Any real world example of taxing super rich being detrimental

[Fear No Evil]

That's not the question at hand, is it?

It should be, if it won't fix anything.. why do it? Unless you are distributing wealth for social justice?

 

[dank69]

I can tell you that giving a bank $5,000,000,000 helps them start plans less than two weeks later to lay off 10000+ workers.

 

[BladeVenom]

That was a tax on a product, not incomes. Try again.

But the effect is the same. If the rich have less money, they spend less money on luxury goods, which hurts the middle class who makes those goods.

A millionaire can do without a new boat, but can those boat makers do without their jobs building those boats? It will just mean more people on unemployment benefits, who can then be bought by politicians promising them even more unemployment benefits.

 

[Freshgeardude]

Pretty straight forward. Real world examples.

So far, we have Buffett saying he could be taxed more and not a single job would be lost because of it. He infers that he has spoken to other people in his circle of welthy friends that say the same thing.

Then we have the other half saying that this would destroy jobs. I want one example of this being true. One plausible scenario. One wealthy person to come forward and saying that paying additional taxes on anything over $1 million he/she makes will force them to lay people off or hire less.

Just one example. I just find it strange that the Republicans talk alot but provide no actual basis. With 300,000,000 US citiziens, you think one real world example could be provided. Rational required!

NOTE that I do think it is possible for an example to be found. But where is it? The Google does nothing.

Here is a pretty simple example.


Say a millionaire wants a boat. They arent taxed, they get the boat.

but if they get taxed, they wont be able to afford that same boat, so they decide not to get it.


Lets all cry he didnt get his boat, ......BUT who actually suffers?

The boat manufacturers. The workers to make the boat.

they dont get money, they dont spend that money, economy is pooped.

where does the money go if they get taxed? it'll end up in the cesspool that is the government's bureaucracy

 

[Craig234]

But the effect is the same. If the rich have less money, they spend less money on luxury goods, which hurts the middle class who makes those goods.

A millionaire can do without a new boat, but can those boat makers do without their jobs building those boats? It will just mean more people on unemployment benefits, who can then be bought by politicians promising them even more unemployment benefits.

Very little money taken from the rich reduces their consumption. They spend very little of their wealth on consumption. Does Bill Gates drive a solid gold nuclear $5B car?

That money does far more for others, for the economy, elsewhere - in the hands of the government, the hands of other citizens, not driving up the price of owning things.

 

[Craig234]

Here is a pretty simple example.


Say a millionaire wants a boat. They arent taxed, they get the boat.

but if they get taxed, they wont be able to afford that same boat, so they decide not to get it.


Lets all cry he didnt get his boat, ......BUT who actually suffers?

The boat manufacturers. The workers to make the boat.

they dont get money, they dont spend that money, economy is pooped.

where does the money go if they get taxed? it'll end up in the cesspool that is the government's bureaucracy

The boatworkers quit the "millionare's yacht company", and start building schools.

The money ends up spent on anything government spends on - infrastructure, education, law enforcement, scientific research, Medicare - it ends up going to people. The government doesn't have a big lake under the capitol it throws the money in, wasting it. If it just goes to paying off the debt - that's less we owe, less interest we have to pay lenders who don't need to be getting more tax dollars. Why not just make a big new tax on everyone making UNDER a million dollars a year that is handed over to the rich, for them to buy even nicer yachts and other luxury goods, since that's what society's resources are best spent doing, serving them?

 

[dmcowen674]

One example I can think of is that the super rich will have less super wealth in their super weath pool from which to draw capital to start new businesses or to invest in new businesses, which could result in fewer employment opportunities.

The super wealthy have had their tax cuts all this time, where is their starting new businesses or investment in new businesses???

You can't spin this.

The gig is up for all wealthy assholes.

Time for Americans to get all of them the fuck out of here starting with Bank of America.

 

[OBLAMA2009]

I seem to remember hearing on this forum long ago that the every 70 years or so the ancient Jews took all wealth accumulated and redistributed it so everybody started out for the next 70 years on an equal footing. We should do that with people and corporations.

All the assholes who are rich and think they are that way because of personal effort would have nothing to fear. If what they say is true they'll be right back at the top again in no time.

once youre rich its almost impossible to not become richer. its a lot easier to turn 10 million into 100 million than to turn 10000 into 100000

 

[OBLAMA2009]

The super wealthy have had their tax cuts all this time, where is their starting new businesses or investment in new businesses???

You can't spin this.

The gig is up for all wealthy assholes.

Time for Americans to get all of them the fuck out of here starting with Bank of America.

agreed. the bush tax cuts were even renewed by obama and did the recipients go out and create jobs? oh i forgot, they cant "because of obamacare", right?

 

[1prophet]

That was a tax on a product, not incomes. Try again.

At the time it was considered a tax on the rich since who else could afford yachts,

as to the original question,

If the loopholes aren't closed taxing the rich is just a feel good farce.

 

[BladeVenom]

If the loopholes aren't closed taxing the rich is just a feel good farce.

Exactly. They'll raise taxes, and then sell more loopholes to those who give them the most lobbying dollars.

 

[rchiu]

once youre rich its almost impossible to not become richer. its a lot easier to turn 10 million into 100 million than to turn 10000 into 100000

BS, go talk to ex-athletes who made millions and now guarding some warehouses. I know it's hard for you liberals to believe, but it actually take intelligence, planning and work to be millionaires and continue to be one.

 

[Ausm]

Any real world examples on how taxing the super rich has fixed a countries financial and social problems?

Yeah just look at the National Debt during Clinton's Presidency after he raised taxes.

 

[rchiu]

The boatworkers quit the "millionare's yacht company", and start building schools.

The money ends up spent on anything government spends on - infrastructure, education, law enforcement, scientific research, Medicare - it ends up going to people. The government doesn't have a big lake under the capitol it throws the money in, wasting it. If it just goes to paying off the debt - that's less we owe, less interest we have to pay lenders who don't need to be getting more tax dollars. Why not just make a big new tax on everyone making UNDER a million dollars a year that is handed over to the rich, for them to buy even nicer yachts and other luxury goods, since that's what society's resources are best spent doing, serving them?

Sounds good except that's not what happens in reality. Just look at obama's last stimulus with tax payer's money, you'd see money going to more socials programs, politically correct industries like green energy without considering if those companies can be competitive, more wasteful infrastructure like school building that doesn't actually improve quality of education.

This government has crap track record in spending tax payer's money. no matter how you want to sugar coat it, it's not gonna change.

 

[Atreus21]

Concetrated wealth actually raises the bar to entry for starting companies and such. Decreasing the concentration of wealth increases opportunity for others.

Tax policy isn't going to do a damned thing for wealth concentration.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Yeah just look at the National Debt during Clinton's Presidency after he raised taxes.

So if we raise taxes to Clinton levels the debt will disappear?

 

[piasabird]

# of employees that work overseas:
Dell
Microsoft
Bank of America
Intel
AMD
FORD

 

[crownjules]

So if we raise taxes to Clinton levels the debt will disappear?

No one has said it's the panacea for the debt problem. But it will help in combination with spending cuts. This is a long term problem that took a long time to create, both because our government has out of control spending and because it cut taxes during an economic boom.

 

[Fear No Evil]

No one has said it's the panacea for the debt problem. But it will help in combination with spending cuts. This is a long term problem that took a long time to create, both because our government has out of control spending and because it cut taxes during an economic boom.

So what makes you think raising taxes will solve the runaway spending problem and not just create more spending? Should be resolve the spending problem before we raise taxes?

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Here is a pretty simple example.


Say a millionaire wants a boat. They arent taxed, they get the boat.

Bla bla bla

You did not answer the question.

So the millionaire gets a 35' boat instead of a 40' boat. And hte government buys a 40' boat instead of a 35' boat.

Stop with the damned hypotheticals.

 

[crownjules]

So what makes you think raising taxes will solve the runaway spending problem and not just create more spending? Should be resolve the spending problem before we raise taxes?

You do both at once, it's called compromise. If you don't trust the politicians to honor their word and/or do what's right then that signifies an entirely different issue, doesn't it?

 

[Fear No Evil]

You do both at once, it's called compromise. If you don't trust the politicians to honor their word and/or do what's right then that signifies an entirely different issue, doesn't it?

It certainly does. So we shouldn't even CONSIDER giving them more money until spending is controlled. I don't trust the politicians to do it because they never have. The best indicator of future performance is past behavior. Our government (Both sides) has done nothing to control spending.. so lets not even discuss giving them more revenue until they can prove otherwise.

Besides, even MASSIVE tax increases would have almost no effect on our debt so it seems stupid to be discussing it.

 

[Macamus Prime]

They need to prove the super rich are creating jobs 1st. Remember, it's 40 years of "job creators this" and "job creators that".

The only jobs created are overseas.

 

[soundforbjt]

Yep, I'm all for lowering the corp tax rate providing that all/100% of corps pay that rate, and they pay one percent penalty for every thousand jobs they outsource. And they have to start creating jobs here in the U.S. before those cuts are made to prove they are deserved.

We've been lied to long enough by both sides.

 

[Budmantom]

Is super rich anyone making $100k or more?