Help the billionaires

[Rastafarian]

Nonfarm Business Sector: Labor Share for All Workers

Graph and download economic data for Nonfarm Business Sector: Labor Share for All Workers (PRS85006173) from Q1 1947 to Q1 2026 about nonfarm, sector, business, labor, and USA.

fred.stlouisfed.org

For the dummies on this board, this means that our economic policies have created the worst ever environment for working Americans, and the best ever environment for billionaires.

Ironically it got significantly worse for workers during W’s reign, and significantly worse during Pedo Protector’s first reign.

But keep voting Republican since they are so good for the economy.

 

[baltimorened]

Nonfarm Business Sector: Labor Share for All Workers

Graph and download economic data for Nonfarm Business Sector: Labor Share for All Workers (PRS85006173) from Q1 1947 to Q1 2026 about nonfarm, sector, business, labor, and USA.

fred.stlouisfed.org

For the dummies on this board, this means that our economic policies have created the worst ever environment for working Americans, and the best ever environment for billionaires.

Ironically it got significantly worse for workers during W’s reign, and significantly worse during Pedo Protector’s first reign.

But keep voting Republican since they are so good for the economy.

I'm on your side, lets tax everyone earning $1billion a year a marginal rate of at least 50%

 

[Huey Grey 2]

Trickle down has only been going on since the 1980s. I think there's a very real chance the working class starts to see some of the benefits of these policies within the next two weeks.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

I'm on your side, lets tax everyone earning $1billion a year a marginal rate of at least 50%

Arthur Laffer, of Laffer Curve fame, was once asked at what tax rate additional rate increases would reduce revenues. IIRC, he put the "optimal" rate around 45%. Other estimates put it closer to 70%. Laffer may have been conservative to avoid offending his conservative supporters.

I wonder how much additional revenue would be raised by by imposing a 50% tax rate on income above $1 billion? Sounds like a question an AI should be able to answer (or hallucinate, as the case may be).

Laffer curve - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Riveting]

Nonfarm Business Sector: Labor Share for All Workers

Graph and download economic data for Nonfarm Business Sector: Labor Share for All Workers (PRS85006173) from Q1 1947 to Q1 2026 about nonfarm, sector, business, labor, and USA.

fred.stlouisfed.org

For the dummies on this board, this means that our economic policies have created the worst ever environment for working Americans, and the best ever environment for billionaires.

Ironically it got significantly worse for workers during W’s reign, and significantly worse during Pedo Protector’s first reign.

But keep voting Republican since they are so good for the economy.

It may be more nuanced than Mo and you think:

https://www.wsj.com/economy/more-americans-are-breaking-into-the-upper-middle-class-bf8b7cb2?st=B9JueT&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

 

[baltimorened]

Arthur Laffer, of Laffer Curve fame, was once asked at what tax rate additional rate increases would reduce revenues. IIRC, he put the "optimal" rate around 45%. Other estimates put it closer to 70%. Laffer may have been conservative to avoid offending his conservative supporters.

I wonder how much additional revenue would be raised by by imposing a 50% tax rate on income above $1 billion? Sounds like a question an AI should be able to answer (or hallucinate, as the case may be).

Laffer curve - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

very little I think. There are only a handful of Americans who earn $1billion/year or more

 

[fatpiggy]

very little I think. There are only a handful of Americans who earn $1billion/year or more

AI says there are "low dozens" of people that report more than $1B a year. So maybe 30-50 people?

Spoiler

No, the claim is misleading and not fully accurate.

nytimes.com
The "over 100 times" part

• The figure of over 100 contacts (often cited as ~140) between Trump associates/campaign figures and Russian nationals, WikiLeaks, or intermediaries comes from a 2019 New York Times analysis, not a Senate report.
  
  nytimes.com
• This tally includes emails, calls, texts, meetings, and social media messages compiled from public reporting, court records, and the Mueller report. It spans the campaign and transition period (roughly mid-2015 to early 2017). Some were innocuous (e.g., diplomatic outreach), while others raised concerns (e.g., Paul Manafort sharing polling data with Konstantin Kilimnik, who had Russian intelligence ties).
  
  thehill.com

The Senate Intelligence Committee's bipartisan (Republican-led) Volume 5 report (2020) detailed extensive contacts and counterintelligence risks—especially around figures like Manafort, Carter Page, George Papadopoulos, and others—but it did not state or emphasize a specific "over 100 meetings" figure. It focused on how Russia exploited vulnerabilities in the campaign.

intelligence.senate.gov
"Republican Senate report found... Russian collusion"

• The Senate Intelligence Committee investigation was bipartisan (chaired by Republican Richard Burr, with Democrat Mark Warner as vice chair). It affirmed Russian interference aimed at helping Trump but found no evidence of conspiracy or collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.
  
  intelligence.senate.gov
• Key points from the report and related probes:
  • Russia conducted an extensive influence campaign (hacking, disinformation, social media).
  • There were problematic contacts and poor judgment by some Trump associates (e.g., eagerness for dirt on Clinton, failure to report some outreach).
  • No coordination or collusion: The committee, Mueller investigation, and others explicitly did not establish a criminal conspiracy. Mueller stated the evidence "did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government."
    
    npr.org
• The report highlighted "grave" counterintelligence concerns (e.g., Manafort's ties) but stopped short of collusion claims.
  
  npr.org

Bottom line: There were many contacts (some suspicious), which is what you'd expect in a high-profile campaign with foreign interest. The Senate report documented them thoroughly but rejected the "collusion" narrative as a coordinated conspiracy. The meme-style claim mixes a real NYT tally with a partisan spin that the actual Senate findings do not support.

 

[m.knox]

I love when lefties call IRS data right wing propaganda.

 

[GesterHawk]

Nonfarm Business Sector: Labor Share for All Workers

Graph and download economic data for Nonfarm Business Sector: Labor Share for All Workers (PRS85006173) from Q1 1947 to Q1 2026 about nonfarm, sector, business, labor, and USA.

fred.stlouisfed.org

For the dummies on this board, this means that our economic policies have created the worst ever environment for working Americans, and the best ever environment for billionaires.

Ironically it got significantly worse for workers during W’s reign, and significantly worse during Pedo Protector’s first reign.

But keep voting Republican since they are so good for the economy.

 

[GesterHawk]

I'm on your side, lets tax everyone earning $1billion a year a marginal rate of at least 50%

Does that include capital gains?

 

[GesterHawk]

Trickle down has only been going on since the 1980s. I think there's a very real chance the working class starts to see some of the benefits of these policies within the next two weeks.

We just have to make them rich enough to not care if they get richer, then it will start to flow down to the rest of us shlubs.

 

[baltimorened]

Does that include capital gains?

if someone has realized capital gains, sure.

 

[Moral]

if someone has realized capital gains, sure.

Lucky for them they just get low interest loans on their wealth without having to realize those capital gains as they continue to consolidate wealth at the top. All they had to do was buy politicians thanks to Citizen's United and have those politicians pass the bills that the billionaires had crafted in their 501c3 think tanks.

 

[Rastafarian]

Lucky for them they just get low interest loans on their wealth without having to realize those capital gains as they continue to consolidate wealth at the top. All they had to do was buy politicians thanks to Citizen's United and have those politicians pass the bills that the billionaires had crafted in their 501c3 think tanks.

Be careful. You will awaken @bdgan and he will try to argue that there are no tax loopholes for billionaires. You can present him evidence, but somehow he still evades factual information.

 

[bdgan]

Be careful. You will awaken @bdgan and he will try to argue that there are no tax loopholes for billionaires. You can present him evidence, but somehow he still evades factual information.

How is this limited to billionaires? I know I could do it but I'm not interested in spending 4% per year in interest for the next 10-20 years. If I only had 2-3 years to live it would probably make sense. 4% per year for 3 years =12% to avoid 20%-24% capital gains tax.

 

[bdgan]

Nonfarm Business Sector: Labor Share for All Workers

Graph and download economic data for Nonfarm Business Sector: Labor Share for All Workers (PRS85006173) from Q1 1947 to Q1 2026 about nonfarm, sector, business, labor, and USA.

fred.stlouisfed.org

For the dummies on this board, this means that our economic policies have created the worst ever environment for working Americans, and the best ever environment for billionaires.

Ironically it got significantly worse for workers during W’s reign, and significantly worse during Pedo Protector’s first reign.

But keep voting Republican since they are so good for the economy.

What policies have changed over the past 20 years? Don't you realize that people living in Canada & Europe are experiencing the same things?

The UK’s wealth gap has grown by 50% in eight years – and poses a strategic risk to the nation - LSE Inequalities

Canada's Wealth Gap Hits Five-Year High as Stock Gains Bypass Most Households | the deep dive

 

[baltimorened]

Lucky for them they just get low interest loans on their wealth without having to realize those capital gains as they continue to consolidate wealth at the top. All they had to do was buy politicians thanks to Citizen's United and have those politicians pass the bills that the billionaires had crafted in their 501c3 think tanks.

you can do the same thing..I just borrowed against my holding to buy an apartment. It's not just billionaires who have these options, everyone does.

You are aware of the limitations on donations to members of Congress or candidates, right...

 

[bdgan]

Trickle down has only been going on since the 1980s. I think there's a very real chance the working class starts to see some of the benefits of these policies within the next two weeks.

What is trickle down except a theory? Exactly what trickle down policies are in place that you want to get rid of?

 

[fatpiggy]

Be careful. You will awaken @bdgan and he will try to argue that there are no tax loopholes for billionaires. You can present him evidence, but somehow he still evades factual information.

A great point made by the billionaire in the original post.

They aren’t loopholes. It’s architecture. The system is designed that way and these billionaires played by the rules. People are mad at them for winning?

A loophole is something that is noticed and closed quickly. Something that has been that way for a long time with no attempt to change it is not a loophole. Its architecture as the system was designed.

People throw around “loophole” but when it’s time to close that loophole to “their” people they get real shy.

 

[baltimorened]

A great point made by the billionaire in the original post.

They aren’t loopholes. It’s architecture. The system is designed that way and these billionaires played by the rules. People are mad at them for winning?

A loophole is something that is noticed and closed quickly. Something that has been that way for a long time with no attempt to change it is not a loophole. Its architecture as the system was designed.

People throw around “loophole” but when it’s time to close that loophole to “their” people they get real shy.

thing is, the architecture is there for everybody..the degree is different, and for sure you need some money in order to play, but billionaires are not the only ones taking advantage of tax laws.

 

[fatpiggy]

thing is, the architecture is there for everybody..the degree is different, and for sure you need some money in order to play, but billionaires are not the only ones taking advantage of tax laws.

Of course everyone wants their own little carve out.

It’s why I support a flat tax. Think I have seen You support it also.

1) everybody contributes and has skin in the game
2) no biased carve outs.
3) no loopholes

 

[TC_Nole_OX]

MAGA voters:

 

[bdgan]

A great point made by the billionaire in the original post.

They aren’t loopholes. It’s architecture. The system is designed that way and these billionaires played by the rules. People are mad at them for winning?

A loophole is something that is noticed and closed quickly. Something that has been that way for a long time with no attempt to change it is not a loophole. Its architecture as the system was designed.

People throw around “loophole” but when it’s time to close that loophole to “their” people they get real shy.

A lot of people complain about loopholes for the rich but when I ask what loopholes they say something ignorant like "all of them" or "it's not my job to tell you". I think it's ridiculous to make an accusation then refuse or be unable to support it. There is no doubt that things are more difficult for some working people but fixing the problem means that some things have to change and that can't happen if you don't know what to change.

People who blame U.S. tax policies completely ignore the fact that the wealth gap and affordability problem are global issues. I don't have magical answers that would solve everything but I do have some opinions about tax policy:

• I'm OK with raising the top rate back to 39.6% and imposing a 1% wealth tax on > $1 billion. I'm also OK with increasing the capital gains tax to 35% for incomes over $1 billion.
• I would impose a 6.2% split between employee & employer SS tax on earnings above $200k.
• I would get rid of the special treatment of incentive stock options and tax all stock options as non qualified.
• I would dramatically increase the childcare credit so it would be easier for a spouse to keep working.
• I would limit the ability of people to use trusts to avoid estate taxes but to be honest I don't know how that can be done. Maybe LB has some thoughts.

The only one of these things that would materially help the middle class would be the childcare credit but they would help lower the deficit and perhaps help with inflation due to less money printing. Here are some things I wouldn't do:

• Raise the minimum wage above $15/hr. Pushing the minimum wage higher promotes automation and increases prices. IMO it's counterproductive.
• Increase the corporate income tax by more than 1%. The 21% rate is already in line with other OECD countries and taxing U.S. companies more than the rest of the world would make the U.S. less competitive.
• Impose huge taxes on unrealized gains. I completely understand that a handful of people have an insane amount of wealth but most of that wealth is the value of the businesses they own. Forcing them to liquidate a significant portion of those businesses would kill investment and jobs.
• Expand the welfare state. To me it's like a sports team where you have starters and reserve players. You would never tell the reserve players that they don't have to practice. Everybody should be encouraged to work hard.

 

[fatpiggy]

A lot of people complain about loopholes for the rich but when I ask what loopholes they say something ignorant like "all of them" or "it's not my job to tell you". I think it's ridiculous to make an accusation then refuse or be unable to support it. There is no doubt that things are more difficult for some working people but fixing the problem means that some things have to change and that can't happen if you don't know what to change.

People who blame U.S. tax policies completely ignore the fact that the wealth gap and affordability problem are global issues. I don't have magical answers that would solve everything but I do have some opinions:

• I'm OK with raising the top rate back to 39.6% and imposing a 1% wealth tax on > $1 billion. I'm also OK with increasing the capital gains tax to 35% for incomes over $1 billion. Unfortunately all this would do is lower the deficit. It wouldn't make house, insurance, and grocery prices fall. Maybe inflation would be a bit lower because the government wouldn't have to print as much money.
• I would get rid of the special treatment of incentive stock options and tax all stock options as non qualified.
• I would dramatically increase the childcare credit so it would be easier for a spouse to keep working.
• I would limit the ability of people to use trusts to avoid estate taxes but to be honest I don't know how that can be done.

Admittedly the only one of these things that would materially help the middle class would be the childcare credit. Here are some things I wouldn't do:

• Raise the minimum wage above $15/hr. Pushing the minimum wage higher promotes automation and increases prices. IMO it's counterproductive.
• Increase the corporate income tax by more than 1%. The 21% rate is already in line with other OECD countries and taxing U.S. companies more than the rest of the world would make the U.S. less competitive.
• Impose huge taxes on unrealized gains. I completely understand that a handful of people have an insane amount of wealth but most of that wealth is the value of the businesses they own. Forcing them to liquidate a significant portion of those businesses would kill investment and jobs.
• Expand the welfare state. To me it's like a sports team where you have starters and reserve players. You would never tell the reserve players that they don't have to practice. Everybody should be encouraged to work hard.

All seems very fair and reasonable.

I still support a flat tax. There will always be bias in taxing. While I like your proposed changes, others will not. It's impossible to be "fair" to everyone. Fair is subjective and will always change with whomever is in power i suppose.

A flat tax gives everyone skin in the game. No free rides. You can't be a leech on society, you must get off the couch and contribute in some way, no matter how small.

We are all Americans. We are all in this together. We should all be treated equally. The government shouldn't view us as White Americans, Black Americans, Rich Americans or Poor Americans. The Government should view us as Americans.

 

[Huey Grey 2]

All seems very fair and reasonable.

I still support a flat tax. There will always be bias in taxing. While I like your proposed changes, others will not. It's impossible to be "fair" to everyone. Fair is subjective and will always change with whomever is in power i suppose.

A flat tax gives everyone skin in the game. No free rides. You can't be a leech on society, you must get off the couch and contribute in some way, no matter how small.

We are all Americans. We are all in this together. We should all be treated equally. The government shouldn't view us as White Americans, Black Americans, Rich Americans or Poor Americans. The Government should view us as Americans.

Did you really just say that the American tax system shouldn't consider there being a difference between billionaires and people in poverty when taxing it's citizens? Yikes.

 

[fatpiggy]

Did you really just say that the American tax system shouldn't consider there being a difference between billionaires and people in poverty when taxing it's citizens? Yikes.

There are billions of dollars of difference.

The billionaire will pay billions in taxes, the poverty person will pay absolutely nothing. They have no incentive for the system to do better, no pride in the system because they don't have to contribute, and they develop dependency on the system.

Everyone should pay the same rate, not the same amount. We are all Americans. The government shouldn't be in the business of discriminating.

 

[Huey Grey 2]

There are billions of dollars of difference.

The billionaire will pay billions in taxes, the poverty person will pay absolutely nothing. They have no incentive for the system to do better, no pride in the system because they don't have to contribute, and they develop dependency on the system.

Everyone should pay the same rate, not the same amount. We are all Americans. The government shouldn't be in the business of discriminating.

Why should someone making 30k a year pay the same rate as someone making 3 billion a year?

 

[fatpiggy]

Why should someone making 30k a year pay the same rate as someone making 3 billion a year?

Why should they pay less?

I propose they are both taxed under the Authority of the USA and the USA should represent all citizens equally. The government should not be in the business of discriminating.

 

[scotchtiger]

very little I think. There are only a handful of Americans who earn $1billion/year or more

AI says there are "low dozens" of people that report more than $1B a year. So maybe 30-50 people?

I’m afraid we may have added an entirely new class of financial morons to the board this week.

 

[baltimorened]

Why should someone making 30k a year pay the same rate as someone making 3 billion a year?

who is making $3billion a year of taxable income?

 

[Tenacious E_rivals41982]

Posted this in the other thread:

I am not a billionaire but this is against my interests and I would support it: tax all dividends and capital gains at the same rate as earned income. So lower the earned income rate and raise it there. Would pay a lot of bills for the country and it actually makes sense.

 

[Huey Grey 2]

Why should they pay less?

I propose they are both taxed under the Authority of the USA and the USA should represent all citizens equally. The government should not be in the business of discriminating.

Because they only make 30k. That's not enough to survive as us. Now you expect them to somehow afford the same rate as someone who can but mansions and yachts?

 

[Huey Grey 2]

who is making $3billion a year of taxable income?

Very few. That's my point on why billionaires pay lower tax rate than you and me.

 

[baltimorened]

MAGA voters:

View attachment 1286203

I think you're misreading the room...see bdgan post below.

want to increase taxes on billionaires...fine..Let's just be clear about what we're saying. We are a country that taxes income. There are very few, no more than 4 or five if that many that earn more than $1billion in taxable income. Now if you want to move on to a wealth tax that's an entirely different story and there's even debate if that's constitutional

 

[Huey Grey 2]

I think you're misreading the room...see bdgan post below.

want to increase taxes on billionaires...fine..Let's just be clear about what we're saying. We are a country that taxes income. There are very few, no more than 4 or five if that many that earn more than $1billion in taxable income. Now if you want to move on to a wealth tax that's an entirely different story and there's even debate if that's constitutional

I'd love this conversation. Billionaires operate under a completely different tax structure than the rest of us. And that structure leads to them paying super low rates. So why can't we fix this?

 

[Tenacious E_rivals41982]

I think you're misreading the room...see bdgan post below.

want to increase taxes on billionaires...fine..Let's just be clear about what we're saying. We are a country that taxes income. There are very few, no more than 4 or five if that many that earn more than $1billion in taxable income. Now if you want to move on to a wealth tax that's an entirely different story and there's even debate if that's constitutional

There are alternatives. Like mine posted above on this page.

 

[Moral]

The American middle class emerged in the 1940s and 1950s. It wasn't really something that existed in the US until the New Deal and a much more progressive tax system.

Since then we have seen the wealthy chip away at that tax system and the overall share of wealth owned by the middle class has been shrinking while the share of wealth by the wealthy has increased. In other words, the middle class is getting smaller as there is a transfer of wealth to the top.

It is important to be cognizant of how relatively new the American middle class is and to consider what is needed to keep it in existence.

 

[Rastafarian]

A great point made by the billionaire in the original post.

They aren’t loopholes. It’s architecture. The system is designed that way and these billionaires played by the rules. People are mad at them for winning?

A loophole is something that is noticed and closed quickly. Something that has been that way for a long time with no attempt to change it is not a loophole. Its architecture as the system was designed.

People throw around “loophole” but when it’s time to close that loophole to “their” people they get real shy.

Absolutely hilarious. Citizens United created a system in which politicians need massive sums of money to get elected. In order to get that money, they have to do things for the people that give them that money. The people who have the most to give are billionaires, so they then have the most to gain. So working class folks (which I will generously define as anyone who is makes under a million a year and is worth less than $20 million) ending up paying the tab for the billionaires who bought their way into an “architecture” that minimizes their tax responsibilities.

Fatpiggy and baltimoronned’s response - “sounds fair to me!”

 

[baltimorened]

Very few. That's my point on why billionaires pay lower tax rate than you and me.

I have to admit, I don't understand your post. The number of billionaires doesn't have anything to do with their tax rate. I guess I'm misunderstanding your thought.

 

[Rastafarian]

Did you really just say that the American tax system shouldn't consider there being a difference between billionaires and people in poverty when taxing it's citizens? Yikes.

Don’t forget that a lot of these folks were raised to call the civil war “the war of northern aggression”, and that evolution never happened.