Something like 70% of the extremely wealthy are Democrats.
Make it make sense. It doesn't.
Make it make sense. It doesn't.
DallasAg 94 said:They're talking about:backintexas2013 said:
Define rich? The super wealthy? Yes most support her. The top 10% who get fleeced in the name of fairness to lazy? Not sure. Never seen it broken down like that.
Mark Cuban
Buffett
Zucker
Bill Gates
Bezos...
You know... the wealthy ones that got rich off of Government money and policy.
That's the Rich/Super wealthy that support her. It is the group most people think the Democrats are referring to having to "pay their fair share." It is also the people who say "the rich should pay their fair share."Tom Fox said:DallasAg 94 said:They're talking about:backintexas2013 said:
Define rich? The super wealthy? Yes most support her. The top 10% who get fleeced in the name of fairness to lazy? Not sure. Never seen it broken down like that.
Mark Cuban
Buffett
Zucker
Bill Gates
Bezos...
You know... the wealthy ones that got rich off of Government money and policy.
That is not who is getting taxed into oblivion. It is small business owners and the professional class.
If you want to target that class of voters like Cuban it can't be done through income taxes.
It doesn't.backintexas2013 said:
Notice the Kamala supporters won't touch an actual policy thread. Just curious how taxing the rich helps the middle class get out of debt they created for themselves
The most telling part about this, is that Kamala is assuming her supporters are economic morons.DallasAg 94 said:That's the Rich/Super wealthy that support her. It is the group most people think the Democrats are referring to having to "pay their fair share." It is also the people who say "the rich should pay their fair share."Tom Fox said:DallasAg 94 said:They're talking about:backintexas2013 said:
Define rich? The super wealthy? Yes most support her. The top 10% who get fleeced in the name of fairness to lazy? Not sure. Never seen it broken down like that.
Mark Cuban
Buffett
Zucker
Bill Gates
Bezos...
You know... the wealthy ones that got rich off of Government money and policy.
That is not who is getting taxed into oblivion. It is small business owners and the professional class.
If you want to target that class of voters like Cuban it can't be done through income taxes.
HOWEVER, it is not the people any of those Dems are really going to tax. You are right... that doesn't require Income Tax increases. It requires confiscation. Which is what Pocahontas wants with her 3% wealth tax... which will never happen.
They are going to take it from the top 20% of earners. That is where the money is located.deddog said:The most telling part about this, is that Kamala is assuming her supporters are economic morons.DallasAg 94 said:That's the Rich/Super wealthy that support her. It is the group most people think the Democrats are referring to having to "pay their fair share." It is also the people who say "the rich should pay their fair share."Tom Fox said:DallasAg 94 said:They're talking about:backintexas2013 said:
Define rich? The super wealthy? Yes most support her. The top 10% who get fleeced in the name of fairness to lazy? Not sure. Never seen it broken down like that.
Mark Cuban
Buffett
Zucker
Bill Gates
Bezos...
You know... the wealthy ones that got rich off of Government money and policy.
That is not who is getting taxed into oblivion. It is small business owners and the professional class.
If you want to target that class of voters like Cuban it can't be done through income taxes.
HOWEVER, it is not the people any of those Dems are really going to tax. You are right... that doesn't require Income Tax increases. It requires confiscation. Which is what Pocahontas wants with her 3% wealth tax... which will never happen.
And the fact is, they are if they vote for her.
There are 756 billionaires in the US. ( Link)
Their collective fortunes total $ 5.2 Trillion ( Link)
The US Government spent $6.2 Trillion for FY 23 (Link)
Even if you CONFISCATED the income of every billionaire in the US, you wouldn't be able to pay for an entire year of Government spending. And what happens in the year after you've confiscated the income?
Where do you think government is going to get this money from?
Yup. Eviscerate the upper middle class.Tom Fox said:They are going to take it from the top 20% of earners. That is where the money is located.deddog said:The most telling part about this, is that Kamala is assuming her supporters are economic morons.DallasAg 94 said:That's the Rich/Super wealthy that support her. It is the group most people think the Democrats are referring to having to "pay their fair share." It is also the people who say "the rich should pay their fair share."Tom Fox said:DallasAg 94 said:They're talking about:backintexas2013 said:
Define rich? The super wealthy? Yes most support her. The top 10% who get fleeced in the name of fairness to lazy? Not sure. Never seen it broken down like that.
Mark Cuban
Buffett
Zucker
Bill Gates
Bezos...
You know... the wealthy ones that got rich off of Government money and policy.
That is not who is getting taxed into oblivion. It is small business owners and the professional class.
If you want to target that class of voters like Cuban it can't be done through income taxes.
HOWEVER, it is not the people any of those Dems are really going to tax. You are right... that doesn't require Income Tax increases. It requires confiscation. Which is what Pocahontas wants with her 3% wealth tax... which will never happen.
And the fact is, they are if they vote for her.
There are 756 billionaires in the US. ( Link)
Their collective fortunes total $ 5.2 Trillion ( Link)
The US Government spent $6.2 Trillion for FY 23 (Link)
Even if you CONFISCATED the income of every billionaire in the US, you wouldn't be able to pay for an entire year of Government spending. And what happens in the year after you've confiscated the income?
Where do you think government is going to get this money from?
Hungry Ojos said:
It shows just how ridiculously stupid she and her supporters are. You could confiscate 100% of all US billionaires' assets and it wouldn't make a dent in the middle class. Just so ****ing stupid.
In my recent discussions with educated liberals, the number they like ti throw around is more than $400k in earnings.backintexas2013 said:
lol. Dems can't define that. They have no clue. Talk in general is their thing. Heck they can't define the rich
Never underestimate the stupidity and ignorance of the average American. Then realize half of America is more stupid and ignorant than that average person.oh no said:
there are some America-hating communists out there who can see what's happening and just love it, but there are millions and millions of programmed / brainwashed low IQ useful idiots and npc bots out there who just love the feelz of the platitudes being shared to them and don't even realize they're voting for communism.
If I had to guess, that seems like it would be household income. If I am right, would absolutely be shocked if the percentage of people who post on this website who have a household income over 130k is not at least 60%.backintexas2013 said:
Top 20% is about $130,000. I bet it's quite a lot of texags posters.
That's only $130,000+Tom Fox said:They are going to take it from the top 20% of earners. That is where the money is located.deddog said:The most telling part about this, is that Kamala is assuming her supporters are economic morons.DallasAg 94 said:That's the Rich/Super wealthy that support her. It is the group most people think the Democrats are referring to having to "pay their fair share." It is also the people who say "the rich should pay their fair share."Tom Fox said:DallasAg 94 said:They're talking about:backintexas2013 said:
Define rich? The super wealthy? Yes most support her. The top 10% who get fleeced in the name of fairness to lazy? Not sure. Never seen it broken down like that.
Mark Cuban
Buffett
Zucker
Bill Gates
Bezos...
You know... the wealthy ones that got rich off of Government money and policy.
That is not who is getting taxed into oblivion. It is small business owners and the professional class.
If you want to target that class of voters like Cuban it can't be done through income taxes.
HOWEVER, it is not the people any of those Dems are really going to tax. You are right... that doesn't require Income Tax increases. It requires confiscation. Which is what Pocahontas wants with her 3% wealth tax... which will never happen.
And the fact is, they are if they vote for her.
There are 756 billionaires in the US. ( Link)
Their collective fortunes total $ 5.2 Trillion ( Link)
The US Government spent $6.2 Trillion for FY 23 (Link)
Even if you CONFISCATED the income of every billionaire in the US, you wouldn't be able to pay for an entire year of Government spending. And what happens in the year after you've confiscated the income?
Where do you think government is going to get this money from?
Obama floated $200k as rich in the 2009-2010 time frame. The real goal is coming after retirement accounts anyway possible (think taxing unrealized gains as a start).Tom Fox said:In my recent discussions with educated liberals, the number they like ti throw around is more than $400k in earnings.backintexas2013 said:
lol. Dems can't define that. They have no clue. Talk in general is their thing. Heck they can't define the rich
That is somewhere around the top 3% of US households.
Google says $130K as of July 2024backintexas2013 said:
I think $190,000 household is top 20%. Going off memory
Taxing the rich more will reduce inflation more. Also, Kamala's policy is not just to increase taxes on the rich, but also to close tax loopholes that allow the rich to pay far less than they owe.backintexas2013 said:
Notice the Kamala supporters won't touch an actual policy thread. Just curious how taxing the rich helps the middle class get out of debt they created for themselves
You don't even get close on confiscating income. Even if you confiscated all 756 billionaires entire net worth, you still are a trillion short of covering 1 year of Federal spending.deddog said:
There are 756 billionaires in the US. ( Link)
Their collective fortunes total $ 5.2 Trillion ( Link)
The US Government spent $6.2 Trillion for FY 23 (Link)
Even if you CONFISCATED the income of every billionaire in the US, you wouldn't be able to pay for an entire year of Government spending. And what happens in the year after you've confiscated the income?
Where do you think government is going to get this money from?
The middle class idiots who vote for Bidenomics.DarkBrandon01 said:Taxing the rich more will reduce inflation more. Also, Kamala's policy is not just to increase taxes on the rich, but also to close tax loopholes that allow the rich to pay far less than they owe.backintexas2013 said:
Notice the Kamala supporters won't touch an actual policy thread. Just curious how taxing the rich helps the middle class get out of debt they created for themselves
I am also very curious about why the middle class is being blamed for their own financial struggles, when on every other thread on this forum, people blame Bidenomics for it.
Which is it?
Did the middle class just become more stupid and fiscally irresponsible over the past decade?
Or is there a wider systemic issue that prevents financial prosperity?
I'll give you a hint. If one person struggles, that's an individual problem. If everyone struggles, that's a societal problem.
So why blame the middle class for a situation they cannot control?
Before claiming that he would tax "millionaires and billionaires"TAMU1990 said:Obama floated $200k as rich in the 2009-2010 time frame. The real goal is coming after retirement accounts anyway possible (think taxing unrealized gains as a start).Tom Fox said:In my recent discussions with educated liberals, the number they like ti throw around is more than $400k in earnings.backintexas2013 said:
lol. Dems can't define that. They have no clue. Talk in general is their thing. Heck they can't define the rich
That is somewhere around the top 3% of US households.
wealth is what i meant, nice catch.aglaes said:You don't even get close on confiscating income. Even if you confiscated all 756 billionaires entire net worth, you still are a trillion short of covering 1 year of Federal spending.deddog said:
There are 756 billionaires in the US. ( Link)
Their collective fortunes total $ 5.2 Trillion ( Link)
The US Government spent $6.2 Trillion for FY 23 (Link)
Even if you CONFISCATED the income of every billionaire in the US, you wouldn't be able to pay for an entire year of Government spending. And what happens in the year after you've confiscated the income?
Where do you think government is going to get this money from?
It would take roughly 25% of ALL US citizens net worth to pay the total Federal Debt - ie $34 trillion.
Fenrir said:
How does taxing the rich reduce inflation? What is the mechanism at play there?