Anonymous #1 3d

Taxing is not enough, we need to seize their entire wealth and evenly distribute it to working class like us

2

Anonymous #2 3d

We don’t have to pay taxes. The state can create wealth for the public. They should immediately give them to us, not building aristocracy

2

Anonymous OP 3d

That is literally authoritarian ideology

2

Anonymous #2 3d

The idea that the people who are economically disadvantaged deserve it is a legitimizing myth created by the wealthy so that you don’t question existing systems of power. Do you think that the Appalachians are poor because those people are inherently inferior? Do you think that’s why black people are poor? Do you think that someone who did grueling farm work for their entire life to care for their family didn’t try as hard as someone who already had money and made good investments?

7

Anonymous OP 3d

“I deserve everything even though I do the bare minimum”

1

Anonymous #2 3d

Well so what? We the people do deserve more, don’t you think?

5

Anonymous #1 3d

It’s inherently a wildly awful ideology to see “mediocrity” as a moral failing deserving of punishment, but someone coming from a poor family and lacking the social opportunity or luck to accumulate wealth also isn’t mediocrity. And if you parse out the consequences of your worldview that “poor people deserve it” you get some obviously monstrous conclusions.

1

Anonymous #1 3d

Also before someone points it out yes I know that describing the Appalachians or black people as universally poor is incorrect but I had a limited word count in one comment and was pointing to general trends of economic inequality which are not universal, but are noticeable as a result of historic and continued social marginalization.

1

Anonymous #1 3d

100 years ago there was no socialism.

0

Anonymous #1 3d

The only way to solve this is socialism. We seize everyone’s wealth and evenly distribute with everybody. Then, there is equality for everyone.Thank you for agreeing with me.

1

Anonymous #2 3d

we live in authoritarianism piss brain

3

Anonymous #2 3d

Not actually “seize” (you can already do that), but more like nationalize companies that are critical to the economy. Which is ironically what Trump has done a little bit, despite being against socialism 💀

1

Anonymous #4 3d

If you don’t seize, there is always be an exit for the rich.

4

Anonymous #3 3d

What? Socialist ideas had already for 80 years by that point and there were multiple recently founded but not long-lived socialist states and also the Soviet Union??? Is this that shit where we quibble about the definition of socialism or some other thing.

2

Anonymous OP 3d

Not if you don’t do shit. That’s like giving the last placed team a participation trophy. The ones who are successful and make something of themselves aren’t complaining. This is the easiest country in the world to accumulate wealth. Fucking figure it out.

1

Anonymous #2 3d

Have you considered that we’re already paying a ton in taxes and getting fuck all in return?

1

Anonymous #1 3d

Socialism isn't communism. USSR was communism. Socialism is modern day Europe. You said 100 years ago and now you say 80. Pick a date socialism existed in the 40s and 50s which most people believe is the hay day of America.

1

Anonymous OP 3d

I am a democratic socialist myself (though I suspect we differ on implementation). I was just trying to explain stuff relevant to what that dude was saying rather than repeating a refrain that’s just gonna scare the guy

4

Anonymous #4 3d

Your state government is going out and buying Israeli bonds with poor credit ratings for the sake of “supporting Israel” instead of doing something for its residents

1

Anonymous OP 3d

Yeah man seize the neurosurgeon’s assets that trained for 20 years to make the money he makes and give it to the McDonald’s cashier down the street. The cashier definitely deserves to profit off the neurosurgeon’s hard work 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

1

Anonymous #2 3d

He should do it for the love of the profession and betterment of the lives of everyone not just himself. Selfishness got us here. We'll stay here until people like you rattle some brain cells around

3

Anonymous #2 3d

Yeah I’m not letting you touch my brain if you’re just doing it for the money lmfao

2

Anonymous #1 3d

You remind me of this

1

Anonymous #1 3d

Dude all I’m hearing is you just want to punish rich people. The top 1% (700k and up) are already responsible for damn near 50% of the tax income.

1

Anonymous #2 3d

Also, they’re not going to be taxing neurosurgeons that much. This would be targeted at tech CEOs. That’s several orders of magnitude more income

2

Anonymous #2 3d

Graph with some proof of your dumbass take? I'm sorry to say but "50% of tax" isn't that much when we're talking a net worth of SIX HUNDRED BILLION FUCKING DOLLARS!

1

Anonymous #3 3d

I was referring to the 1920s being 80 years into socialism existing as a concept. Okay so it’s the shit where we quibble about the definitions until the words don’t mean anything anymore gotcha. Okay if we go with the definition of socialism as in meaning a social safety net like Europe (which many people will disagree with mind you myself included) then you would include the labor governments of Britain and Australia which were in power 100 years ago

1

Anonymous #3 3d

I’m kind of impressed you’re misunderstanding me that badly if you think I’m one of the dumbasses who thinks the Nazis were socialists

1

Anonymous #1 3d

I'm sorry but 100 year ago the pure wealth inequality and lobbying didn't exist. We're talking about US politics. This is a US Politics only board. I don't give a fuck about 100 years ago.

1

Anonymous #2 3d

only top 5% should pay taxes. Not us

1

Anonymous #3 3d

Net worth ≠ liquid cash available

3

Anonymous #2 3d

So at what point does someone have too much and too little money? Draw a personal line. Anything for me over $200,000 should be taxed away.

1

Anonymous #2 3d

Yeah there's the stock loophole. Sell stock dumbass. Billionaires shouldn't hold so much industry. They're seeing pure profit which should be taxed for the betterment of society.

1

Anonymous #3 3d

…at 100%?

1

Anonymous #2 3d

A neurosurgeon does labor, for which they are well compensated for. A neurosurgeon is a worker who is at most likely a low-millionaire. That is fundamentally different from the class of people who passively accumulate billions from doing nothing except having money to make more money. A multimillionaire neurosurgeon is much closer to you or I or the poorest American than they are to a billionaire.

8

Anonymous #4 3d

YES! ANYTHING OVER $200,000 SHOULD BE TAXED AT 100% FOR SOCIETY. YOU CANNOT RATIONALIZE SPENDING MORE THAN $200,000 A YEAR FOR ANY REASON.

1

Anonymous #3 3d

Honestly my kneejerk reaction was “in some cities $200k doesn’t even go THAT far” but I wonder if that would force the cost of living down

1

Anonymous #3 3d

200000 is still too much. I think everyone should pay 100% income tax. And we should get everything for free.

1

Anonymous OP 3d

What would be the point in working hard to make money then? You wouldn’t even be able to enjoy the fruits of your labor then. This country is what it is because of the constant drive to be the best. That’s why we’re the richest country on earth and it’s responsible for a myriad of innovations that would likely have never occurred otherwise. Taxing only the top 5% is fucking insane. We’d become the most mediocre country on earth because nobody would have any drive to succeed.

1

Anonymous #4 3d

It definitely fucking will. Our tax dollars will build more public spaces, better roads, public transport, schools, childcare, etc. prices of things will go down because the ultra rich will instantly cease to exist. Affordable means affordable for everyone with that little economic class difference.

1

Anonymous #3 3d

Now I’m just confused what you were even saying then. Socialist groups existed in America 100 years ago (like the Socialist Party of America). You said socialism didn’t exist 100 years ago, so I pointed out governments in case you meant governments. And then you say you only meant the United States? So socialism has never existed as a concept because America has never had a socialist government? What?

1

Anonymous #4 3d

Sorry I'm so frustrated with this. It's such an easy and simple solution. It would save our collapsing society.

1

Anonymous OP 3d

“If I can’t be rich, then everyone should just be equally poor” 100% tax on 200,000??? You’re fucking insane.

1

Anonymous OP 3d

Damn the bait was good until that part lmfao

1

Anonymous #4 3d

I'm not baiting though I'm ngl.

2

Anonymous #4 3d

You got it now

1

Anonymous #3 3d

Hehe

1

Anonymous #3 3d

Again, what would be the incentive to innovate if you get rewarded nothing for it?

1

Anonymous #2 3d

Bait got baited bro lmao

1

Anonymous #2 3d

Are you trying to say that $200,000 is nothing?

1

Anonymous #3 3d

If you have a family that won’t get too far. You can have one vacation. Maybe.

-1

Anonymous #2 3d

Hey buddy. I haven't seen the beach in 4 years. I first saw the beach which is 5 hours away when I was 10. I'm adopted. An only child. $200,000 is a life changing amount. This is per year. One vacation per year is more than I've ever seen.

1

Anonymous #2 3d

Not to mention 2+2 still equals 4. 200,000 + 200,000 is still 400,000. That's a fuck load of money. More than anyone needs.

1