Current Events > 'Billionaires shouldn't exist', Bernie Sanders says as he introduces tax plan.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Sen. Bernie Sanders rolled out a new wealth tax plan on Tuesday. The proposed wealth tax is more aggressive than Warren's plan, given its scale. According to the proposal, it would hit the wealthiest 180,000 American households in the top 0.1% and cut the wealth of billionaires in half over 15 years.

"This proposal does not eliminate billionaires, but it eliminates a lot of the wealth that billionaires have, and I think that's exactly what we should be doing." Sanders is also proposing a "national wealth registry" to enforce the tax.

Rates:
Here are how people's fortunes would fare under the Sanders wealth tax plan:
$32 million to $50 million: 1% marginal tax rate
$50 to $250 million: 2%
$250 to $500 million: 3%
$500 million to $1 billion: 4%
$1 billion to $2.5 billion: 5%
$2.5 billion to $5 billion: 6%
$5 billion to $10 billion: 7%
$10 billion or more: 8%
These brackets would be cut in half for single-filers.

Source / More Reading:
https://www.businessinsider.com/bernie-sanders-wealth-tax-plan-ultra-rich-2019-9

Do you support or oppose this plan? Despite Bernie Sander's belief that billionaires should not exist, this plan will not eliminate them but it remains more aggressive than the tax plan proposed by Elizabeth Warren.

---

Depends on what they use that money for afterwards. It doesn't matter if they over tax the rich, if it's to invest it in things that won't help the poor.
---

sanders: give me your money....i need a new beach house.
---

I mean anyone who doesn't want the middle and lower classes to be crushed into the tiniest line forcing a revolution should be in favor of this.

Will it happen though? Probably not.

stone posted...

Depends on what they use that money for afterwards. It doesn't matter if they over tax the rich, if it's to invest it in things that won't help the poor.

Yeah that covers my feelings pretty well

---

That's basically a rounding error for people with that much cash. Fair, next.
---

Let's go ask France how that worked out.
https://www.france24.com/en/20150808-france-wealthy-flee-high-taxes-les-echos-figures

The 8% tax at the top is kinda steep tho tbqh. That is more than inflation + market rate most years, so it will really discourage investment.
---

stone posted...

Depends on what they use that money for afterwards. It doesn't matter if they over tax the rich, if it's to invest it in things that won't help the poor.

CNN headlines plainly state it's to help fund Medicare for all, Vox article indicates:

Sanders says would go toward paying for his biggest policies, including Medicare-for-all, affordable housing, and universal child care.

---

Even though this wouldn't really impact me, I am not a fan of introducing a balance sheet tax. I'm not sure if necessarily encourages the right behaviours (it's almost an incentive to spend/get rid of your cash or at least move assets beyond the definition of the family/household) and then there's also the ambiguity/issues with actual measurement of one's net assets.

---

Before doing this, make offshore accounts illegal and investigate all the shitheads in Panama papers. Because none of those tax evading dipshits got punished in any part of the world
---

It's misleading to make the headline "billionaires shouldn't exist" when the his proposal will still allow people to be billionaires.

But he should have known better than to say that. This is politics where all your words are going to be twisted.
---

Kombucha posted...

CNN headlines plainly state it's to help fund Medicare for all, Vox article indicates:

I'd be down then. But they'd just have him assassinated if he couldn't be brought to heel

---

I forgot that proudclad flipped on taxation issues after the 2017 tax cuts went exactly as anyone with even a small amount of sense knew they would.
---

pls posted...

That's basically a rounding error for people with that much cash. Fair, next.

---

Damn_Underscore posted...

It's misleading to make the headline "billionaires shouldn't exist" when the his proposal will still allow people to be billionaires.

But he should have known better than to say that. This is politics where all your words are going to be twisted.

Perhaps, but this is exactly what he said as he introduced his plan so of course it's going to be in the headlines. I think he was just attempting to appear to be tough on wealth inequality. In reality while his plan is the most aggressive yet, it fails to actually eliminate billionaires. People that don't read past the headlines will be misinformed I guess, but I doubt it will somehow damage his reputation.

---

apolloooo posted...

Before doing this, make offshore accounts illegal and investigate all the shitheads in Panama papers. Because none of those tax evading dipshits got punished in any part of the world

Couldn't they conceivably just roll it all into one bill?

---

Kombucha posted...

Couldn't they conceivably just roll it all into one bill?

Depends if they want to get it through or not... there will be enough advocates to fight it.

But back on topic though, even if you make offshore accounts illegal (unlikely - more likely it would be you need to declare it and also align with CRS), the issue becomes things like measurement of assets (fair value vs historical cost) as well as who is in/out of scope for that proposed wealth registry) since you have trusts, other family members, etc...

---

Questionmarktarius posted...

Let's go ask France how that worked out.
https://www.france24.com/en/20150808-france-wealthy-flee-high-taxes-les-echos-figures

lmao where the fuck are the wealthy in America going to flee to?

---

Tyranthraxus posted...

lmao where the fuck are the wealthy in America going to flee to?

I think the US has much more patriotic/proud individuals who are less likely to go elsewhere but in most other countries, I'd imagine people would be quick to denounce citizenship and move to countries with strong protection laws (eg Switzerland, Singapore, etc).

---

Awesome posted...

sanders: give me your money....i need a new beach house.

Ah yes, that $4.35 trillion beach house hes really had his eye on

---

Tyranthraxus posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

Let's go ask France how that worked out.
https://www.france24.com/en/20150808-france-wealthy-flee-high-taxes-les-echos-figures

lmao where the fuck are the wealthy in America going to flee to?

Mexico, probably. It's just the right combination of stable and corrupt.

Once you hit $1 billion, you're just hoarding money. You can't possibly spend that amount of money in your lifetime.

---

they should be paying 70% in taxes we had a booming middle class and few poor before ronny dementia reagen took office and fucked up America
---

The only thing dumber than a wealth tax is a wealth tax you think will fund government programs continuously.

Dude is a fucking clown.

Broseph_Stalin posted...

The only thing dumber than a wealth tax is a wealth tax you think will fund government programs continuously.

Dude is a fucking clown.

If rich people have less money and it goes to government programs, what do you think happens to poor peoples' money?

---

Garioshi posted...

Once you hit $1 billion, you're just hoarding money. You can't possibly spend that amount of money in your lifetime.

do you think they have like a room full of gold like scrooge mcduck or something lol

gloBal enemy posted...

I think the US has much more patriotic/proud individuals who are less likely to go elsewhere but in most other countries, I'd imagine people would be quick to denounce citizenship and move to countries with strong protection laws (eg Switzerland, Singapore, etc).

There's no place on Earth that will treat them better. Especially not Singapore which doesn't even fucking have room for them because of how tiny it is but even if they were okay with living in some cramped area with no privacy the government is a hell of censorship and obscure Draconian laws that even the rich aren't immune to.

---

Btw, the US is the only, or one of the only (i forget), countries in the world where you have to pay taxes even if you live abroad. So these billionaires would have to renounce US citizenship and all of the benefits that come from having it if they want to dodge taxes

---

Garioshi posted...

If rich people have less money and it goes to government programs, what do you think happens to poor peoples' money?

you need to learn the difference between an income tax and a wealth tax

https://i.redd.it/h1vfx0chqul31.jpg

Garioshi posted...

Once you hit $1 billion, you're just hoarding money. You can't possibly spend that amount of money in your lifetime.

I do like that many billionaires are putting money into researching space because the public has been pretty against using tax dollars for it over many decades. I honestly would not want to see interest in space drop as a result of the taxes if they were implemented, but I somehow doubt this would happen given the shift in public interest in recent years. Add to that, most private sector companies are now well funded and established. Whereas before the wealthy were basically required to be dropping their own money into the companies for the sake of their survival, on a regular basis. IIRC Jeff still does, though.

---

Kombucha posted...

I do like that many billionaires are putting money into researching space

A planet-wide wealth tax would guarantee a colony on the moon or Mars within a few months, mostly for tax-evasion purposes.

Questionmarktarius posted...

A planet-wide wealth tax would guarantee a colony on the moon or Mars within a few months, mostly for tax-evasion purposes.

Not going to lie, I lol'd

Questionmarktarius posted...

Let's go ask France how that worked out.
https://www.france24.com/en/20150808-france-wealthy-flee-high-taxes-les-echos-figures

Does France actually tax expats? Among american expats and digital nomads, the IRS is notorious for chasing citizens across the globe and forcing them to pay taxes even while abroad. I suppose the rich could work on establishing citizenship elsewhere and renounce their citizenship entirely.

---

It's better than the current plan of letting the rich do whatever the fuck they want with no consequences.
---

Southernfatman posted...

It's better than the current plan of letting the rich do whatever the fuck they want with no consequences.

Prohibition is better than the current plan of doing nothing about alcoholism.

I mean he's right. No one should ever be Bezos rich.
---

Broseph_Stalin posted...

Southernfatman posted...

It's better than the current plan of letting the rich do whatever the fuck they want with no consequences.

Prohibition is better than the current plan of doing nothing about alcoholism.

This probably sounded much smarter in your head
---

Smashingpmkns posted...

No one should ever be Bezos rich.

Why?

Broseph_Stalin posted...

Southernfatman posted...

It's better than the current plan of letting the rich do whatever the fuck they want with no consequences.

Prohibition is better than the current plan of doing nothing about alcoholism.

Bad argument is bad
---

Broseph_Stalin posted...

Smashingpmkns posted...

No one should ever be Bezos rich.

Why?

Why should a single person be allowed to have as much wealth as billions of other people? It's fair to earn your way into millions, but when you have billions and the reigns of one of the largest and most powerful companies in the world...that is too much power for a single person.
---

The Great Muta 22 posted...

Bad argument is bad

Chad-Henne posted...

This probably sounded much smarter in your head

lol you know you've hit a nerve when people have to lash out but can't really argue against it

everyone on the internet spends so much time in echo chambers, they all have the same exact reaction when faced with reality

There shouldn't be
---

Broseph_Stalin posted...

lol you know you've hit a nerve when people have to lash out but can't really argue against it

you can't argue against a non-argument lol

---

pls posted...

Why should a single person be allowed to have as much wealth as billions of other people?

Because unless they are imposing a negative externality on people, there is nothing bad about being wealthy.

Broseph_Stalin posted...

The Great Muta 22 posted...

Bad argument is bad

Chad-Henne posted...

This probably sounded much smarter in your head

lol you know you've hit a nerve when people have to lash out but can't really argue against it

Yep that's exactly what's happening here, and not people pointing out that your argument was very dumb
---

Balrog0 posted...

you can't argue against a non-argument lol

Are unintended consequences a thing?

No, broseph must be wrong for some reason no one can define.

ah yes a vague reference to unintended consequences sure is a solid, airtight argument that deserves way more elaboration than it itself gives (none)

---

Chad-Henne posted...

and not people pointing out that your argument was very dumb

Broseph_Stalin posted...

lol you know you've hit a nerve when people have to lash out but can't really argue against it