- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Would you be in favor of this wealth tax?
Posted on 12/9/25 at 8:55 am to Lsujacket66
Posted on 12/9/25 at 8:55 am to Lsujacket66
No, I pay enough.
0
Posted on 12/9/25 at 9:51 am to frogtown
quote:
"Trickle down" has been a documented failure since Reagan.
BS. Pure bullshat.
Don't believe me.
But you should believe the study done by the London School of Economics. Go ahead and actually read the article. A link to the study itself is there.
quote:
The rich get richer, while unemployment and economic growth are unaffected
If you cut taxes on the rich...they then bargain more aggressively for their own compensation at the direct expense of workers lower down the income distribution.
Their conclusion: the rich got richer and there was no meaningful effect on unemployment or economic growth.
This has been known.
But nonetheless, trump convinced millions of people to vote against their self interests, resulting in billionaires getting yet another tax cut.
Systematically taking money from the middle class and those less fortunate, and then giving it to billionaires.
And I understand that this is an uncomfortable realization for many of you, and for the reasons pointed out by Mark Twain, it is difficult to accept. But that is what has happened, and what is continuing to happen under trump.
Posted on 12/9/25 at 9:54 am to Lsujacket66
You’re saying we need more taxes?
Posted on 12/9/25 at 9:55 am to Lsujacket66
quote:
Would you be in favor of this wealth tax?
No
Posted on 12/9/25 at 10:00 am to Nosevens
That $1,000,000 number was achieved by adding $5000 every year for those 18 years. You must contribute $90,000 to get the million.
Posted on 12/9/25 at 10:02 am to Lsujacket66
We already have income and capital gains taxes.
We don't need more double taxation on successful people. They will rightly just take their money somewhere else.
Nobody is entitled to someone else's property.
We don't need more double taxation on successful people. They will rightly just take their money somewhere else.
Nobody is entitled to someone else's property.
Posted on 12/9/25 at 10:04 am to Lsujacket66
You don't create wealth by stealing it.
Posted on 12/9/25 at 10:07 am to retired_tiger
quote:First off, "trickle down" is an economically meaningless term. Money in any economic system emanates (aka "trickles down") from a source. It does so in Communism, Socialism, or Capitalism. Folks employing "trickle down" gibberish are simply arguing as to what the emanating source should be.
"Trickle down" has been a documented failure since Reagan
Second, you say capitalism "has been a documented failure since Reagan"? Documented by whom? Documented by famous economists like Rachel Maddow, Joy Behar, Whoopi Goldberg, or Don Lemon?
Real wages in the United States are up 18.5% over the past 30 years.
Now for those of you from the Behar-Goldberg school of economics, let's make clear what "real wages" means. "Real wages" is an inflation adjusted number. Meaning that if it takes two dollars today to buy what it took one dollar to buy in 1996, someone who's income grew nominally from $100,000 in 1996 to $200,000 today would have a nominal growth of $100,000, but a real wage growth of zero.
18.5% growth implies the $200,000 (0% real growth) would instead be $237,000.
By comparison for example, US growth of 18.5% exceeds that of increasingly socialist Germany over the same period by more than four-fold (>400%)
Document that failure please.
Posted on 12/9/25 at 10:09 am to retired_tiger
quote:
Don't believe me.
It worked in the 60s
Posted on 12/9/25 at 10:12 am to Lsujacket66
quote:
Would you be in favor of this wealth tax?
Without even reading your idea... no. No I would not.
Posted on 12/9/25 at 10:14 am to Lsujacket66
My only opposition to it, as it is with most tax proposals, is simply that I don't trust the government to use the money properly. In a vacuum, taxes are for the common good and get spent wisely and efficiently. However, the vacuum doesn't exist in a real life application.
Posted on 12/9/25 at 10:20 am to Lsujacket66
quote:
Billionaires have 6.72 trillion in net worth. If we gave that 1% tax on billionaires to all children in the US (73 million) that would be $919 per kid per year
You want to take 1% of a Billionaires wealth? And, you want to do that every year?
I hate leftists.
Posted on 12/9/25 at 10:24 am to Lsujacket66
I'm against the government doing the $1000 thing and totally disagree with the wealth tax.
Posted on 12/9/25 at 10:28 am to Lsujacket66
It would be ruled unconstitutional, and if it weren’t, our elected officials would treat the money as a slush fund and siphon from it.
Common sense is, nobody’s accumulated wealth belongs to the government.
Hard pass
Common sense is, nobody’s accumulated wealth belongs to the government.
Hard pass
This post was edited on 12/9/25 at 10:30 am
Posted on 12/9/25 at 10:29 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Second, you say capitalism "has been a documented failure since Reagan"?
That is NOT what I said.
Trickle down economics have been a documented failure, and you can read the article and study linked above for more information.
Posted on 12/9/25 at 10:32 am to NC_Tigah
quote:It's a real tribute to the power of propaganda how this democrat bumper sticker meme is attributed to Reagan.
First off, "trickle down" is an economically meaningless term.
The upside is, when you hear someone use it, you know what you're dealing with.
This post was edited on 12/9/25 at 10:33 am
Posted on 12/9/25 at 10:34 am to Lsujacket66
quote:appreciate capitalism and expand it by increasing socialism.
was to give kids an incentive to appreciate capitalism
All that we will teach them is there is a supply of money, and we will teach and encourage them to pursue more of it....period.
Posted on 12/9/25 at 12:33 pm to retired_tiger
quote:Of course it is. You just didn't know how to say it.
That is NOT what I said.
Instead, you used a nonsensical, derisive, otherwise economically meaningless term -- "trickle down economics."
The only way to interpret your use of "trickle down" in actual economics is to refer to it as a pure application of capitalism.
quote:So you're going to double down? A term that has no formal economic definition has somehow been documented in undefined terms to be a failure? That's your argument?
Trickle down economics have been a documented failure, and you can read the article and study linked above for more information.
In that regard, the tooth fairy's neglect to place $1 under little Johnny's pillow in exchange for a deposited tooth, would qualify as a similar economic failure.
This post was edited on 12/9/25 at 12:51 pm
Posted on 12/9/25 at 1:11 pm to Lsujacket66
quote:
The interesting thing is this a direct transfer of wealth
frick you commie.
Posted on 12/9/25 at 1:20 pm to Lsujacket66
quote:
But I also had this idea that a 1% wealth tax for those worth over a billion. Billionaires have 6.72 trillion in net worth. If we gave that 1% tax on billionaires to all children in the US (73 million) that would be $919 per kid per year. Which would be in addition to the original $1000 from the gov and any $ added by companies or parents etc,
You are amazingly ignorant and poorly educated. Do you really imagine wealthy people just have giant vaults of money out of which to pay this tax?
Page 3 of 4
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News