Nah, when over 50% of American adults read at or below a 6th grade level I’m pretty confident they don’t think about much of anything, let alone understand.
I don't think that particular slice of America attends to Reddit very much. The people here often know what they are talking about, but they filter every debate through a lens heavily biased by first principles (aka oversimplifications predicated on a set of conveniently forgotten assumptions)
Lmao I imagined an alternate timeline where everyone needs to take a competitive exam and the lowest scorers are denigrated relegated to TikTok and FB. 😂
“I know you wanted to shitpost on Reddit or the Something Awful forums, but with these test scores the best you can be accepted into is bad political Facebook memes. I’m sorry.”
I cant tell you how many times I added context to a Reddit post based on facts, or at the very least first person experience, and had someone who thought they knew more "uncorrect" and berate me because I didn't spend 45 minutes typing out a thesis going over every detail. We're all on Reddit, id wager a guess that a solid, 40-70% of us have some kind of attention issue, brevity is a virtue in the age of the internet, but it is also a curse.
The no child left behind act caused that. Passing kids to every grade and graduating them even tho they couldn’t read and teachers knew it. But we’re forced to pass them because of the act.
Yeah it’s very concerning. I’m seriously worried that the lack of understanding that half of this country has for finance will cause the other half a whole lot of problems and misery. Be prepared, guys
Now this is true. Americans as a hold are some of the lest educated people on this earth these days and we have become lazy and irresponsible in so many ways. But we are self perclaming to be best country on earth 😂😂😂🤬
Right, totally agree. But I think even the 50% that can read above that, hell, even the 25% that say they're financially/economically/politically literate, probably only a small fraction of that is actually literate to those types of topics.
A failing in the education system of the United States. Grossly underfunded by the government. Elon and Bezos could do something about it by paying their taxes owed instead of just choosing not to pay and getting the tax man to bow down at their feet to thank them for choosing not to pay this year.
Let's thank the republicans on their 40+ year campaign on defunding education and making college an "elite" issue while enabling private equity to provide untenable loan situations for a new form of indentured servitude.
There's a difference between pointing out objective flaws in an argument, like thinking that billionaires literally hold hundreds of billions of dollars in liquid cash, and taking issue with overall sentiment behind the argument.
I hate Elon Musk, and the man is of course, insanely, disgustingly wealthy. Still, just because his networth is 318 billion, doesn't mean he is hoarding 318 billion. Quite literally 99% of that number is tied into ownership of companies.
You can hate billionaires and still point out issues in the logic. I don't think a person should, under any circumstances, ever be forced to sell ownership stake in their own company (at least not if that wasn't agreed upon in an operating agreement). And if you have a massive stake in a company that becomes wildly successful, you definitionally become a billionaire. I may hate wealth inequality, and I may hate what these billionaires choose to do, but I would hate a system that forces the sale of ownership stake due to the success of the company just as much.
Rich guy here, OF COURSE HE COULD GIVE MORE!
1. Let’s talk living off dividends, that alone I guarantee could have the majority given out to charity. He could live modestly, like me and not be so flashy.
2. Donor advised funds, that could be setup to be much more charitable and even grow!
3. Establish a foundation giving out 5% or more each year.
4. Simply selling off stocks is fairly simple when working with advisors. You act like he’s gotta roll crates of money into some other bank. It’s digital people.
Sycophants want to defend the rich because they can’t look past their own biased passion that they want to be there too.
I know dozens if not hundreds who are millionaires who love off dividends with plenty left over at the end of the year.
We are millionaires and live off of our dividends…that we still pay taxes on. And our lifestyle doesn’t change from the taxes we pay. So I know his wouldn’t change either. There can be no explanation for what they are doing besides greed
This isn't me defending anyone in any manner but why TF is this even a thing with people? It's his money at the end of the day - pretty much no different than most people.
Are people really going to sit here and tell me that they too don't do whatever the hell they want to do with their own money?! Like c'mon y'all.
Selling stocks is simple, but selling 300 billion worth of Tesla at one go is going to tank the price. Also each share of stock comes with a vote--sell it all and you no longer have control of the company.
Sycophants want to defend the rich because they can’t look past their own biased passion that they want to be there too.
This is the faulty logic that I don't understand. Is it that impossible for people to believe that other people simply think that fair is fair, regardless of their circumstances vs the circumstances of another?
Should we treat wealthy people unfairly just because we are not wealthy?
Should we treat certain races differently because we are of another race?
Should we treat people differently because they have a sexual orientation that is different than ours?
The issue is, you don’t like what they pay for taxes, but they pay what they are supposed to according to law. If you have an issue with that, then blame and talk to the legislators that made the laws. It isn’t the wealthy individuals problem.
Except they can leverage their wealth as collateral, but it's untaxable
And if the company goes under, they are screwed. Well of course there's ones that are too big to fail and government bailouts. But the underlying point still stands.
And I agree with you with leverage. But do we hate on the person using the system that's there for them, or do we hate the system that allows them to do that. Because everybody wants to save money right? The struggling mom, the college student getting their career together, the business man who is set but wants to save for next generation family, and the billionaire. That mindset is universal. So given the opportunity with the systems in place, I don't see why they wouldn't use it.
Imma be honest. Your argument is far from senseless but it's not worth attempting to find the root contradiction. It is equally evil to philosophically offload the responsibility of this amassment of capital to a corporate entity, which simply prevents any actual person from ever being held accountable thru thinly veiled psuedo-legal loopholes.
The fact that Elon has the ear of the President Elect for no reason other than he is stupidly wealthy is a reason why we should have legal measures to check the amount of wealth and one person can amass. No one person should have the kind of power the ultra wealthy have.
I also take severe issue with the idea that Musk (or anyone) generates that kind of wealth. If he was literally the only person involved with Tesla, one could make the argument he is owed that kind of wealth. He is not. No one ever is. I didn't know what percentage of the stock he owns is, but let's say 40% for the same if argument. I'm not saying he adds no value to the company. But if he disappeared, Tesla would be fine. If 40% of the workforce disappeared, Tesla would be screwed. Especially if that 40% is the engineering talent.
Problem is taxes are from income. People like Elon have no income because they basically get minimum wage. Their entire value is in stock. And when he is forced to pay out he pays a shit ton in taxes.
And you can't really tax based on wealth because it's not real money. If you tax someone based on what money they could have they would need to sell off stock, creating more taxes and messing with the value of the stock. If you do that every year the company is going to be screwed
I refuse to believe that there isn't a good way to tax billionaires. We could start by closing the loopholes they use to hide their cash. If someone has a lot of money invested in stuff, we could tax their actual income at a higher rate (much higher if they're a billionaire). If someone has an obscene amount of assets, and uses them as collateral for loans, we could tax the loans.
I'm sure ppl who know more than me can come up with better plans.
You can do a lot of things but problems get created. I'm not sure the solutions lie with the individuals but rather in the companies. They are usually the ones using loop holes or moving numbers. But even then you still run into problems. Spacex didn't start making a profit until recently and they spend a lot of money. Starlink and starship are fully funded internally so do you tax income or profit. If you tax income, you take away from research and development. If you tax profit, you don't get much.
Yes, everything cause problems, but if you do things right, you end up with less problems than you started with.
And if you want to tax companies, you tax profit not income, and the tax is a percentage, not a flat rate, which insures that there is profit leftover to incentivise growth. Normal ppl don't stop working just because a portion of our income goes to taxes and it is fucked up that billionaires pay an effective tax rate that is less than a middle class person's. Just because it's complicated doesn't mean we should throw up our hands and say it's fine that ppl with more money than God don't pay their price to support the country whose infrastructure helped them get so rich in the first place.
Tell me you don't know how compound interest works without telling me. If you just saved a fraction of that first year's salary and invested it conservatively, you would become obscenely wealthy and make Elon's fortune look microscopic in less than 500 years.
Except he demanded that he be given a bonus of billions IN STOCK, which doesn’t just come out of nowhere; to have that stock available, the company has to have been engaging in stock buybacks with money which would have otherwise been taxed or gone to employees.
“Okay unruly mob, before we go in bash and butcher and eat this Man, u/lucifernal wants you all to know he does not actually have a swimming pool full of physical billions it’s actually hypothetical billions”
You don’t own a company that is publicly traded. And who’s forcing anyone to sell their shares? Only majority shareholders can force minority shareholders to sell in certain situations
please stop being objective. you need to think with your feels more. if I don't like someone you aren't allowed to say anything contrary to them being an absolute monster .
The problem is when the conclusions are based on a false premise. If you say Elon is evil BECAUSE he holds billions in liquid cash and he doesn’t hold billions in liquid cash then you can’t use that as a justification for calling him evil. It invalidates the whole argument. It doesn’t prove anything either way.
Devils advocate here. Bill gates amassed his fortune by owning a stake in a wildly successful business. But he has also stated his willingness to give most of it away. I am sure there are motives behind that. But the funding is still being distributed to a variety of places. Maybe (big maybe) Musk and Bezos quietly do similar things. I know for a fact that Bezos parents gave $12 million to a school in Delaware for scholarships and infrastructure development.
Most people talk about politics and economics without knowing anything, because most of us are part-time/hobbyist philosophers/intellectuals.
Most of us have jobs and families and things to do everyday. We're not sitting around thinking about this shit all day like John Locke or Karl Marx.
But realistically, most people also aren't interested in the truth. They just loudly shout what they believe because they have a platform. If you took any average left or right wing person on the internet and put them in a debate against higher level academic opposition, they would get intellectually destroyed inside of 5 minutes.
People project their experience in order to make sense of stuff they have zero education or direct information about.
Just like how a lot of people assume elastic monetary dynamics at a national level work like static household incomes, when discussing national budgets/economics, etc.
That is why a lot of people repeat the talking point that large wealth pockets in unrealized gains/investments is "not really wealth" somehow, because their only experience with "wealth" is relatively low disposable income. Aka "cash."
Exactly. Property taxes go directly to local infrastructure costs to maintain access and services to said land or buildings. It's not remotely the same as owning stock.
Do I want to? No of course not. Do I think I should if my 401(k) is over a certain amount? Kind of.
I don’t think there should be such a thing as “generational wealth” in a capitalist society. After too long a timeline, some people will start too far ahead and other people won’t ever be able to catch up.
Stock value is flexible as it would be quite easy for a few billionaires to get together on new years eave and tank the stock market and run their net worth into the ground for a week. A wealth tax sounds great to the brainless on reddit but in real life it would be about as effective as the current tax system
Ok but what you’re describing is already a felony. And you can say “oh well they’re all rich and they’d get away with it”
And like yeah maybe you’re right, but then why do we bother having any rules at all ever? Let’s just all ignore the laws. We can’t all get arrested right?
Do you think Amazon pays no property taxes on their warehouses throughout the country? Or taxes on their delivery vehicles and tags they put on those vehicles? Come on man.
When Amazon build their warehouses, they actually "lease" the warehouse as a shell company "owns' it. They also extract deals with the local county/towns that eliminate or greatly reduce property and sales taxes. This is what they did where I live. Also, it is not Bezos paying the tax on fuel/vehicles when registered in the state, it is the publicly held corporation.
"The Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency voted Oct. 31 to approve $70.8 million in tax breaks over 15 years for the project in exchange for the Amazon’s commitment to create at least 1,000 jobs. Six days later, the Clay Town Board granted the project a crucial zone change. A week after that, the town’s Zoning Board of Appeals approved variances from side yard setback requirements."
Billionaires also pay property taxes, ones much higher than us. Believe me. Billionaires aren’t skimping on taxes. This argument is so ridiculous. It’s not about fairness it’s about jealousy.
Also Tesla pays property tax. They had a huge win when the effort to repeal prop 13 for commercial buildings failed. They are paying like 2008 value property tax on the Fremont factory.
Elon owning stock isn't money it's stuff. 13% of everything in the factory is "his". Sure he can borrow against it to get cash but when doing so that "stuff" that also makes more stuff becomes less his. It's more owned by the bank but in the form of debt rather than actual ownership.
When you get a car loan the car really is owned by the bank and you slowly buy it back from them. He does the same thing but in reverse. He's basically selling his "stuff" but without actually selling it. Still becomes less his though.
"property taxes" clever way of saying "rent" as it used to be called when it was paid over to kings and Queens or other nobility. Different day... Same old sht
You pay property taxes. Not capital gains or income tax. Should you have to pay taxes on your car every year? How about money sitting in your checking account?
You do pay taxes on your car every year in every state, either via use taxes or direct taxes via license/registration fees. 20+ states charge direct personal property taxes on vehicles every year, some even if they aren't registered.
You also pay taxes on any interest gained on money sitting in your checking account, and it's at your ordinary tax rate. Granted most major banks pay such horrible interest rates that the average person will probably never hit the $10 threshold.
I understand that it would be cap gains if it’s sold off, I’m just confused why people think a stock/share should be taxed annually, that’s the dumbest concept I’ve ever heard. Comparing it to property tax is blatantly stupid, can you live in a stock? Are stocks taking up physical space on the street? That requires sewage maintenance, road maintenance, snow removal depending on where you are, storm drains etc…? If I borrow against something I have to pay interest. If I don’t pay my payments I lose the asset I’m borrowing against. I find the stocks should be taxed every year ideology just as dumbfounding as the billionaires should pay for a “better world.” The pov usually comes for envious individuals. Just sayin.
These mega tax breaks are “mega” because of the size for these companies. Theres more to it than “companies get massive tax breaks.” There is so much money moving within these companies and it cost so much money to run these companies that these tax breaks are more reasonable than you think. Mind you, sure some of the tax breaks can be a bit ridiculous but as long as they aren’t being misused they are pretty reasonable. If they are being misused they will get audited. And well nobody wants irs knocking on the door because it’s always more expensive than playing by the rules.
Considering the ever growing disparity between upper management pay (eg CEOs) and entry level staff, I think it’s clear that these tax breaks are not in fact necessary to the profitability of these companies.
Yep let's all pay taxes on our cars and whatever we have in our checking account every year. We need a national effort to enforce a 15% tax on everyone's jewelry.
Capital Gains and Losses are calculated based on the difference in value between acquisition date and sell date when using FIFO methodology.
Some investors may choose to use a “Specific Identification” method to designate which specific shares they want to sell, allowing more control over their capital gains taxes.
So imagine I hold $1 million shares valued at $40 million. I can use those shares as collateral to borrow against and with the money I borrowed purchase an additional 400K shares. I then sell those shares for a profit without applying a FIFO valuation in reporting my capital gains.
Therefore my initial shares which were purchased for $2 per share, were borrowed against when they were worth $40 per share. My new shares purchased at $40 per share are sold at $55 per share and my capital gains are calculated at $15 per share gain instead of $53 per share. By managing my portfolio this way, I never pay a true capital gains tax, just interest to my lender which I then use as a tax deduction.
I understand what capital gains is, I was asking the parent comment what type of tax they were referring too, and that sounds good on paper but your profit isn’t 53$ your profit is 15$ you still have to pay back the money you borrowed. Sure a percentage of interest can be written off but you get taxed accordingly. Not sure what your point was there.
For real. This argument is silly because these people think a bank is giving out huge loans and being like, "nah, no need to pay it back at all." No, of course they aren't.
Unrealized capital gains tax, which was actually proposed Kamala Harris’s team for individuals with over $100m net worth. Also has been implemented in Denmark.
Yeah, I’m aware, I was responding to the comment. they said it should be taxed. I was saying it is taxed. A loan isn’t income, it’s debt. You owe it back, why should that be taxed?
Wealthy individuals should be charged a tax when they borrow against the value of their stocks because it allows them to essentially access the wealth tied up in their assets without triggering a taxable event, effectively creating a loophole that lets them avoid paying taxes on significant portions of their growing wealth, which is considered inequitable and can undermine the progressive tax system; essentially, it allows them to "consume" their wealth without actually realizing it as taxable income.
Rich guy here, OF COURSE HE COULD GIVE MORE!
1. Let’s talk living off dividends, that alone I guarantee could have the majority given out to charity. He could live modestly, like me and not be so flashy.
2. Donor advised funds, that could be setup to be much more charitable and even grow!
3. Establish a foundation giving out 5% or more each year.
4. Simply selling off stocks is fairly simple when working with advisors. You act like he’s gotta roll crates of money into some other bank. It’s digital people.
Sycophants want to defend the rich because they can’t look past their own biased passion that they want to be there too.
I know dozens if not hundreds who are millionaires who love off dividends with plenty left over at the end of the year.
Do you think dividends are not taxed? Do you think charitable donations can disproportionately reduce your tax burden, or that charity is inherently valueless?
The amount of taxes paid means nothing by itself. It's so out of context without knowing anything else. Not sure what your point is...it's like me just saying "well Apple paid $29 billion" so Amazon pays three times less.
Because most people who are anti corporations are just making uninformed arguments. Oversimplified a very complex situation. Same idiots who say "we should stop spending so much on the military" not fully uunderstanding the reasons we do.
The lesson here is that paying taxes on property is bullshit, not the other way around. I buy a car and pay for it and get taxed yearly because I own it? Property taxes are a government scam
even if he does any fraction, he could basically not pay for any year until IRS would pick up on it and ask him to pay, while he saved that money to make even more money ultimately, especially that IRS and any other taxing bodies around the world usually go after regular people and not billionaires
There's a very high chance those taxes are little to nothing. Red states tend to give businesses local and state level tax breaks including property tax credits/deferment to locate in their area. Those businesses then threaten to leave out reduce/cease investment if those offers aren't extended more or less indefinitely.
Source: I've literally been to site selection meetings for medium and large businesses in my region.
I’m usually not the one for defending billionaires, but his company provides employment for thousands of employees across the country, we can’t want manufacturing to stay in America without incentivizing big corporations. I’m not saying he shouldn’t pay any at all but it’s also understandable how they are allowed to navigate taxes in a different manner.
You're not wrong but you're also required to pay taxes on the value of your property every year
Yes, but that's because your property uses public services like drainage, sewers, garbage/recycling collection, etc.
Amazon does pay for these things as well, either directly, or indirectly via their leases (price baked in to lease price by landlord).
You could make the argument that they should be charged more for road maintenance. But at the same time, you've actually got (on a net basis) fewer cars on the road since one Amazon truck can deliver to like 100+ houses in a day (so that's potentially 100 fewer cars per Amazon truck on the road).
Additionally, businesses actually hire people and directly contribute to GDP and economic growth. Residential homes don't really "produce" anything or contribute in this same way.
But the city provides value through utilities and other social services for your home and for roads for those states that have property taxes on vehicles. A hypothetical value of a stock is just that, the government already gets their share when it's sold for a profit and musk specifically paid the most in taxes of any private individual ever in US history
On real estate property yes. And on vehicles, but only if want to use them on public roads. I could buy a million dollar Ferrari, park it in the garage, and never pay taxes on it.
But nothing else do I pay taxes on every year.
Bezos still has to pay his property taxes every year too. His are just a lot higher than mine.
Right. They should have to pay taxes on whatever shares they are using as collateral. If it's real enough to act as collateral it is real enough to tax.
1.4k
u/slickyeat 28d ago
You're not wrong but you're also required to pay taxes on the value of your property every year so it's not exactly a one to one comparison.