Ocasio-Cortez suggests 70% tax for wealthy to fund climate change plan

You actually let them do that to you? Who was the last one to do so and what did they tell you to do and when and did you do it?

 

It shows the opposite, if you increase the tax rates it effects tax revenue negatively as Clinton found out. When you lower them it effects tax revenue positively as Gingrich and Kasich said it would and it did and as Bush43 proved again.

 

No he didn't. He has a slight rise in the Federal Debt (6%) despite exploding GDP growth (69%). That is how Trump has reduced the Debt to GDP ratio. Remember, the key is growing GDP faster than the debt, which now that Trump is in command, we are finally doing.

Well, they gave lip service to concern, but, I don't think the House under Ryan did any better of a job controlling Debt growth than Pelosi did.

Silly nonsense, the Debt to GDP ratio was higher under Barack The Unfortunate, in Dec 2016 than it is today.

• Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and U.S. Office of Management and Budget, Federal Debt: Total Public Debt as Percent of Gross Domestic Product [GFDEGDQ188S], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDEGDQ188S, January 14, 2019.

Sure, that is why the Democrats are all pushing for tax cuts for the rich by removing the cap on SALT deductions.

Wage growth is finally exceeding inflation, in the Trump Economic Expansion.

And yet their take home pay is finally increasing.

Why the hell are you still here then? The only reason their model has been "working" is because they rob us blind on trade and freeload of the US Taxpayer for their National Defense. Trump's fixing that too.

Yeah weird. United SOCIALIST Soviet Republic. Hitler was a National SOCIALIST. One of the deadliest doctrines in human history and no matter how many nations it destroys and people it kills, we are forever assured that if only the Sophomores at Santa Cruz State could implement, why, it would be utopia! Little hint, Utopians are Murderers.

With them in control of the government that doles out the goodies, and as always, when government takes control from the People, Government serves the needs of Government, not the People. No thank you. Our Constitution has it right THE PEOPLE rule, the government are but our servants.

Free Markets serve everyone.

We need to break up the Big Tech Companies. They are a bunch of phony Libs and they amassed far too much wealth and power.

She's a self-righteous idiot, convinced she's a genius.

Let's hope so.

 

I am intimately familiar with the capitalist dogmas you're posting. It's true capitalism has produced great wealth for America, but CEOs & brain surgeons weren't the only ones involved in that success story. But they and the wealthy social class they represent, are the only ones benefiting from that wealth. I'm simply stating the obvious--that CEOs couldn't have succeeded without the constant work of managers & workers doing their jobs within that CEOs business. Brain surgeons couldn't create wealth without the universities, college professors, teachers, fellow surgeons, who taught them their specialty, and supporting medical staff who make that surgery possible. CEOs & brain surgeons or any other highly paid success story made America wealthy alone & on their own. They are success stories because many underlings did their job well as well. We all contribute to America's economic success. All I'm saying is that America has evolved into a country that no longer rewards those in middle & lower classes for their contributions toward that success. America is only rewarding the wealthy elements. That's wrong morally & a social long-term danger. History offers several examples where countries or societies became so imbalanced that small ultra-wealthy families owned & controlled large segments of that nation's wealth, popular resentments eventually exploded into revolutions, whose outcomes were seldom those originally sought. I want to avoid such outcomes. I also want my country to share the wealth more sensibly & more humanely.

I also disagree with your suggestion that we can all be measured for our value as a human based on monetary considerations. Trump is worth billions, and has the power to create wealth almost from simply being present, but as a human being, he's an impoverished, miserable example of a man.

 

What I find hard to understand is your belief that the college professors, teachers", etc. did not benefit from the successes of "brain surgeons" and anyone else. We all have benefited from the industry, inventiveness, determined work ethic of other people, XploreR, and those other people were paid agreeable compensation for their labor -- were they not?

You get your car repaired -- and the mechanic is paid what he is willing to work for. You get your teeth cleaned -- and the dental hygienist gets agreeable compensation. And, yes, you have surgery done on your brain and, of course, the surgeon also gets paid what he/she thinks is a fair reward for services rendered. Surely THAT is not the problem. We make what we earn in a free market system. We make what we are worth -- no more, and no less. What part am I misunderstanding?

I would submit to you that the real problem occurs in the TAXATION on that agreeable compensation! All the loopholes, tax shelters, deductions, exemptions, carried- interest, and all the other crap in the U. S. Tax Code -- even AFTER Trump did fix some of the things that have needed overhaul. We still desperately need a complete do-over of the entire taxation system -- precisely because THAT is what treats people unfairly in this country -- but not the amount of money that we are paid in our jobs, per se. We always have the right to leave a job that we think does not pay us fairly, BUT, none of us can escape an obviously, and completely unfair system of taxes on our "agreed upon" compensation.

 

Everyone is connected and reliant on everyone else. Obviously 1 single person can't run a corporation or make/market and sell a product all by themselves, but a whole bunch of worker ants can't do diddly squat without someone telling them what to do. A world of worker ants can't create crap without a queen. A corporation without leadership, FAILS. Underlings need to be told what to do and leaders need the underlings to do it. But you need the leaders to think up and execute the ideas. Apple was a NOTHING company without Steve Jobs and Steve Jobs was just a complete whackjob without really talented people that could make his ideas come to life.

But it STARTS at the top. ALWAYS does. There are no corporations and therefor no wealth, without the leaders building them. And good corporations spread the wealth. But labor has a cost and a price. The guys cleaning toilets at Google aren't nearly as valuable as the engineers. In NO LOGICAL WORLD can these people be treated on the same level. They simply aren't equal in any measurable way, so you can't spread the wealth to the janitors to make them rich. They're janitors. Their job requires very little training and very little skill and brainpower. Do CEOs get rewarded insanely compared to janitors? Yes. But why shouldn't they? Janitors risk nothing, have no stress or real responsibility. Is it hard work? Sure. But nearly any human being on earth who is physically capable, can do it. The vast majority of people couldn't even imagine or handle running a business, much less a corporation. CEOs are stressed 24/7. If you don't think so, you have NEVER met a CEO in your life. Exceptions exist of course. Some people fall into wealth, but that's life. It ain't fair.

You want more money? Its VERY simple. Get skills that convince people to PAY YOU MORE. Discounting people with disabilities, your lot in life is determined by you and you alone. If you're not making enough, that's on YOU. You want a bigger piece? Go take it. Expecting the govt to take it for you is a recipe for disaster.

 

Over the past few months I've watched several news outlets, all of which agree that Trump past the 19 trillion dollar level in his first budget year as President. Every news source I say or read, agreed it was a historical record. I'm no economist, so I have no interest in challenging their conclusions, but I've found in 99% of past cases, their numbers were reliable.

 

You said:
...Trump's deficit breaks all past records....
FY2018 deficit was $782B, higher than the FY2017 deficit of $666B
http://www.crfb.org/blogs/cbo-shows-782-billion-deficit-fy-2018

Are you ignorant of the fact this is not a record deficit, or are you indeed aware of that fact and chose make a claim you know to be false?

 

It's all intricately interwoven into our daily society. Only wealthy people own businesses that hire you or me as workers. They become our "bosses", and constantly tell us what to do, when, and how--and jump on us with all fours when we make a mistake or fail to live up to "their" standards. They decide when, where & for what we get laid off or fired. In many cases they become the judges that determine winners & losers in all sorts of competitions. They manage & control our personal lives in so many ways, it's hard to imagine. And, it's done on a subconscious level often times. Take a look at Congress. Up until 2018, practically every member was a millionaire. They control the government too. They control everything--more now than ever before in history. Though it's been true throughout history, in most countries too. Money opens many more opportunities to one, but it doesn't make anyone a better human being for having it. In many cases, just the opposite is true. Look at Trump--a fine example--of a man oozing wealth, but a miserable human being incapable of love or compassion.

 

1: You don't know to many business owners, or you have a very loose definition of "wealthy"
2: They're paying you, and they expect you do your job; if you do your job correctly, they don't have to tell you anything

Your entire post is written with the tenor of a spoiled, entitled millennial who takes exception to having to earn a living.

 

1. The "growth" you refer to is from the stock market. Investors were excited about the Laisse Faire promise of Trump, and went hog wild on the markets. But some investors are beginning to see the dark side of Trump, and the markets are in great flux. Who knows what will happen next? The market could end up falling faster than it rose, and end up pushing this nation's economy into a deep recession or even depression. And, what will Trump's reputation as a capitalist or as a leader be then? Meanwhile, the deficit continues to rise.
2. Agreed. But it appears the only time Republicans really care about the deficit is when it belongs to a Democrat.
3. Conservatives & Republicans conveniently like to forget Obama inherited a broken economy from W, and had a divided or Republican controlled Congress unwilling to work with him for six out of eight years of his term in office. Republicans have proven incapable of rule when they control all of Congress & the White House. Is it supposed to be a surprise that nothing got done with them during Obama's years?
4. By how much?
5. For three decades, workers across America worked for stagnant wages while the wealthy classes enjoyed the largest gains in income for any period of American history. A tremendous increase in American wealth occurred, but the middle & lower classes got none of it. Now you're excited that everyday workers are getting paychecks that are above the level of inflation? What's that--2%, or 2.5%? Over the last three decades, the wealthy enjoyed increases of income between 50% & 90% in short time frames. And you want us to be excited that Trump is bringing 2% or 2.5% increases in wages that will be frozen again immediately, for years to come? And, exactly how much of that 2% or 2.5% is actually ABOVE inflation? Perhaps 0.5%--or less? Yeah, for sure, Trump is something else. Whew. . .
6. For most of history, Europe was the global hotbed for armed conflict. It was almost continual. In the last century, World Wars 1 & 2, took up a total of 10 years of that century, and only 21 years of relative peace divided them. Since NATO was formed we've enjoyed perhaps the longest period of peace in Europe in history. You complain about the cost of that peace rather than feeling gratitude for it. I disagree. I feel that peace was cheaply won, and I applaud both the European & American leaders with the foresight & commitment to make that possible. Just one war during those years of peace would have cost multiples more in monetary expenditures, plus the loss of millions of innocent lives. I disagree with your logic, your thinking, and your values on this--strongly.
7. The term "socialist" has been badly abused. The communist government of the Soviet Union called themselves "Socialist" because they knew that was a positive system to be affiliated, and it was good propaganda for their public image. All communist governments during the 20th century did the same. But none offered real "socialist" programs or policies benefiting their citizens. Communist & National Socialist countries both became tyrannical dictatorships. Real "Socialist" countries are founded on the principle that individuals have value that should be rewarded as part of the general society. That includes personal human rights. Real "Socialist" countries don't become dictatorships, because that's counter to respecting human rights & human values.
8. I agree with you for communist & national socialist countries, but not true Democratic Socialist ones. I also want to submit that capitalist corporations and individual business monopolies can be as bossy, controlling, and harsh to local populations as a government can. Abuse isn't limited to government alone. Personally, I feel every organization reflects the character of the individuals controlling it. We can have good or bad companies, or corporations. And, we can have good or bad governments--depending on who is in charge at any given time.
9. If that were true, we wouldn't be living in a country where <2% of our citizens receive >98% of the wealth created by everyone working together as a nation.
10. Sounds very authoritarian. Select a fall guy, blame him for every ill, and use him as a ploy to keep your followers focused on anything but the truth. It works. Trump is living proof.
11. AOC cares about the worker class, minorities, women, and America generally, and is dedicated to doing what she can to make improvements. Conservatives can only find new & more imaginative ways to attack her. I think the focus of the two opponents is enough to offer clarity & truth, if one is open to truth.
12. Finally. . .something we can agree on.

 

Nothing is stopping you from become your own boss and allowing those working for you to not feel controlled or stuck or a loser. If you work for someone, you do the job you're hired for. Their standard should be YOUR standard. Are you still in college, because it sounds like it. Before many business owners ever become wealthy, they're usually close to BROKE or in debt. Often, they don't pay themselves because the business has expenses and they have to put all of that first. You understand this right?

 

Thing is, until what, the early 1970's, taxes on the wealthy were well over 50%, and there were no shortages of millionaires. don't take my word for it, look it up.

Reaganomics has screwed this country royal, no matter how many variations are tried.

 

Reality check:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-09-14/tax-cuts-are-costing-the-u-s-treasury-money

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/30/the...hat-cutting-corporate-taxes-creates-jobs.html

 

I'm curious. How do you feel about the fact that all the middle class & lower class workers of America worked for a statistically stagnant wage for three decades, while the wealthy classes' income during that same period went up over 90%? How is that commensurate with your views on the benefits of capitalism? I am not opposed to the wealthy being wealthy. I'm not against their success, financially or otherwise. I applaud them. But I am concerned that my country has allowed a situation to develop where the middle and lower classes are working harder and making less in terms of living costs than they made three to four decades ago. I'm concerned that fewer & fewer families have become wealthy beyond any human need at the expense of the masses. I'm concerned for both the impact of that discrepancy in wealth on our culture and our country, and for the conflicts that can erupt from its continuing. I'm also concerned for the growing presence of what are effectively monopolies in a widening variety of commercial interests. Capitalists preach the value of competition, but our current system is becoming increasingly monopolistic. That too, serves only the wealthy class. American capitalism is no longer working for the majority of its citizens. It needs fixing. Or, it needs rejecting.

 

I think some form of profit sharing by increasing numbers of companies & corporations would go a long way toward alleviating the disrespectful gap between the wealthy & the masses. Increasing taxes on the wealthy would also help.

There are examples of failed companies being taken over or bought out by their own workers & they--working cooperatively--carrying that company to financial success. We need more of that.

 

I notice that you didn't even bother to respond to my suggestion that the "monster under the wage-earners bed" is the system of grossly unfair taxation in the United States. You didn't bother to respond to my observation that people EARN what they are WORTH in a free-market system. No surprise... 'bottom-feeder' socialists rarely concern themselves about taxation, because they usually earn little or nothing in income besides what they can talk the government out of in various kinds of "subsidies" and other welfare. And words like "earn" and "worth" have little relevance to them, either. Their mantra is, "I exist, so the world owes ME a living -- and a pretty damned good living at that!"

No, instead of taking even a moment to consider any of that, you prefer instead to jump over to your insistence that the 'distribution' of money in this country itself is somehow wrong, ignoring completely what an individual worker actually does, and what that work is worth. You seem to formulate your outlook based on a subjective pronouncement that Capitalism must either be 'fixed', or 'rejected'.

OK, since it is obvious that you'd just like to reject Capitalism as it is practiced in the United States, tell us what you want to replace it with... VENEZUELA?!

 

Remember this about the U. S. Tax Code -- the tax BRACKET is completely unimportant! The important thing is how much a person actually PAYS IN TAXES.

You might be in a very high "tax bracket" -- but, if you have lots and lots of tax shelters, deductions, exclusions, and exemptions, plus you're able to hire tax lawyers and tax accountants to shelter your money in lots of labyrinthine tax loopholes -- then, like MAGIC, suddenly you're actually paying little or nothing! See how THAT works? See how THAT is the thing we should be focusing on?! The hypothetical "tax bracket" doesn't really mean a damn thing!

 

I understand better than you think. When my wife & I started our small business, we paid our few workers double the minimum wage right out of the gate. If I had more to give, I would.

 

Interesting assumption. I skipped your posting on taxation because I don't have time at the moment to respond in depth. I'll save that for later.

You've read enough of my posts, and responded to enough of them, to know I regard Venezuela as a communist country, not a socialist one. I've also posted the fact than many former communist nations called themselves "socialist" to appear more moderate in their propaganda. But socialists & communists have less in common than socialists & capitalists do. America has been badly propagandized on the subject during the Cold War, and much of that lingers in the American consciousness--to everyone's detriment. I used to support American capitalism as it exists. But over the years, I've felt the barriers, and the very real limitations imposed by it on me personally, and friends. During the 2016 campaign, Bernie Sanders brought it into distinct focus with his statistic of 2% of our wealthiest families owning & controlling 98% of our wealth as a nation. For me, that left 98% of us competing over the 2% of leftover scraps not siphoned up by those wealthy elites. That forced me to recognize the dark side of American capitalism in a way I'd never felt before. It changed me. I agreed with Bernie, and still do. I agree with AOC as well--and other new Democratic Socialists now running for or elected to office. They want to address the breakdown of capitalism in America, and fix it's inability to get some of that wealth into the hands of the middle & lower classes. I believe America should stand for opportunities for all its occupants--not just a few. Capitalists will tell us that that is already true, but that's fake news, because only the wealthy can compete in today's America. The middle class has been squeezed out, and is disappearing. And the lower class is growing larger every day. America's greatness was based on the middle class. That greatness faded when the middle class began fading away. America will NEVER be "great again" with a tiny wealthy elite coupled to a monstrous impoverished class.

 

If you got something to say then say it, blind links refute nothing.

 

And the effective tax rates were virtually the same as today due to the HUGE deductions and credits back then. don't take my word for it, look it up.

Reaganomics produced the longest period of sustained growth and a HUGE advancement by the middle class and they work everytime.

 

And what is the distinction you are making here?

What barriers as a result of capitalism have you suffered under and been limited by and be specific. You think you would be less limited by a centrally controlled socialist economy and government?

Not even close and how do you assess the entire worth of EVERYTHING in the country? When was this ever done?

How did that effect you at all, go out and earn your wealth, you think other people are supposed to turn theirs over to you?

It's working quite well with the lowest unemployment numbers in history especially for the minority classes and incomes rising for everyone. Why would you want to stop that and go back to stagnant socialist policies where government says how much you will have?

It is most certainly true and there is no another country in the world or has ever existed where there is more opportunity for EVERYONE. And the middle class began failing under LIBERAL policies that tend to break up families and punish success and entrepenurialship.

 

OK, then, I guess what you're most concerned with is that some very small percent of us owns and controls ~98% of the total wealth? Is that about it? Then, I've got bad news....

In 1913, "progressive" Democrats under Woodrow Wilson shoved a thing into existence in this country that would eventually control our entire economy -- the Federal Reserve System. It controls everything of any commanding importance in our economy, including money supply, interest rates, and, the all-important ability to 'pick winners and losers' by 'rescuing' those it (in its wisdom) considers (you guessed it) 'too big to fail'! So, you see, XploreR, THAT horse is long since "out of the barn", and especially after summer of 2007, the Fed's choke-hold on the economy has tightened. You, Bernie Sanders, and AOC can like it, dislike it, rage against it, or whatever else amuses you -- as it stands today, you will NEVER force the Federal Reserve (and the insiders who populate it) to give up control.

Now that we've gotten it clear who owns, controls, and actually dictates the 'macro'-level policies of the economy, would you like to return to something that we DO have some degree of individual control over? Like achieving success through what we know how to do, what we can do, what we can produce, what we contribute in VALUE to the economy of the United States, and, what we are willing to do for X-amount of money?

BTW, it won't help to throw your hands in the air and decide to migrate to some 'socialist-paradise', like Denmark, Sweden, or some other European economic 'black hole'. Nearly all of Europe is dominated by its own equivalent of our Federal Reserve System. Theirs is called the European Central Bank. In England, it's (you guessed it) the Bank of England. Japan? It's the Bank of Japan.

Actually, there are only two (TWO) major-league countries left in the civilized world where central banks (and their 'insiders') don't rule and control everything -- China, and the Russian Federation.

So... is Venezuela looking like a better choice for you after all...? If you go, please take the Ocasio-Cortez creature with you. It's bad enough being ruled by a "Big Brother" like the Federal Reserve -- but better it than by incredibly naive, silly morons like her, or Cory Booker, Kamela Harris, or any of the rest of the radical Democrat "Insane Clown Posse"....

 

I don't like lawyers. I think we should tax them 80%! Com'on Socialist, jump on my bandwagon!