Report: Tax Returns of the Top 25 Wealthiest in America

[Endus]

So, how many of those people are going to elect to do those "dirty jobs" for no money?

See, reality is a bitch.

Try checking out my sources and data before claiming I'm wrong. Every time basic income or other guaranteed income plans have been tested, there's been negligible impacts on employment.

[Slant]

We don't need billionaires, they are just a happy result of capitalism.

Does this mean you want to become a ditch digger for the cause?

I simply wanted to show that people who suck out septic tanks probably wouldn't be inclined to do so, if they had no financial incentive to do so.

Thank fuck nobody suggested we remove financial incentives in the form of salary. Phew, dodged that bullet you just created out of thin air because you don't have an argument against the other things we're saying...

[Machismo]

Try checking out my sources and data before claiming I'm wrong. Every time basic income or other guaranteed income plans have been tested, there's been negligible impacts on employment.

I did, the problem with studies like that, is that the "benefits" are very temporary, and the people know it. In your wonderland, they would be forever, so there's no looming issues on the horizon.

In the end, it's no different than the "stimulus" payments that Americans received. Many people just pocketed it, to save for later, and kept on doing exactly as they had been doing... because they knew it wasn't forever.

Meanwhile, when we have a sample size of hundreds of millions, we see that employers are having a very difficult time filling jobs, and one of the big reasons... unemployment benefits were heavily boosted.

Now, imagine if those were permanent.

- - - Updated - - -

Thank fuck nobody suggested we remove financial incentives in the form of salary. Phew, dodged that bullet you just created out of thin air because you don't have an argument against the other things we're saying...

People have called for that.

[Shadowferal]

It's "forcing" when it's communism, but somehow not "forcing" when it's capitalism.

Well, if you choose not to work two jobs just to make ends meet...not starve and have a roof overhead, it's still...freedoms and shit. - - - Updated - - -

Oh come on tell me when it has worked.

Capitalism on its own has worked as well as communism on its own. The best economies have always been a mix of the two.

[Endus]

I did, the problem with studies like that, is that the "benefits" are very temporary, and the people know it. In your wonderland, they would be forever, so there's no looming issues on the horizon.

Some of the examples (like Alaska) it's permanent and ongoing.

So clearly you didn't actually check the sources provided.

In the end, it's no different than the "stimulus" payments that Americans received. Many people just pocketed it, to save for later, and kept on doing exactly as they had been doing... because they knew it wasn't forever.

Do you have any analytical basis for this?

I've provided data and analysis. I'm not gonna accept a statement by fiat as any kind of counter-argument.

Meanwhile, when we have a sample size of hundreds of millions, we see that employers are having a very difficult time filling jobs, and one of the big reasons... unemployment benefits were heavily boosted.

It isn't that big a deal, even right now. The economy's doing fine.

Now, imagine if those were permanent.

Are you expecting me to foresee bad things? Because I don't. Employers might have to step up their compensation to entice workers into accepting a position? The horror.

People have called for that.

Are these the same "people" that Trump keeps citing as his sources?

[Cæli]

I think people would more easily pay all taxes required if the given money was easily traceable, and public spendings were totally transparent, and published on a decentralized ledger where cheating is much harder.

People who favor socialist ideas seems to often fail to account for human nature and why people don't want to cooperate, not because they're bad, but because they're humans. Obviously if they don't trust the state for working as best as they could with the money, people will try to avoid taxes. Also if they feel that it goes in the pocket of what they call parasites, they will try to avoid taxes.

Same story forever, I guess we're too primitive to change for the better.

Also I think an anti freedom system can work to provide security and progress, but do we really want it? See china. I think the answer is no, human nature again, at least in my country people already revolted against the feeling of being oppressed, not viable.

Money redistribution is a band aid solution, not a solution, it has to be used in case of emergency only in my opinion. But it's probably unavoidable nowadays. We need to work to fix our problems or keep working on it.

[Shadowferal]

People who favor socialist ideas seems to often fail to account for human nature and why people don't want to cooperate, not because they're bad, but because they're humans. Obviously if they don't trust the state for working as best as they could with the money, people will try to avoid taxes. Also if they feel that it goes in the pocket of what they call parasites, they will try to avoid taxes.

The elitist wealthy and their insistence on not paying their tax share has nothing to do with trust, and everything to do with greed.

[Huehuecoyotl]

Multiple pages of "discussion" ending with Machismo being banned. Death and Taxes aren't the only certainties, it seems.

Did I miss anything that's worth plowing through those pages, or can I just pick things up from here?

[Cæli]

The elitist wealthy and their insistence on not paying their tax share has nothing to do with trust, and everything to do with greed.

What I was thinking was if the things I explained were in place, there would be less reluctance overall and the tax revenue would be higher, not that everyone will trust or aren't greedy, which I agree

[Captain N]

Multiple pages of "discussion" ending with Machismo being banned. Death and Taxes aren't the only certainties, it seems.

Did I miss anything that's worth plowing through those pages, or can I just pick things up from here?

Didn't miss a thing. Same bullshit that's been going on for pages. Endus makes and argument and backs it up. Machismo responds with straw men and "I already covered it" nonsense. Repeat ad nauseam until he ends up banned again for trolling.

[Ivanstone]

Multiple pages of "discussion" ending with Machismo being banned. Death and Taxes aren't the only certainties, it seems.

Did I miss anything that's worth plowing through those pages, or can I just pick things up from here?

I tried to take a big square shit on Peter Thiel.
https://www.propublica.org/article/l...ree-piggy-bank

The info-graphic they used for Thiel's IRA is funny. And horrifying.

Admittedly, I only got to read half of it because I made the mistake of replying to our local Grover Norquist Sock Puppet. Also I have to place my August comic order. How many copies of Eat The Rich #1 from Boom Studios should I order?

[Zan15]

I tried to take a big square shit on Peter Thiel.
https://www.propublica.org/article/l...ree-piggy-bank

The info-graphic they used for Thiel's IRA is funny. And horrifying.

Admittedly, I only got to read half of it because I made the mistake of replying to our local Grover Norquist Sock Puppet. Also I have to place my August comic order. How many copies of Eat The Rich #1 from Boom Studios should I order?

holy crap i read this too this morning and it was incredible.

I guess anyone can...chuckle...do it.... right?

Silly goose limits are only for the poor!

[Glorious Leader]

Yes, it is based on that. In Endusland communism, people will be provided for, regardless of whether they choose to work, or not. He wants to say that people won't stop working if they are being provided for by others.

Reality disagrees.

Yo I wanna more about endusland. Sounds like endusland is threatening me with a good time.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, if you choose not to work two jobs just to make ends meet...not starve and have a roof overhead, it's still...freedoms and shit. - - - Updated - - - Capitalism on its own has worked as well as communism on its own. The best economies have always been a mix of the two.

Only negative liberties nothing else. Only freedom to never freedom from.

[Zan15]

Yo I wanna more about endusland. Sounds like endusland is threatening me with a good time.

.

at first it sounds very invasive, maybe in a very "wrong" place. You know the place you go when you are 50 for your....umm... "back door ride"

[uuuhname]

In case anyone is interested.

I feel like this belongs in the condo collapse thread because the only clip that really matters is where this numbskull honestly makes the argument that everyone in those buildings should have know better, and moved out I guess. Don't blame the people who own the building, blame the government for not doings its job even though I think it's not the government's job to regulate these things.

[Ivanstone]

No I haven’t had time to properly read them. Still relevant.
https://www.propublica.org/article/e...to-avoid-taxes
https://www.propublica.org/article/c...publica-report

There’s still lots to this drove of returns and they’ve only highlighted some of the more egregious problems.

[Mayhem]

In case anyone is interested.

That was actually fun to watch. I do wonder how the knowledge would be provided in that libertarian world where the government does no research and implements no regulations.

I mean, how would anyone even know about the deaths from heart attacks mentioned in the video? Also, insurance companies wouldn't exist in such a world because they couldn't be profitable.

[bladeXcrasher]

I feel like this belongs in the condo collapse thread because the only clip that really matters is where this numbskull honestly makes the argument that everyone in those buildings should have know better, and moved out I guess. Don't blame the people who own the building, blame the government for not doings its job even though I think it's not the government's job to regulate these things.

Even the smartest libertarians aren't much better than our resident libertarian, lol. Funny how they all pivot so quickly when cornered, ready to move on to the next topic.

[Ivanstone]

I guess its time for an update.
TLDR:
*Already existing private corporations have already had an ability to alter executive compensation and instead compensate them using the corporate profit provided they own the company. This can be a problem if the top end income tax bracket and the top end corporate tax bracket differ in size.
*In theory those reductions in executive salaries can be used to re-invest in the company. In practice the IRS would need to examine how the money is used and the IRS is woefully underfunded by design. FULL DISCLOSURE: I'm a small businessperson who pays myself a pittance but I do re-invest in my store.
*This form of tax evasion was turbo-charged after the Trump tax cuts since corporate taxation was reduced and the amount of taxes that could be saved was tripled.
*At no point in this article was a wealth tax suggested as a remedy. Having actual law enforcement, ie the IRS, being funded is.

https://www.propublica.org/article/h...r-own-salaries

I have one further separate issue not referenced in the article. Some of the people listed in the article are known GOP donors and donations could almost be considered a bribe for lower taxes. Dick and Liz Uihlein deserve a special call-out. I regularly receive ULINE catalogs. I promptly toss them into the recycling bin since I'm boycotting their shitty company. In part because I don't like their politics. Also in part because I don't like how they subject their employees to their politics.
https://www.gawker.com/uline-where-t...fox-1782029287

PS. Worker safety is not one of their priorities.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...s-covid-safety

[Veggie50]

Well, Trump's tax cut removed the ability to use a personal vehicle for work related uses unless you are self employed. https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/heres-t...ir-tax-returns

As I said, if they do make a "wealth tax", then when stock prices go up or down, when an automobile value goes down(which it usually does) or anything else that would constitute as wealth(remember, someone owning a house, regardless if they are looking to sell it or not, is considered wealth) goes down, that would be subject to writing off taxes or paying less in taxes then people would like. Remember, it wouldn't be on the total sum of the wealth but the gain or loss from whenever it goes up or down.

When you add property(stock, real estate, etc.) as a means to judge wealth and base tax rates off of it, well, don't be surprised when the same people pay the same amount or less in taxes.

No, actually. You wrongly assume a wealth tax is a tax on gains/losses. In civilized countries wealth tax does exist, and it simply looks at worth of assets at the end of fiscal year, and you pay a % over that.