But That's None Of My Business

People would just use the money wrong.

Probably true at this moment, but still, it isn't true that the poverty, lack of education, dying of starvation and curable diseases aren't solvable problems. It is up to us, and also, it is definitely true that we will never solve those problems until we restrain the neoliberal capitalism we're having now. Because even if people would use the money wrong, the super rich are using it wrong also, and we have wars, environment destruction, etc, because of their use of the money.

The more you tax the rich, the less money they have. The super rich and the rich are the people who do the hiring. The more you tax a company the employs many people, the less hiring they'll do and will, in fact, lay some of those workers off. It's job loss.

That's not actully true, cause the super rich have much more money than they need for hiring people. You have the case of Dan Price, the owner of the gravity company, he lowered his year earnings to equalise them with his workers payments and his company grew even bigger. And it's a matter of principle, people who are super rich have extreeme benefits from the society, so, they should be prpperly taxed to pay the society back. Also, you're putting it like it all works well so we should keep it. Capitalism as we have it today is quite dysfunctional and people are unhappy about it, so, even if more taxes for the rich would be bad, it's worth trying cause something has to be changed.

Taxing anyone isn't a good idea. Raising taxes is even worse. That isn't the government's job.

And how do you know that's worse? How can you prove that you know that? How can you say that it isn't a good idea to rightfully tax people who have billions of dollars (you know how much a billion of dollars actually is), to provide money to ensure nobody lives completely poor and dies of hunger and curable diseases? You're saying it's actually ok for someone to have million times more money than he needs and to pay his workers so that they barely make it to the end of the month? And if that doesn't work, how come in the Gravity, a company owned by Dan Price it worked? And that isn't government's job... Well, if sorting out things in the society isn't government's job, whos is it?

From what I can tell from your comments, you hate anyone who is rich. You have the mentality that if you have money you need to be taxed excessively. The United States did not start federally taxing its citizens until 1900 and state taxes in the 1930's. Taxes oppress, nothing more. Taxes do not create jobs, they take jobs.

We want a part of the American dream, to make money and be successful, but you can't do that if the government continue to raise taxes and steal from its citizens. It just doesn't work that way.

Our forefathers left England for religious freedom and escape unjust taxes. All we've done is get back into that.

I don't hate anyone, hate has nothing to do with my attitudes. Simply, the capitalism as it's practiced in the US doesn't work. It makes too much mess, too much damage to the environment, too much underpaid people, poor people, homeless people, people dying because of curable illnesses and etc. And the thing is, that's solvable. Simply by taxing the people who have much more than they need. Or you're saying that it is more important to make sure that people can earn countless billions of dollars than to ensure that these problems I mentioned should be solved?

And as in the case of Dan Price, google about him, is proved and it is that it is possible to lower your income as an owner of the company and radically raise the payment of your workers and to become even more successful. So, not that it's not doable, but it actually works better than the way most of the companies do business. What you say about american dream has nothing to do with this. I'm talking about super rich people, people who already made it, and have everything they want. American dream has nothing to do with that, they already have all their possible dreams fulfilled. And as I've said, their owe their success to the society and they need to give the society back. They didn't came rich in Mars and came to the Earth. They lived in the society, got raised, got educated, treated for any kind of diseases, etc. They can, and need to play their part in the wellbeing of the society. They have nothing to lose by doing it, cause they'll still be super rich, and they have a lot to gain actually.

First of all, it isn't up to people with billions of dollars to help those who have nothing. It isn't up to the government who is essentially broke, to help, either. It is up to every one of us to help in any way we can. Charitable donations to legit charities is the way to go, as it is up to the individual to help those in need and for the charities to do their job. It isn't right to force anyone to donate or to tax the crap out of them just because they have money. Who are you and who am I to tell anyone what to do with their money? We have no right to MAKE them give anything or a certain amount.

Second, many of these "super rich" people are already very charitable and donate a lot of their money to the needy. Yes, some are stingy, but it isn't our place to tell them what they have to do with their money. Giving is from the heart and is voluntary, not forced and should never be that way. It creates resentment and makes the individual not want to give when they are forced.

This whole mentality of "the super rich need to give most of their earnings to those who need it" is sad and pathetic and needs to stop, for real. If I had million or billions, I would give a lot. I know I would,because I like to give, but to force it is wrong. And the government has no right to tell anyone what to do with their hard earned money.

I never said 'most of their earnings', you said that, I said 20 percent of their annual salaries, which is far from the most of their incomes. It is the people who should be giving as well, when we look at it morally. But when we look at it politically it is the government who needs to take care of that, because government represents the people and is directly responsible to the people. So, the government can provide enough taxes to make sure society works well and that no one lives poor or homeless. It is the government who can say what do you do with your money because obviously the government taxes you, or it isn't? So, if we're gonna hold on to your attitudes, we need to have a complete anarchy and no taxes at all. But if we're not gonna have that, and obviously we won't, than we have to tax people properly, and it sure isn't normal or sane to have similar kind of taxes to the people who earn few thousands dollars a year and the people who earn billions. And also, as I've said, billionaires are born in our society. Raised, educated, cured, etc, they got their benefits from the society and made it extremely well. So, we definitely have no right to take their success away from them, but they should definitely contribute much more than regular people, since they benefit from the society much more than regular people. And 20 percent of an annual income would be just about it.

It's not as simple as "tax rate". The " tax rate" on the rich is already over 20%. The problem is loopholes, tak breaks, and tax incentives that are complicated and easily manipulated, by those who know what paperwork and which numbers to move around.

I don't know from where are you and about which country's system are we talking about. Whatever it is, I'm not actually saying that it's easy to do it or that it can be done now... People are on a low level in lots of ways and it is true that money could be misused even if we'd get it. But we still need to get it, and if we misuse it than we can work on that problem. About those loopholes and stuff, it can be like that, but I am talking about an idea. Because people are so ignorant that most of them oppose the very idea that the richest parts of the society should be taxed properly and the money used for the wellbeing of all. If we'd all push that topic as something we demand from our government, we'd work on those loopholes of there are so many.

I'm in the U.S. What I'm saying is in the conversation about taxes, tax rate (what one would be paying before tax breaks, using loopholes, receiving tax subsidies and tax incentives) is meaningless. Because of all those things, the effective tax rate (what people actually end up paying) is less. What I'm saying is that we need to remove loopholes so that the effective tax rate increases.

Okay, I can agree on that. I am not that familiar with the american system and it's details, since I'm from Europe. But I know that majority of the people will actually defend big corporations and super rich people in their agenda, while actually, that agenda is working exactly against them... People are ignorant, that was my point, but technically, I agree with you, if that's the case in the US.

In the U.S. the tax code provides incentives and tax breaks to attempt to influence what is invested in (I.e. green energy) or to influence hiring patterns (for instance some businesses are given tax incentives to hire ex-convicts which many businesses would otherwise avoid hiring) there's alot of such tax breaks, incentives, subsidies, ect. That businesses with good accountants can take advantage, in some cases by not even making actual changes, but changing how they file certain paperwork.

Yeah, I am aware that you can manipulate lots of things just by paperwork. Whatever it is, it needs to be changed, so either we change our governments and force them to deal with that or we make taxes that will provide that, if they don't already exist.