 90% of US workers does NOT contribute to GDP growth. In fact, it has the opposite effect and should be taxed accordingly:

Exclusive: How Private Debt Strangles Growth, Stokes Financial Crises, and Increases Inequality | naked capitalism

"Rapid private debt growth also fueled what were viewed as triumphs in their day—the Roaring Twenties, the Japanese 'economic miracle' of the ’80s, and the Asian boom of the ’90s—but each of these were debt-fueled binges that brought these economies to the brink of economic ruin.

"Those crises are the best known, but almost all crises in major countries have been caused by rapid private debt growth coupled with high overall levels of private debt.

"The reverse is true as well; almost all instances of rapid debt growth coupled with high over- all levels of private debt have led to crises.

"There are two claims you can count on: Booms come from rapid loan growth.

"And crises come from booms."

 

[georgephillip]

Then you can't complain that wealthy people have all the wealth. You can't say cake is bad for you, and then turn right around, and complain rich people own all the cake, and they need to share it.

I never said rich people need to share the stock market; rich people need to have their unearned income taxed at a much higher rate than people who earn their money by providing goods and services that grow the economy as opposed to those who strangle GDP with concentric coils of debt.

Exclusive: How Private Debt Strangles Growth, Stokes Financial Crises, and Increases Inequality | naked capitalism

But when you post graphs about the wealthy and poor.... the stock market wealth, is that wealth. You have posted dozens of graphs about how much wealth the rich have, and contrasted that with how much wealth the poor have.

The stock market, is that wealth. The vast vast majority of the wealth the that wealthy have, is shares in companies.

That $90 Billion that Warren Buffet has, is all in stocks. He doesn't own $90 Billion in houses, or cars, or gold bars, or some vault like Scrooge Mcduck.

Now as for increasing taxes on unearned income...

Then you are just going to give them incentive to invest elsewhere.

As I said before, one of the reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they are investors. Because they are investors, they are going to put their investments where ever there is a good ROI.

My point is... increasing taxes on investments, will result in lower investment. Lower investment means, less jobs, and less wealth for the country.
If you are ok with that, then knock yourself out.

Regardless, my view is that government already has so much money, and people are worse off today, than in the past.
Better to have private people with the money, making products and building the economy.

As I said before, one of the reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they are investors. Because they are investors, they are going to put their investments where ever there is a good ROI.

Their wealth comes from common law court decisions awarding vast private fortunes to a few relative parasites at the expense of the many productive workers they employ:

Robert Reich: Corporate Social Responsibility Is a Scam

"Let’s not forget Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon and its Whole Foods subsidiary.

"Just weeks after Bezos made the Business Roundtable commitment to all his stakeholders, Whole Foods announced it would be cutting medical benefits for its entire part-time workforce.

"The annual saving to Amazon from this cost-cutting move is roughly what Bezos – whose net worth is $110 billion – makes in two hours. (Bezos’s nearly-completed D.C. mansion will have 2 elevators, 25 bathrooms, 11 bedrooms, and a movie theater.)"

 

[Andylusion]

Then you can't complain that wealthy people have all the wealth. You can't say cake is bad for you, and then turn right around, and complain rich people own all the cake, and they need to share it.

I never said rich people need to share the stock market; rich people need to have their unearned income taxed at a much higher rate than people who earn their money by providing goods and services that grow the economy as opposed to those who strangle GDP with concentric coils of debt.

Exclusive: How Private Debt Strangles Growth, Stokes Financial Crises, and Increases Inequality | naked capitalism

But when you post graphs about the wealthy and poor.... the stock market wealth, is that wealth. You have posted dozens of graphs about how much wealth the rich have, and contrasted that with how much wealth the poor have.

The stock market, is that wealth. The vast vast majority of the wealth the that wealthy have, is shares in companies.

That $90 Billion that Warren Buffet has, is all in stocks. He doesn't own $90 Billion in houses, or cars, or gold bars, or some vault like Scrooge Mcduck.

Now as for increasing taxes on unearned income...

Then you are just going to give them incentive to invest elsewhere.

As I said before, one of the reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they are investors. Because they are investors, they are going to put their investments where ever there is a good ROI.

My point is... increasing taxes on investments, will result in lower investment. Lower investment means, less jobs, and less wealth for the country.
If you are ok with that, then knock yourself out.

Regardless, my view is that government already has so much money, and people are worse off today, than in the past.
Better to have private people with the money, making products and building the economy.

But when you post graphs about the wealthy and poor.... the stock market wealth, is that wealth. You have posted dozens of graphs about how much wealth the rich have, and contrasted that with how much wealth the poor have.

Private wealth that comes from inflicting record levels of debt on 90% of US workers does NOT contribute to GDP growth. In fact, it has the opposite effect and should be taxed accordingly:

Exclusive: How Private Debt Strangles Growth, Stokes Financial Crises, and Increases Inequality | naked capitalism

"Rapid private debt growth also fueled what were viewed as triumphs in their day—the Roaring Twenties, the Japanese 'economic miracle' of the ’80s, and the Asian boom of the ’90s—but each of these were debt-fueled binges that brought these economies to the brink of economic ruin.

"Those crises are the best known, but almost all crises in major countries have been caused by rapid private debt growth coupled with high overall levels of private debt.

"The reverse is true as well; almost all instances of rapid debt growth coupled with high over- all levels of private debt have led to crises.

"There are two claims you can count on: Booms come from rapid loan growth.

"And crises come from booms."

Private wealth, does not cause debt.

As I have said before, I make just barely $30k a year, and last year was the first year I made $30K. Before that It was $20K a year for the last 2 decades.

I have no debt. You pointed out that the wealthy have doubled their wealth over the past 10 years. I have zero debt.

How does wealthy people having wealth cause debt? And if it does, how am I immune to this?
Can you explain?

The roaring 20s did not cause a debt fueled crash. Government caused the crash.

The Japan debt, and our debt, is not caused by private wealth.

Debt is caused by spending too much.

To claim otherwise is ridiculous Are you seriously suggesting, that if the government collected less money, that somehow we could still over spend, and not have debt?

Again, Michael Jackson made by most estimates, almost a billion dollars in his lifetime. By the time he died, he was bankrupt. That's the whole reason he went on the "This is it!" Tour, because otherwise he'd be in bankruptcy.

How does one man make a billion dollars, and end up impoverished? The same way the Federal Government can collect $3.3 Trillion dollars, and end up impoverished.

Because you spend, more than you make.

Debt is caused by over spending. The rich people of this world do not force individuals to over spend, nor do they force governments to over spend.


Stop over spending.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Then you can't complain that wealthy people have all the wealth. You can't say cake is bad for you, and then turn right around, and complain rich people own all the cake, and they need to share it.

I never said rich people need to share the stock market; rich people need to have their unearned income taxed at a much higher rate than people who earn their money by providing goods and services that grow the economy as opposed to those who strangle GDP with concentric coils of debt.

Exclusive: How Private Debt Strangles Growth, Stokes Financial Crises, and Increases Inequality | naked capitalism

But when you post graphs about the wealthy and poor.... the stock market wealth, is that wealth. You have posted dozens of graphs about how much wealth the rich have, and contrasted that with how much wealth the poor have.

The stock market, is that wealth. The vast vast majority of the wealth the that wealthy have, is shares in companies.

That $90 Billion that Warren Buffet has, is all in stocks. He doesn't own $90 Billion in houses, or cars, or gold bars, or some vault like Scrooge Mcduck.

Now as for increasing taxes on unearned income...

Then you are just going to give them incentive to invest elsewhere.

As I said before, one of the reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they are investors. Because they are investors, they are going to put their investments where ever there is a good ROI.

My point is... increasing taxes on investments, will result in lower investment. Lower investment means, less jobs, and less wealth for the country.
If you are ok with that, then knock yourself out.

Regardless, my view is that government already has so much money, and people are worse off today, than in the past.
Better to have private people with the money, making products and building the economy.

As I said before, one of the reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they are investors. Because they are investors, they are going to put their investments where ever there is a good ROI.

Their wealth comes from common law court decisions awarding vast private fortunes to a few relative parasites at the expense of the many productive workers they employ:

Robert Reich: Corporate Social Responsibility Is a Scam

"Let’s not forget Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon and its Whole Foods subsidiary.

"Just weeks after Bezos made the Business Roundtable commitment to all his stakeholders, Whole Foods announced it would be cutting medical benefits for its entire part-time workforce.

"The annual saving to Amazon from this cost-cutting move is roughly what Bezos – whose net worth is $110 billion – makes in two hours. (Bezos’s nearly-completed D.C. mansion will have 2 elevators, 25 bathrooms, 11 bedrooms, and a movie theater.)"

The annual saving to Amazon from this cost-cutting move is roughly what Bezos – whose net worth is $110 billion – makes in two hours.

Bezos isn't paid hourly.

 

[Andylusion]

Then you can't complain that wealthy people have all the wealth. You can't say cake is bad for you, and then turn right around, and complain rich people own all the cake, and they need to share it.

I never said rich people need to share the stock market; rich people need to have their unearned income taxed at a much higher rate than people who earn their money by providing goods and services that grow the economy as opposed to those who strangle GDP with concentric coils of debt.

Exclusive: How Private Debt Strangles Growth, Stokes Financial Crises, and Increases Inequality | naked capitalism

But when you post graphs about the wealthy and poor.... the stock market wealth, is that wealth. You have posted dozens of graphs about how much wealth the rich have, and contrasted that with how much wealth the poor have.

The stock market, is that wealth. The vast vast majority of the wealth the that wealthy have, is shares in companies.

That $90 Billion that Warren Buffet has, is all in stocks. He doesn't own $90 Billion in houses, or cars, or gold bars, or some vault like Scrooge Mcduck.

Now as for increasing taxes on unearned income...

Then you are just going to give them incentive to invest elsewhere.

As I said before, one of the reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they are investors. Because they are investors, they are going to put their investments where ever there is a good ROI.

My point is... increasing taxes on investments, will result in lower investment. Lower investment means, less jobs, and less wealth for the country.
If you are ok with that, then knock yourself out.

Regardless, my view is that government already has so much money, and people are worse off today, than in the past.
Better to have private people with the money, making products and building the economy.

As I said before, one of the reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they are investors. Because they are investors, they are going to put their investments where ever there is a good ROI.

Their wealth comes from common law court decisions awarding vast private fortunes to a few relative parasites at the expense of the many productive workers they employ:

Robert Reich: Corporate Social Responsibility Is a Scam

"Let’s not forget Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon and its Whole Foods subsidiary.

"Just weeks after Bezos made the Business Roundtable commitment to all his stakeholders, Whole Foods announced it would be cutting medical benefits for its entire part-time workforce.

"The annual saving to Amazon from this cost-cutting move is roughly what Bezos – whose net worth is $110 billion – makes in two hours. (Bezos’s nearly-completed D.C. mansion will have 2 elevators, 25 bathrooms, 11 bedrooms, and a movie theater.)"

Whole Foods has to make a profit. Doesn't matter how much Bezo has. If the store that you work at, doesn't have the money to pay for your health care, then it can't.

 

[georgephillip]

Then you can't complain that wealthy people have all the wealth. You can't say cake is bad for you, and then turn right around, and complain rich people own all the cake, and they need to share it.

I never said rich people need to share the stock market; rich people need to have their unearned income taxed at a much higher rate than people who earn their money by providing goods and services that grow the economy as opposed to those who strangle GDP with concentric coils of debt.

Exclusive: How Private Debt Strangles Growth, Stokes Financial Crises, and Increases Inequality | naked capitalism

But when you post graphs about the wealthy and poor.... the stock market wealth, is that wealth. You have posted dozens of graphs about how much wealth the rich have, and contrasted that with how much wealth the poor have.

The stock market, is that wealth. The vast vast majority of the wealth the that wealthy have, is shares in companies.

That $90 Billion that Warren Buffet has, is all in stocks. He doesn't own $90 Billion in houses, or cars, or gold bars, or some vault like Scrooge Mcduck.

Now as for increasing taxes on unearned income...

Then you are just going to give them incentive to invest elsewhere.

As I said before, one of the reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they are investors. Because they are investors, they are going to put their investments where ever there is a good ROI.

My point is... increasing taxes on investments, will result in lower investment. Lower investment means, less jobs, and less wealth for the country.
If you are ok with that, then knock yourself out.

Regardless, my view is that government already has so much money, and people are worse off today, than in the past.
Better to have private people with the money, making products and building the economy.

As I said before, one of the reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they are investors. Because they are investors, they are going to put their investments where ever there is a good ROI.

Their wealth comes from common law court decisions awarding vast private fortunes to a few relative parasites at the expense of the many productive workers they employ:

Robert Reich: Corporate Social Responsibility Is a Scam

"Let’s not forget Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon and its Whole Foods subsidiary.

"Just weeks after Bezos made the Business Roundtable commitment to all his stakeholders, Whole Foods announced it would be cutting medical benefits for its entire part-time workforce.

"The annual saving to Amazon from this cost-cutting move is roughly what Bezos – whose net worth is $110 billion – makes in two hours. (Bezos’s nearly-completed D.C. mansion will have 2 elevators, 25 bathrooms, 11 bedrooms, and a movie theater.)"

The annual saving to Amazon from this cost-cutting move is roughly what Bezos – whose net worth is $110 billion – makes in two hours.

Bezos isn't paid hourly.

ezos isn't paid hourly

Now you know.

 

[georgephillip]

Then you can't complain that wealthy people have all the wealth. You can't say cake is bad for you, and then turn right around, and complain rich people own all the cake, and they need to share it.

I never said rich people need to share the stock market; rich people need to have their unearned income taxed at a much higher rate than people who earn their money by providing goods and services that grow the economy as opposed to those who strangle GDP with concentric coils of debt.

Exclusive: How Private Debt Strangles Growth, Stokes Financial Crises, and Increases Inequality | naked capitalism

But when you post graphs about the wealthy and poor.... the stock market wealth, is that wealth. You have posted dozens of graphs about how much wealth the rich have, and contrasted that with how much wealth the poor have.

The stock market, is that wealth. The vast vast majority of the wealth the that wealthy have, is shares in companies.

That $90 Billion that Warren Buffet has, is all in stocks. He doesn't own $90 Billion in houses, or cars, or gold bars, or some vault like Scrooge Mcduck.

Now as for increasing taxes on unearned income...

Then you are just going to give them incentive to invest elsewhere.

As I said before, one of the reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they are investors. Because they are investors, they are going to put their investments where ever there is a good ROI.

My point is... increasing taxes on investments, will result in lower investment. Lower investment means, less jobs, and less wealth for the country.
If you are ok with that, then knock yourself out.

Regardless, my view is that government already has so much money, and people are worse off today, than in the past.
Better to have private people with the money, making products and building the economy.

As I said before, one of the reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they are investors. Because they are investors, they are going to put their investments where ever there is a good ROI.

Their wealth comes from common law court decisions awarding vast private fortunes to a few relative parasites at the expense of the many productive workers they employ:

Robert Reich: Corporate Social Responsibility Is a Scam

"Let’s not forget Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon and its Whole Foods subsidiary.

"Just weeks after Bezos made the Business Roundtable commitment to all his stakeholders, Whole Foods announced it would be cutting medical benefits for its entire part-time workforce.

"The annual saving to Amazon from this cost-cutting move is roughly what Bezos – whose net worth is $110 billion – makes in two hours. (Bezos’s nearly-completed D.C. mansion will have 2 elevators, 25 bathrooms, 11 bedrooms, and a movie theater.)"

Whole Foods has to make a profit. Doesn't matter how much Bezo has. If the store that you work at, doesn't have the money to pay for your health care, then it can't.

Whole Foods has to make a profit. Doesn't matter how much Bezo has. If the store that you work at, doesn't have the money to pay for your health care, then it can't.

Whole Foods doesn't have the money to pay for employee health insurance because parasites like Bezos extract too much unearned income from the corporate coffers.

Thatcher lied to you.

There is an alternative.

Worker Self-Directed Nonprofits

 

[georgephillip]

Then you can't complain that wealthy people have all the wealth. You can't say cake is bad for you, and then turn right around, and complain rich people own all the cake, and they need to share it.

I never said rich people need to share the stock market; rich people need to have their unearned income taxed at a much higher rate than people who earn their money by providing goods and services that grow the economy as opposed to those who strangle GDP with concentric coils of debt.

Exclusive: How Private Debt Strangles Growth, Stokes Financial Crises, and Increases Inequality | naked capitalism

But when you post graphs about the wealthy and poor.... the stock market wealth, is that wealth. You have posted dozens of graphs about how much wealth the rich have, and contrasted that with how much wealth the poor have.

The stock market, is that wealth. The vast vast majority of the wealth the that wealthy have, is shares in companies.

That $90 Billion that Warren Buffet has, is all in stocks. He doesn't own $90 Billion in houses, or cars, or gold bars, or some vault like Scrooge Mcduck.

Now as for increasing taxes on unearned income...

Then you are just going to give them incentive to invest elsewhere.

As I said before, one of the reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they are investors. Because they are investors, they are going to put their investments where ever there is a good ROI.

My point is... increasing taxes on investments, will result in lower investment. Lower investment means, less jobs, and less wealth for the country.
If you are ok with that, then knock yourself out.

Regardless, my view is that government already has so much money, and people are worse off today, than in the past.
Better to have private people with the money, making products and building the economy.

But when you post graphs about the wealthy and poor.... the stock market wealth, is that wealth. You have posted dozens of graphs about how much wealth the rich have, and contrasted that with how much wealth the poor have.

Private wealth that comes from inflicting record levels of debt on 90% of US workers does NOT contribute to GDP growth. In fact, it has the opposite effect and should be taxed accordingly:

Exclusive: How Private Debt Strangles Growth, Stokes Financial Crises, and Increases Inequality | naked capitalism

"Rapid private debt growth also fueled what were viewed as triumphs in their day—the Roaring Twenties, the Japanese 'economic miracle' of the ’80s, and the Asian boom of the ’90s—but each of these were debt-fueled binges that brought these economies to the brink of economic ruin.

"Those crises are the best known, but almost all crises in major countries have been caused by rapid private debt growth coupled with high overall levels of private debt.

"The reverse is true as well; almost all instances of rapid debt growth coupled with high over- all levels of private debt have led to crises.

"There are two claims you can count on: Booms come from rapid loan growth.

"And crises come from booms."

Private wealth, does not cause debt.

As I have said before, I make just barely $30k a year, and last year was the first year I made $30K. Before that It was $20K a year for the last 2 decades.

I have no debt. You pointed out that the wealthy have doubled their wealth over the past 10 years. I have zero debt.

How does wealthy people having wealth cause debt? And if it does, how am I immune to this?
Can you explain?

The roaring 20s did not cause a debt fueled crash. Government caused the crash.

The Japan debt, and our debt, is not caused by private wealth.

Debt is caused by spending too much.

To claim otherwise is ridiculous Are you seriously suggesting, that if the government collected less money, that somehow we could still over spend, and not have debt?

Again, Michael Jackson made by most estimates, almost a billion dollars in his lifetime. By the time he died, he was bankrupt. That's the whole reason he went on the "This is it!" Tour, because otherwise he'd be in bankruptcy.

How does one man make a billion dollars, and end up impoverished? The same way the Federal Government can collect $3.3 Trillion dollars, and end up impoverished.

Because you spend, more than you make.

Debt is caused by over spending. The rich people of this world do not force individuals to over spend, nor do they force governments to over spend.


Stop over spending.

As I have said before, I make just barely $30k a year, and last year was the first year I made $30K. Before that It was $20K a year for the last 2 decades.

I have no debt. You pointed out that the wealthy have doubled their wealth over the past 10 years. I have zero debt.

Neither do I, and I'm probably a generation older than you. I never made more than $18,000 in a single year during my entire working life. Some years I made $0 WITHOUT being incarcerated.

The fact that you and I managed to survive debt free doesn't change the historical reality that for thousands of years the richest ten percent of a country became rich by lending money at interest to 90% of their fellow citizens.

That is exactly was has happened here over the past forty years, independently of which major political party controls government.

https://www.debt.org/faqs/americans-in-debt/

"Consumer debt was approaching $14-trillion after the second quarter of 2019, according to the New York Federal Reserve. It was the 20th consecutive quarter for an increase.

"The record $13.86-trillion of debt for Q2 was up $219 billion from the previous quarter and up $1.2-trillion over the previous record high of $12.68-trillion in the third quarter of 2008.

"There has been consistent growth in four main areas of debt — home, auto, student loans and credit cards."

Much of that credit card debt is not being spent on luxury items; it is being spent on necessities no longer affordable after five decades of wage stagnation.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Then you can't complain that wealthy people have all the wealth. You can't say cake is bad for you, and then turn right around, and complain rich people own all the cake, and they need to share it.

I never said rich people need to share the stock market; rich people need to have their unearned income taxed at a much higher rate than people who earn their money by providing goods and services that grow the economy as opposed to those who strangle GDP with concentric coils of debt.

Exclusive: How Private Debt Strangles Growth, Stokes Financial Crises, and Increases Inequality | naked capitalism

But when you post graphs about the wealthy and poor.... the stock market wealth, is that wealth. You have posted dozens of graphs about how much wealth the rich have, and contrasted that with how much wealth the poor have.

The stock market, is that wealth. The vast vast majority of the wealth the that wealthy have, is shares in companies.

That $90 Billion that Warren Buffet has, is all in stocks. He doesn't own $90 Billion in houses, or cars, or gold bars, or some vault like Scrooge Mcduck.

Now as for increasing taxes on unearned income...

Then you are just going to give them incentive to invest elsewhere.

As I said before, one of the reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they are investors. Because they are investors, they are going to put their investments where ever there is a good ROI.

My point is... increasing taxes on investments, will result in lower investment. Lower investment means, less jobs, and less wealth for the country.
If you are ok with that, then knock yourself out.

Regardless, my view is that government already has so much money, and people are worse off today, than in the past.
Better to have private people with the money, making products and building the economy.

As I said before, one of the reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they are investors. Because they are investors, they are going to put their investments where ever there is a good ROI.

Their wealth comes from common law court decisions awarding vast private fortunes to a few relative parasites at the expense of the many productive workers they employ:

Robert Reich: Corporate Social Responsibility Is a Scam

"Let’s not forget Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon and its Whole Foods subsidiary.

"Just weeks after Bezos made the Business Roundtable commitment to all his stakeholders, Whole Foods announced it would be cutting medical benefits for its entire part-time workforce.

"The annual saving to Amazon from this cost-cutting move is roughly what Bezos – whose net worth is $110 billion – makes in two hours. (Bezos’s nearly-completed D.C. mansion will have 2 elevators, 25 bathrooms, 11 bedrooms, and a movie theater.)"

The annual saving to Amazon from this cost-cutting move is roughly what Bezos – whose net worth is $110 billion – makes in two hours.

Bezos isn't paid hourly.

ezos isn't paid hourly

Now you know.

Bezos isn't paid hourly.
Now you know.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Then you can't complain that wealthy people have all the wealth. You can't say cake is bad for you, and then turn right around, and complain rich people own all the cake, and they need to share it.

I never said rich people need to share the stock market; rich people need to have their unearned income taxed at a much higher rate than people who earn their money by providing goods and services that grow the economy as opposed to those who strangle GDP with concentric coils of debt.

Exclusive: How Private Debt Strangles Growth, Stokes Financial Crises, and Increases Inequality | naked capitalism

But when you post graphs about the wealthy and poor.... the stock market wealth, is that wealth. You have posted dozens of graphs about how much wealth the rich have, and contrasted that with how much wealth the poor have.

The stock market, is that wealth. The vast vast majority of the wealth the that wealthy have, is shares in companies.

That $90 Billion that Warren Buffet has, is all in stocks. He doesn't own $90 Billion in houses, or cars, or gold bars, or some vault like Scrooge Mcduck.

Now as for increasing taxes on unearned income...

Then you are just going to give them incentive to invest elsewhere.

As I said before, one of the reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they are investors. Because they are investors, they are going to put their investments where ever there is a good ROI.

My point is... increasing taxes on investments, will result in lower investment. Lower investment means, less jobs, and less wealth for the country.
If you are ok with that, then knock yourself out.

Regardless, my view is that government already has so much money, and people are worse off today, than in the past.
Better to have private people with the money, making products and building the economy.

As I said before, one of the reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they are investors. Because they are investors, they are going to put their investments where ever there is a good ROI.

Their wealth comes from common law court decisions awarding vast private fortunes to a few relative parasites at the expense of the many productive workers they employ:

Robert Reich: Corporate Social Responsibility Is a Scam

"Let’s not forget Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon and its Whole Foods subsidiary.

"Just weeks after Bezos made the Business Roundtable commitment to all his stakeholders, Whole Foods announced it would be cutting medical benefits for its entire part-time workforce.

"The annual saving to Amazon from this cost-cutting move is roughly what Bezos – whose net worth is $110 billion – makes in two hours. (Bezos’s nearly-completed D.C. mansion will have 2 elevators, 25 bathrooms, 11 bedrooms, and a movie theater.)"

Whole Foods has to make a profit. Doesn't matter how much Bezo has. If the store that you work at, doesn't have the money to pay for your health care, then it can't.

Whole Foods has to make a profit. Doesn't matter how much Bezo has. If the store that you work at, doesn't have the money to pay for your health care, then it can't.

Whole Foods doesn't have the money to pay for employee health insurance because parasites like Bezos extract too much unearned income from the corporate coffers.

Thatcher lied to you.

There is an alternative.

Worker Self-Directed Nonprofits

Whole Foods doesn't have the money to pay for employee health insurance

Whole Foods doesn't have the money to pay for employee health insurance for employees that work fewer than 30 hours a week. About 1900 workers,

because parasites like Bezos extract too much unearned income from the corporate coffers.

You ever find the info on employee compensation versus profit.....for any public company? For Amazon?