Report: Tax Returns of the Top 25 Wealthiest in America

[Machismo]

Or, let's think about this for a second, he has a vested interest in lying about this issue to keep himself rich and make sure his class becomes inherited and eternal.

And everyone who wants his money has a vested interest in deliberately misunderstanding simple concepts like wealth and income.

It also doesn't help your case that he has stated he thinks he should be paying more in taxes, but that a wealth tax is the wrong way to do it.

[Bodakane]

Imagine thinking that wanting the ultra wealthy to actually pay a fair share of taxes is really about us wanting their money in our pockets somehow.....sigh.

[Shadowferal]

Imagine thinking that wanting the ultra wealthy to actually pay a fair share of taxes is really about us wanting their money in our pockets somehow.....sigh.

*sigh*
Now he'll play games by asking to define "fair share" because in his delusion he imagines the middle class to be equal with billionaires, despite the fact that "fair share" has already been stated as 90% on everything over 50mil.

[Bodakane]

*sigh*
Now he'll play games by asking to define "fair share" because in his delusion he imagines the middle class to be equal with billionaires, despite the fact that "fair share" has already been stated as 90% on everything over 50mil.

Imagine the use of infrastructure it takes to deliver 3.5 billion products a year.

[Dontrike]

Not according to the numbers. The overall average is higher than every other group, based on a percentage of their income. It's not simply in pure dollar amount, but their actual tax rate is higher.

The fact that any of them can be lower than the poorest of the poor is asinine at best.

[Machismo]

The fact that any of them can be lower than the poorest of the poor is asinine at best.

And yet, by average... it's simply not the case.

- - - Updated - - -

*sigh*
Now he'll play games by asking to define "fair share" because in his delusion he imagines the middle class to be equal with billionaires, despite the fact that "fair share" has already been stated as 90% on everything over 50mil.

I'll let the United States Government define it... and they disagree with you.

- - - Updated - - -

Imagine thinking that wanting the ultra wealthy to actually pay a fair share of taxes is really about us wanting their money in our pockets somehow.....sigh.

They are paying a fair share. If you have evidence that they are breaking the laws, then let's see it.

[Bodakane]

Can anyone not the poster quoted, explain these two sentences to me?

They are paying a fair share. If you have evidence that they are breaking the laws, then let's see it.

Like when did fair and legal mean the exact same thing?

[Machismo]

Can anyone not the poster quoted, explain these two sentences to me?



Like when did fair and legal mean the exact same thing?

The United States government is the one that has the last say on whether Americans are "paying their fair share." That's literally one of their jobs.

[Shadowferal]

Like when did fair and legal mean the exact same thing?

Are you kidding? That's libertarian logic. If it's legal then it's all good. It's all about pay-to-play. The gop prostituted themselves and gave a fat tax cut to the wealthy that the middle and poor have to pay for. And since it's legal, the libertarians cheer at how fair it it all is.

[uuuhname]

Can anyone not the poster quoted, explain these two sentences to me?



Like when did fair and legal mean the exact same thing?

they don't. it's just an argument made out of convenience, and is quickly dropped when the argument inevitably shifts to "well, maybe the government should tax the rich more."

[JohnBrown1917]

They are paying a fair share. If you have evidence that they are breaking the laws, then let's see it.

Thats why news laws should be made to make sure they start paying way, way more.
...Or just take like 99% of what Musk, Bezos and Gates own, that'd be good too.

[Endus]

The United States government is the one that has the last say on whether Americans are "paying their fair share." That's literally one of their jobs.

By this same argument, if the US government passed a law saying that any net worth over $10 million would be taxed at a rate of 100%, you'd be totally fine with that, because that's a "fair share", according to your own definition here.

Is that the case?

[Machismo]

Thats why news laws should be made to make sure they start paying way, way more.
...Or just take like 99% of what Musk, Bezos and Gates own, that'd be good too.

Yep, thanks for making my case for me, why this is such a bad idea.

- - - Updated - - -

By this same argument, if the US government passed a law saying that any net worth over $10 million would be taxed at a rate of 100%, you'd be totally fine with that, because that's a "fair share", according to your own definition here.

Is that the case?

Yep, then they would be "paying their fair share" and that share would be considerably more.

I wouldn't be fine with that, because "paying their fair share" isn't my argument. That's the argument of progressives who want to raise taxes, without actually talking about numbers.

So, take it up with them.

[uuuhname]

Yep, then they would be "paying their fair share" and that share would be considerably more.

I wouldn't be fine with that, because "paying their fair share" isn't my argument. That's the argument of progressives who want to raise taxes, without actually talking about numbers.

So, take it up with them.

lmao ok so why are you even involved in this conversation? because the progressives would AGREE that they need to pay more. bye, see yourself out the door.

[Shadowferal]

lmao ok so why are you even involved in this conversation? because the progressives would AGREE that they need to pay more. bye, see yourself out the door.

Did you really think he was all about fairness? His concerns are about how the wealthy can fuck over the country more than they have.

[Machismo]

lmao ok so why are you even involved in this conversation? because the progressives would AGREE that they need to pay more. bye, see yourself out the door.

I'm calling out people who swear they are not "paying their fair share."

It's a terrible argument, and is simply generic, and doesn't involve any critical thinking. It's nothing more than regurgitated pundit talking points.

[Endus]

Yep, then they would be "paying their fair share" and that share would be considerably more.

I wouldn't be fine with that, because "paying their fair share" isn't my argument. That's the argument of progressives who want to raise taxes, without actually talking about numbers.

So, take it up with them.

Well, at least you're wildly inconsistent and continuing to misrepresent basic terminology rather than hold to a rational fact-based position.

[Machismo]

Did you really think he was all about fairness? His concerns are about how the wealthy can fuck over the country more than they have.

Nope, that's a lie.

This just seems to show the masses are ignorant, and easily convinced to regurgitate talking points.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, at least you're wildly inconsistent and continuing to misrepresent basic terminology rather than hold to a rational fact-based position.

Nope, not at all.

This is the protest-poster motto of progressives, when most have no clue what they are even talking about. This is made evident by their complete lack of understanding regarding basic economic terms, as well as actual tax burdens.

[Endus]

Nope, not at all.

This is the protest-poster motto of progressives, when most have no clue what they are even talking about. This is made evident by their complete lack of understanding regarding basic economic terms, as well as actual tax burdens.

This is word salad that means nothing.

You're flatly incorrect about what "fair share" means; it is not in any way defined by the US government. You don't want to deal with the term on proper footing, so you lie to misrepresent it, and then apply it inconsistently with regards to your own position to boot.

You've got no business claiming others "lack basic understanding". You've repeatedly tried to redefine words and terminology because their proper meaning won't support your views.

[uuuhname]

I'm calling out people who swear they are not "paying their fair share."

It's a terrible argument, and is simply generic, and doesn't involve any critical thinking. It's nothing more than regurgitated pundit talking points.

it's a terrible argument because it's butting into YOUR appeals to emotion when you call these people hatful and jealous of rich people. when all we ever want to do is ensure this capitalist system you claim to care about so much functions a little less off of the suffering and misery of working class people so that it can SUSTAIN itself better.