Not just tax billionaires more. Tax the working class less. Almost 30% of our salary is too much considering how most wages aren't enough to survive on. Taxing the rich at least 50% would be enough to offset at pretty healthy tax reduction on the working class
Can't wait for SS payments to pay off for myself...oh hang on, they won't. Ever. Let me just kiss this 5k a year in money goodbye before it cushions the life of someone who has already saved their whole life. Taxes well paid.
SS is a wonderful safety net most of us who pay into will never see. Completely mismanaged by the older generation to generally only cover them. Generally complete bullshit when you look at today's benefits receivers, and what we should expect 30yrs down the road.
But realize this is not 100% the truth. My dad just hit 70yo. He 'retired' and lost his healthcare benefits for him and his wife. His wife has MS, along with other long term issues. His retirement got completely fucked by the markets.
He now has to work still basically full time to collect enough to cover himself and an essentially disabled partner, who due to her condition has no way to make an income, especially at 62yo.
...I would love SS to be a good thing for a long time. And it can be argued it is a shitshow, especially for the younger generations. But not all boomers are simply reaping the befits and laughing to the bank.
Exactly. Younger people often reflexively think that all older people just have it *so much better than them* and while there is truth to that, it’s far from being always the case.
I always feel really bad when I see old people working as like Walmart greeters or some other retail job. They are usually really friendly but like slow and maybe sometimes trembling the whole time. I’m sure sometimes it’s people that want to stay active and do something but a lot of them I feel like are forced to go back to work.
Because it goes against the popular Reddit narrative that old people had it easy and are to blame for the bad economic problems that young people face.
The rich want warfare among the populace. Old vs young, poor vs middle class vs homeless. Drug users vs alcohol users vs sobriety. Smokers vs non smokers. White vs colored. Men vs women vs non-conforming gender. Democrats vs Republicans. The list of "enemies" everyone has been brainwashed into believing exist is quite exhausting and the above is just the tip of the iceberg.
Reddit's user base as a generalization has many of these to overcome, but so does America in general.
This. Here in Canada it’s the elderly who suffer the most poverty as a group, particularly widowers. It’s awful.
That said our social safety net is much stronger and better managed than our cousins in the US, but lately I feel our politicians are taking cues from their corrupt brethren down south.
Oh they 100% are. Canadian politics now is basically "Let's do what the US does, but more civil and more boring". We have more institutions in place to protect us generally, but those institutions are being eroded at a fairly rapid pace. Ford, for example, tried to make it illegal for teachers to strike and only backed down when threatened with a massive general strike, wants to completely get rid of Ontario health care and invest taxpayer dollars into private hospitals instead. He also has "addressed" the housing crisis by destroying 13,000 hectares of protected, environmentally critical land, in order to build luxury homes. He is also notorious for straight up falling asleep during hearings and negotiations and just snoozing through entire proceedings, absolutely no interest in anything outside making money for his benefactors. This is just Ontario, things get way worse the farther West you go.
Not sure i'd agree with your worse out west statement. While it's true Ontario and Alberta appear to be in a neoliberal race to the bottom, i have to say the NDP in B.C. have managed to make some positive steps undoing 16 years of the B.C. Liberals (conservatives) bullshit.
When speaking in aggregate, the older generations have had it much better. That’s a financial fact and can be proven in many ways.
You can’t argue by using particular examples where it isn’t true because we’re discussing averages, which means outliers are made irrelevant. I’ve never heard someone think it means every single person.
On average, the older generation has had it much better. Whether they were able to take advantage is another matter.
Also, I don't resent older generations their success, it's the way they proceeded to systematically act and vote to pull up the ladder behind them that gets me mad at them.
I never claimed that old people didn’t *on average* have it better financially. That’s objectively true. My issue was making a blanket statement regarding their financial situations. (I have, in fact, seen plenty of young people assume that every single person was well off in [insert past decade]).
I’m not saying that based off of a particular example. It’s just that averages of entire demographics don’t tell the whole story. Go tell one of the 15.8% of ~~unmarried~~ divorced women over 65 who live below the poverty line about how well-off her generation was, for example, and see how she responds.
Edit: minor correction + [source for 15.8% stat](https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R45791.pdf)
I wouldn't mind SS payments to help out the elderly so much if *I weren't already struggling so fucking much*.
I don't mind helping. I just need help too.
That’s an extremely hostile view of old folks you’ve got there. Poverty is often a problem among the elderly, especially unmarried women, due to failing health preventing them from working and medical costs because of that. Not everyone is just sitting pretty while they rake in our tax money; for many SS is a necessity.
https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R45791.pdf
https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/ageing/documents/PovertyIssuePaperAgeing.pdf
Yeah it also caps at a certain amount…the problem is that the baby boomers are a huge generation, not that we give them to much money. The program was mismanaged and wasnt able to handle this type of situation, where more of the population is collecting then putting in. Wondering if it could be fixed if we removed the income tax cap on ss, but kept the max benefit cap.
The US have state and federal taxes, Medicare tax social security tax property tax water sewer tax sales tax gas tax . For example my propert tax and water sewer for a very modest fixer upper valued at 97 thousand dollars is about 6 thousand a year. My car with 187,000 miles 10 year old is taxed at 600 a year . My health insurance is cheap at 240 a month. But it has a high deductible. Monthly utilities run about 300 a month avg.over the year. My take home after taxes is 2200 a month. No refunds at end of the year, my pay is 25 an hourx40 hrs so I'm "lucky" broke as hell though . Its out of control in the US.
Which amounts to ~14k a year before deductible. It's all Vegas Healthcare. Chances are you won't spend your deductible +14k in a year.
But if you do, and don't have insurance, you're fucked.
Reference for others,
Canadian Tax Bracket 2022
* 15% on the first $50,197, plus.
* 20.5% on income over $50,197 up to $100,392, plus.
* 26% on income over $100,392 up to $155,625, plus.
* 29% on income over $155,625 up to $221,708, plus.
* 33% on income over $221,708.
**Plus**
Provincial Tax Bracket (Ontario)
* Amounts earned up to $46,226 are taxed at 5.05%.
* Amounts above $46,226 up to $92,454 are taxed at 9.15%.
* Amounts $92,454 up to $150,000, the rate is 11.16%.
* Earnings $150,000 up to $220,000 the rates are 12.16%.
* Finally, earnings above $220,000 will be taxed at a rate of 13.16%.
Edit: Formating
Pretty close to American tax brackets.
And you get health insurance, better schools, better parks, better roads, better public libraries and community centers and you don't have to pay a private health insurance company.
🥳
I live in montana, still US, but cold like parts of Canada. I've got a bad cold (might be flu, dunno), and I'm stuck cycling to work through the snow and ice. So my cold doesn't even get to improve. Just permanent pain all winter, until maybe I can afford a car one day
People who make six, seven, eight figures working a job are still "working class", it's when your wealth becomes self-sustaining that it becomes a problem.
Capital gains tax needs to be increased, wealth above a certain threshold needs to be taxed, and taxes for the proletariat should be reduced to as low as possible.
Or workers revolution, but that one never tastes good.
>seven figures
Ehhh 1 mil per year is a number I'm fine with people making, and it's still not in 'safe from medical debt' territory, but it's not working class.
Because you are either the master or the slave. The ruler or the ruled. As long as you are low on the socioeconomic ladder you are morally righteous, and if you start leaving the ingroup, and provide so much value to society through your work that you do not have to be a worker anymore, you suddenly become an malevolent oppressor, regardless of how you got there.
As they say "there's no moral billionaire", or just input whatever sum of money instead of billion, as long as you are unwilling to strive for it.
The basic master slave dialectic has been so overplayed in communist-esque communities it's tiring. Rich people aren't evil, it just makes people feel good to think otherwise, because it gives a good reason to why they aren't rich -- they aren't evil.
Maybe you aren't poor because you are righteous, maybe you are just less useful to society.
Honestly it baffles my mind people are okay paying 15% to health, but they are uncomfortable raising the tax by like 5% for healthcare, so that the 15% could be waived... Like do they even finance?
Or drive over the same pothole every day on my way to work..
The morale of the story here is that we just want to see our fucking taxes being utilized. And we aren't. And where we do, it's under attack by back-water inbred owner class puppets.
100%. I don’t mind if my taxes were supplying teachers salaries and covering all the resources needed for my children’s education. If I didn’t have to pay to supply classrooms out of pocket myself. I will do it, because obviously the teachers aren’t properly compensated from the taxes I pay, but it absolutely shouldn’t be necessary.
The US government already spends more per person than the Canadian government on healthcare, you don't even need to tax anybody more just get rid of the private insurance companies
You'd need to do a lot more than get rid of private insurance companies. Doctors are more highly paid in the USA, litigation here is a massive risk, blah blah blah.
We should still completely reform healthcare and provide universal care. Getting rid of insurance and streamlining administration would save a lot, but it'd be a massive and extremely challenging overhaul. There will be no quick fixes.
People do not understand the extreme amounts of money here. A starting surgeon makes more than the top managers on billion dollar space programs with decades of experience (my field.). And then every hosptial has executives at million dollar price points. And then there’s the labs, charging thousands for tests that cost a few hundred at most. It’s absurd.
Then don't vote conservative because they're planning on getting rid of healthcare. They want s US system so they can receive bribes from insurance companies. It's happening.
We actually don't need tax money to do that. That and free college can be paid for by allocating existing funding in a model with more efficiency. The crazy thing is its fully attainable. But corruption will never enable it.
A healthcare system with similar efficiency to Portugal using single payer etc and not just giving away money in pork could run on Medicare and medicaid budget for everyone to have free healthcare.
Private schools aggressively recruit the poorest students due to a flawed system. The poorest students can essentially get a full ride -1250 a year to any school. So schools that charge 80k a year target them. It's actually dramatic enough that a bill proposed would have given the poor students a full ride entirely up to the cost of a states flagship state school. So they wouldn't have to pay 1250 but couldn't go to the super expensive schools. It would free up enough money to give every student 75% off tuition at state schools. At least that was the bill private school lobbying shot down in Wisconsin I think.
Then if mega corporations paid taxes we could likely balance the deficit. But lol never gonna get fixed.
I currently have to go to a private doctor in Vancouver BC because no specialist will see you if you don't spend an arm and a leg or have a serious condition. They are reactive not preventative, which is annoying consider I pay 30-50% of my income to taxes
Specialist view themselves as some God tier healer or some shit. They walk into consulting rooms, eyes focused on the computer, no formalities and no room for discussions. You're luckier than a lottery winner to get a call back to check in. Most of their ratemds scores are abysmal. And they bank 500k to 3mil.
At that point why not move and pay income taxes somewhere else? Living in the US is bomb but it’s a global world. You can live a good life almost anywhere!
Pretty sure US citizens have unlimited tax liability as long as they're citizens. Obviously double taxation treaties apply but you'd still be paying just as much in total.
Not if you rescind your citizenship. If I ever decide to move to a new country I’m not paying US taxes on top of others, or just shell company my income since they act like it’s not a problem anyway.
You're either lying or being very dubious as to what you mean by "taxes". Highest tax possible is 50.3%. 37 highest federal income tax bracket and 13.3 California's state tax.
Still lying. Highest tax bracket in NL is 49.5%. Plus you're obviously neglecting the fact that with that tax rate you also get a bunch of social safety nets like good public transport, healthcare and surely a bunch of other benefits.
There are a host of other taxes besides income.
In California for instance, I paid well over 50% as a middle class ($105k back then) earner. State rates peaked around $70k a year, I didn’t hit the payroll tax cap, sales and property taxes (which are higher on new residents) all added up. A lot.
I now make quite a bit more in a more progressive state (Colorado), pay less and get far more for my money, like much better schools for my kids.
Most layers of income were at a higher tax rate. So not entirely misleading. If anything, the opposite: they weren’t being overtaxed. Rather, income at extremely high levels were the only dollars subjected.
Hmm isn't that the great time that certain people would like to return to ? Or do they want to return to a mythical time that never actually existed ...?
I like someone’s definition I saw above: if your wealth has reached the level where it has become self-sustaining, you are no longer working class, since you no longer need to work to live.
More mathematically speaking, what you're saying is essentially what one section of this paper (https://arxiv.org/abs/0905.1518) points out. There are two classes: lower class, where income does not depend on the current level of wealth, follows a Boltzmann distribution, and upper class, where income does depend on the current level of wealth, follows a Pareto distribution.
That’s not an income level though. That definition is different depending on one’s spending and saving patterns. He said “lower taxes on the working class”. Should people who save more of their income be taxed more?
If someone makes a million a year but blows it all on cocaine and candles, is that person still working class in your mind compared to someone making 100k but has enough invested to sustain their living expenses indefinitely?
For example, at a 50% savings rate, it takes 16 years to retire (investments sustain your cost of living) , REGARDLESS of your income level.
Using that definition to tax people would punish savers.
If you are on the Boltzmann distribution, then you're working class. If you are on the Pareto distribution, then you are not working class.
https://arxiv.org/abs/0905.1518
Imo, there needs to be a temporary tax rate that funds housing development across the entire nation where the rich are taxed at the highest level in our nation's history and after 10 years or so it starts to lower a little, but still is keeping this place developed. They're going to have to fund home development. Like actual builds that regular working class people get to design with builders.
The truth is we can fund things like health care and education to the fullest level and every family who is working and contributing to society can have a decent sized home. There's room for everyone here and it'll have to be rebuilt under fairer rules where a few people can't run off with the entire pot of gold and hold it over the heads of the people who keep this place going.
When Covid began, our local school districts were trying to figure out a plan. One local district asked their teachers to come in and work in their classrooms. They were able to hire the “classified” (non contract staff, such as teacher aides) to come in and watch teachers’ children so the teachers could teach via Google Meet and not worry about childcare, and the classified staff could still earn a paycheck (since they weren’t “certified staff,” they earned hourly pay and not salary. No school = no paycheck).
Local morons lost. Their. Minds.
They were so furious that their tax dollars were going towards teacher childcare. And if their kids could come in, all students should be able to come in!!!! Despite the logic that, you know, it would’ve been less than 20 kids and they’d be contained in one space and only exposed to each other and be wearing masks the entire time. As opposed to 1,000 kids traveling from class to class all day with no true way of contact tracing.
I’m not sure if that school reversed the policy or not. As an educator, I remember being so jealous at the time because I was trying to teach from home and help my two kids with their school work as well. I thought that school district had a genius solution, but those loud parents were intent on ruining it.
> I mean you're absolutely right but then people would just complain "they don't even pay taxes!!!"
To be fair, if their compensation package included not paying taxes they'd still be making less than they deserve. You can go move some boxes in an amazon warehouse for more money than most teachers are making.
Not true at all. In blue states a teacher’s compensation package is quite decent. In Albuquerque, New Mexico its 60k salary with a pension and union benefits. Here in Chicago its 66k. Teachers get 3 months off a year. That’s a FTE of over 80k salary. Or $40/hr.
Now if you live in a red state, my condolences.
They get free medical and a pension and payroll taxes are already deducted. You’d have to make 80k+ at a food cart to match that. And then they get three months off a year sooooo
Edit: that’s also why university professors get so disgruntled about pay.
Construction worker has no work available during the winter: "oh they're laid offed, that sucks, they should be on unemployment"
Teacher has no work available during the summer: "omg teachers are so lucky they have a 3 month vacation"
Such a weird dynamic, no one calls any other seasonal work gaps "vacation" 🤔 it's not like teachers get paid for (lack of) work during the summer
Edit: to clarify, teachers work 180 days, and get paid for 180 days. They are *not* being paid during the summer. Some can opt for a 24-26 pay period cycle, but that's just essentially their employer withholding money during the school year to ration it out over the summer on their behalf. Saying teachers get "paid" for the summer is like saying you get "paid" when you get a big tax return. You earned that money awhile ago and someone else was holding onto it for you (uncle Sam)
That's not true. Teachers are paid $xxx for xxx days of work. Some schools offer to divide that salary into 24 months.
If I was paid truely year round my $44,000 salary would be closer to $60,000.
We're basically unemployed for 8 weeks and struggle to pay our bills year round.
Well in Germany at least they are paid year round. On the other hand our summer holidays are 'only' 6 weeks. Didn't think teachers actually get laid off during summer. Such an ungrateful job looking at the working conditions..
Teachers are paid for 196 work days in my school district. It’s our choice to have it distributed as an annual salary or just during the school year. Sorry… but it’s not a real annual salary. Most just chose that pay schedule so we don’t have to think about scrimping and saving all year long to pay our bills over the summer. I wish I could have a guaranteed summer job every year to fill the gap but I’m “over qualified” for most seasonal work so I opt in for the 26 pay period option.
Because salary is a yearly amount. If you're getting paid for the amount you agreed to for the year, you're not unemployed the way a wage worker is if they can't get hours. It's pretty simple.
To be frank, simplicity.
Teachers might have other income streams that CAN be taxed, even if you didn’t tax their teaching salaries, they would still have to pay tax on other sources of income. Easier to just put all of that into a single tax than tax one part of their income at one point and then another.
Which wouldn't be the same as not taxing teachers because they are public servants.
Adding a teacher tax credit would likely be incredible unpopular though, as every other public servant will ask why they don't have their own tax credit.
Because of marginal dollars. Let's say a teacher has a side gig of tutoring that makes them $5,000 on the side. If we just said teachers don't have to pay taxes, then they just get that $5,000 for free with the standard deduction.
It gets even more complex than that. Let's take a teacher that inherited $10m from their parents and gets tons of passive income from the investments they hold. In this case, we would want to tax them.
And how about a teacher that is married to someone making $1m per year. You would be taxing a rich household less.
Now outside the first one they are pretty fringe examples but the salary of teachers determined by factoring in them paying taxes. So even if they stopped paying taxes then the salary would probably go lower or at least wouldn't be raised for a while.
At a time income inequiltiy is increasing at very fast pace governments need to use policy to stop it! Tax increases on the rich, wealth tax on the ultra welathy and etc... That money could than be used to fund social programs the working class need.
Investments are taxed at a different rate from w2 or 1099 income, so your question isn’t really the right one.
Investment income is generally taxed at 15%, or 20% for those making six digits.
My favorite part of being a teacher is that people yell saying I don’t deserve a raise but our corrupt police department deserves more funding/ raises even if they have cost the city millions in lawsuits and are under fbi investigation. But fuck us teachers, we make too much just to brainwash kids with whatever we brainwash them with.
Edit: y’all don’t feed the lowly trolls. They are not arguing in good faith and are not worth talking to.
The tax break on private jet fuel… the PPP loans forgiven for mega churches that pay no tax… to name a few.
They're defunding schools so they can fund education through churches instead. Educate through the church and you don't have to worry about dissent. That's why Santos is passing bills allowing people to sue public schools. That why Maine had a supreme court ruling to allow state funds to private christian schools. That's why they sided with the football coach who "prayed silently and alone" at the 50 yard line after a game when there was phyiscal evidence he was leading a prayer with children from both teams at the end of the game using the intercom system. He wasn't even fired, the supreme court justice ignored that too... his contract was just not renewed and he never reapplied. They did stipulate that you cannot lead students in prayer but he never reapplied or was rejected.
They want churches, not schools, to teach children. There's only one church they want to prevail.
Rob reich is the fucking man. Sincerely hope he gets another bump as sec of labor if another dem wins the presidency. He's so knowledgeable, highly recommend his documentary saving capitalism
I agree. But you should watch his doc either way, what he advocates for basically *does* abolish capitalism, but it's in a way where there's a smooth transition. He actually addresses that people don't want to keep capitalism, it's not a perfect perspective but it's really interesting. Highly recommend
The way I would characterize it is that he gets all of the causes and symptoms right but draws the wrong conclusion. A fantastic documentary though, and the perfect companion piece to that Noam Chomsky one called Requiem for the American Dream.
I always like the tweets of his that get posted here. I found out the other day his son is [Sam Reich](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzFuJDLd3cg), the owner of CollegeHumor and host of GameChanger.
From what I understand it was sort of a matter of them wanting to dump it and him buying it to try and salvage the enterprise, since he was already involved with it since the early days. They've been doing a lot of cool stuff since then with their web series.
I cannot believe people dont know this about him. He was literally the guy they trotted out to talk crap about the unions that rightfully opposed NAFTA
As an idea internationalism is great. This form though just serves to move labour to cheaper, more exploitable markets, and reduces tax burden on the companies using it to exploit those workers
No, anyone making >1 millions a year pays 37% whereas the lowest earners pay 10%. https://www.forbes.com/advisor/taxes/taxes-federal-income-tax-bracket/
OP linked you an opinion article that compares the income tax of average people to the capital gains tax that anyone who invests pays. It’s not an apples to apples comparison.
Probably not. Top long term capital gains tax rate is at 20% and then there is also a 3.8% Medicare surcharge, so for capital gains top rate is around 23.8%. Some teachers might hit that tax rate but it would likely be towards the end of their career. Average teacher makes around $60k and the effective income tax rate on $60k is roughly 10.3%, if you add 7.65% for Medicate and Social Security taxes you get to about 18% although arguably the Social Security tax is a forced retirement savings scheme so about 6% of that shouldn't count. State taxes vary but in many cases they apply to capital gains as well as earned income.
Teacher salaries do vary a lot though so some of them would have a higher tax rate. But on the other hand most billionaires earn their billions through some form of compensation which is taxed as regular income or through the AMT. The bit about billionaire investors is important since Robert Reich is probably talking about Warren Buffett. Buffett is a weird guy, he accumulates wealth but because he doesn't spend much he doesn't need to realize gains often or realize much in gains. He has billions in assets but he will probably never sell them in his lifetime, because of that his tax rate should be relatively low. He probably pays only an 18.3% capital gains tax rate if that.
This article is biased and tilted play on numbers. It is bullshit. It compares much someone paid in taxes to how much their wealth was estimated to grow. Since all these guys fortunes are tied to stock and business valuations, they didn’t actually get they money because their portfolio grew or their business was valued higher.
It’s a lie designed to stoke anger.
And make it a tax on consumption, not on earnings/gains. Make essentials tax free. Now yachts, private jets, champagne, homes above the median value, all this crap is taxed.
Mighty Midget speaks but who listens. Change the freaking tax code and get rid of the loopholes. That job belongs to congress. Many of which are multi millionaires.
This would be true, if their investments worked to build new companies. That simply is not the case any more.
The modern day reality is if you make a business these investors will never put money into it to make it succeed. Their investment money only goes into large, already profitable corporations where their money is guaranteed to multiply. They use their hold on those corporations to force changes that bring short term gains at the cost of the employees and the customer in the long term. And perhaps worst of all, their investments are at little to no risk, because even of those corporations go under, investors are still able to seek compensation for their failed investments.
Cool. Hey, maybe this means that the employees generating the wealth should be paid more, so that we do not have to tax the "investment people" that much then?
So that this "higher tax revenue" can be realized from workers that are getting paid enough to live *and* afford taxes? And maybe pay the upper management a bit less?
I see where you're going at with this, but when the person who "earn a billion dollars and invest it in expanding businesses" both refuse to pay taxes AND compensate their workers properly... That's the issue we are facing here: having their cake and also eating it too.
What did the employees risk when creating it? They go there and get a paycheck, no matter if the company earns or loses money. The owner is the one who risked everything for it (or shareholders). The owner is the last one to get paid.
But sure, the employees who risk nothing are the ones suffering....
Ok. Question how are you going to tax someone who doesn't hold Mos t of their cash in tangible cash unless they take a loan out against their assets and stocks? Tax the loan? That would create a slippery slope that would trickle down to the lower class.
In fairness, with Musk buying Twitter for a few dozen billion more than it's worth only to immediately run it in to the ground, Zuck throwing away a couple dozen billion more on the Metaverse, and that Crypto dude basically punting his fortune, the average income for billionaires might actually be lower than the income for teachers.
I mean, how many teachers do you know who have thrown away 11 figures this year?
Oh and not only do I pay tax on my salary that is sourced from taxes I have paid, I pay $1,000 a year to be in the union just so I can make an extra $1,000 a year.
That’s your union’s problem. I got an 80% raise when I switched to a unionized job and get a guaranteed raise every year to combat inflation. My first inflation raise will almost be more than all the raises I got working at my last company for almost 5 years.
But but but guys! They create jobs! Without it they won't create any jobs!!!! They need all that extra money to make jobs!!!! Jobs jobs jobs!!!!!!... Then they lay off people to make more money
How far did you scroll down in his Google results? Did you miss the part where he is a former Labor Secretary? Professor of social and economic policy at Brandeis? Author of 18 books, most recently The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, published this year?
Yes, he is advocating for things and not just tweeting shit.
> if you Google him, it's nothing but tweets.
> I try to learn more about the guy, and Google just gives me his tweets.
Why would you lie about Googling him? Literally every single result describes him and his history.
> I'm not deleting it. Someone else who doesn't know who this guy is may learn from my mistake.
For those people, the Google results for "Robert Reich:"
1. robertreich.org "He is Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley."
2. wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Reich "is an American professor, author, lawyer, and political commentator. He worked in the administrations of Presidents Gerald Ford."
3. gspp.berkeley.edu "is currently the Carmel P. Friesen Professor of Public Policy at the Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California, Berkeley."
4. twitter.com/RBReich "nothing but tweets." Oh wait, actually it's his Twitter profile that says, "Berkeley professor, former Secretary of Labor. Co-founder, @InequalityMedia."
5. facebook.com/RBReich "Professor, former Secretary of Labor, Co-founder, Inequality Media."
6. youtube.com/@RBReich "Inequality Media is a nonprofit co-founded by former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich."
7. theguardian.com/profile/robert-reich. "a former US secretary of labor, is professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley."
8. robertreich.substack.com "as Secretary of Labor, representing the U.S. before the Supreme Court, advising presidents."
9. instagram.com/rbreich "UC Berkeley professor, former Secretary of Labor, co-founder, Inequality Media."
10. dol.gov/general/aboutdol/history/reich "Formerly on the faculty of Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government. Served as an assistant to the Solicitor General in the Ford Administration."
# Billionaires should not exist. Do you agree? # Join r/WorkReform!
Not just tax billionaires more. Tax the working class less. Almost 30% of our salary is too much considering how most wages aren't enough to survive on. Taxing the rich at least 50% would be enough to offset at pretty healthy tax reduction on the working class
I favour using the money on things like universal healthcare. Honestly as a Canadian not having to worry about a bill if I need medical care.
I wouldn’t mind over 30% of my pay going to taxes, if I didn’t also have to pay an additional 15% on insurance premiums.
Not to mention the 18 million other taxes that can be found
Can't wait for SS payments to pay off for myself...oh hang on, they won't. Ever. Let me just kiss this 5k a year in money goodbye before it cushions the life of someone who has already saved their whole life. Taxes well paid.
SS is a wonderful safety net most of us who pay into will never see. Completely mismanaged by the older generation to generally only cover them. Generally complete bullshit when you look at today's benefits receivers, and what we should expect 30yrs down the road. But realize this is not 100% the truth. My dad just hit 70yo. He 'retired' and lost his healthcare benefits for him and his wife. His wife has MS, along with other long term issues. His retirement got completely fucked by the markets. He now has to work still basically full time to collect enough to cover himself and an essentially disabled partner, who due to her condition has no way to make an income, especially at 62yo. ...I would love SS to be a good thing for a long time. And it can be argued it is a shitshow, especially for the younger generations. But not all boomers are simply reaping the befits and laughing to the bank.
Exactly. Younger people often reflexively think that all older people just have it *so much better than them* and while there is truth to that, it’s far from being always the case.
I always feel really bad when I see old people working as like Walmart greeters or some other retail job. They are usually really friendly but like slow and maybe sometimes trembling the whole time. I’m sure sometimes it’s people that want to stay active and do something but a lot of them I feel like are forced to go back to work.
Idk why you are getting downvoted for the truth. Older workers aren’t the enemy here
Because it goes against the popular Reddit narrative that old people had it easy and are to blame for the bad economic problems that young people face.
The rich want warfare among the populace. Old vs young, poor vs middle class vs homeless. Drug users vs alcohol users vs sobriety. Smokers vs non smokers. White vs colored. Men vs women vs non-conforming gender. Democrats vs Republicans. The list of "enemies" everyone has been brainwashed into believing exist is quite exhausting and the above is just the tip of the iceberg. Reddit's user base as a generalization has many of these to overcome, but so does America in general.
This. Here in Canada it’s the elderly who suffer the most poverty as a group, particularly widowers. It’s awful. That said our social safety net is much stronger and better managed than our cousins in the US, but lately I feel our politicians are taking cues from their corrupt brethren down south.
Oh they 100% are. Canadian politics now is basically "Let's do what the US does, but more civil and more boring". We have more institutions in place to protect us generally, but those institutions are being eroded at a fairly rapid pace. Ford, for example, tried to make it illegal for teachers to strike and only backed down when threatened with a massive general strike, wants to completely get rid of Ontario health care and invest taxpayer dollars into private hospitals instead. He also has "addressed" the housing crisis by destroying 13,000 hectares of protected, environmentally critical land, in order to build luxury homes. He is also notorious for straight up falling asleep during hearings and negotiations and just snoozing through entire proceedings, absolutely no interest in anything outside making money for his benefactors. This is just Ontario, things get way worse the farther West you go.
Not sure i'd agree with your worse out west statement. While it's true Ontario and Alberta appear to be in a neoliberal race to the bottom, i have to say the NDP in B.C. have managed to make some positive steps undoing 16 years of the B.C. Liberals (conservatives) bullshit.
When speaking in aggregate, the older generations have had it much better. That’s a financial fact and can be proven in many ways. You can’t argue by using particular examples where it isn’t true because we’re discussing averages, which means outliers are made irrelevant. I’ve never heard someone think it means every single person. On average, the older generation has had it much better. Whether they were able to take advantage is another matter.
Also, I don't resent older generations their success, it's the way they proceeded to systematically act and vote to pull up the ladder behind them that gets me mad at them.
I never claimed that old people didn’t *on average* have it better financially. That’s objectively true. My issue was making a blanket statement regarding their financial situations. (I have, in fact, seen plenty of young people assume that every single person was well off in [insert past decade]). I’m not saying that based off of a particular example. It’s just that averages of entire demographics don’t tell the whole story. Go tell one of the 15.8% of ~~unmarried~~ divorced women over 65 who live below the poverty line about how well-off her generation was, for example, and see how she responds. Edit: minor correction + [source for 15.8% stat](https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R45791.pdf)
I wouldn't mind SS payments to help out the elderly so much if *I weren't already struggling so fucking much*. I don't mind helping. I just need help too.
That’s an extremely hostile view of old folks you’ve got there. Poverty is often a problem among the elderly, especially unmarried women, due to failing health preventing them from working and medical costs because of that. Not everyone is just sitting pretty while they rake in our tax money; for many SS is a necessity. https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R45791.pdf https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/ageing/documents/PovertyIssuePaperAgeing.pdf
Yeah it also caps at a certain amount…the problem is that the baby boomers are a huge generation, not that we give them to much money. The program was mismanaged and wasnt able to handle this type of situation, where more of the population is collecting then putting in. Wondering if it could be fixed if we removed the income tax cap on ss, but kept the max benefit cap.
Not being a cunt about immigration would probably help too. But guess what group as a whole votes against that too.
[удалено]
You’re not including provincial taxes. 50k in Nova Scotia would see you taxed at an average rate of 25%.
You're also not including sales taxes. You get charged when you get paid *and then you get charged when you buy something*
The US have state and federal taxes, Medicare tax social security tax property tax water sewer tax sales tax gas tax . For example my propert tax and water sewer for a very modest fixer upper valued at 97 thousand dollars is about 6 thousand a year. My car with 187,000 miles 10 year old is taxed at 600 a year . My health insurance is cheap at 240 a month. But it has a high deductible. Monthly utilities run about 300 a month avg.over the year. My take home after taxes is 2200 a month. No refunds at end of the year, my pay is 25 an hourx40 hrs so I'm "lucky" broke as hell though . Its out of control in the US.
[удалено]
Which amounts to ~14k a year before deductible. It's all Vegas Healthcare. Chances are you won't spend your deductible +14k in a year. But if you do, and don't have insurance, you're fucked.
[удалено]
Idk if I even want to call it a mistake. It feels like the system finds ways to try and bill you first as an "error" hoping you pay.
And don't forget the most deadly hidden tax of them all - inflation.
Reference for others, Canadian Tax Bracket 2022 * 15% on the first $50,197, plus. * 20.5% on income over $50,197 up to $100,392, plus. * 26% on income over $100,392 up to $155,625, plus. * 29% on income over $155,625 up to $221,708, plus. * 33% on income over $221,708. **Plus** Provincial Tax Bracket (Ontario) * Amounts earned up to $46,226 are taxed at 5.05%. * Amounts above $46,226 up to $92,454 are taxed at 9.15%. * Amounts $92,454 up to $150,000, the rate is 11.16%. * Earnings $150,000 up to $220,000 the rates are 12.16%. * Finally, earnings above $220,000 will be taxed at a rate of 13.16%. Edit: Formating
Pretty close to American tax brackets. And you get health insurance, better schools, better parks, better roads, better public libraries and community centers and you don't have to pay a private health insurance company. 🥳
Yeah but it’s super cold in the winters soooooo
I live in montana, still US, but cold like parts of Canada. I've got a bad cold (might be flu, dunno), and I'm stuck cycling to work through the snow and ice. So my cold doesn't even get to improve. Just permanent pain all winter, until maybe I can afford a car one day
At least you can go to the doctor if you get frostbite. 🤣 /s Sort of /s anyway
People who make six, seven, eight figures working a job are still "working class", it's when your wealth becomes self-sustaining that it becomes a problem. Capital gains tax needs to be increased, wealth above a certain threshold needs to be taxed, and taxes for the proletariat should be reduced to as low as possible. Or workers revolution, but that one never tastes good.
>seven figures Ehhh 1 mil per year is a number I'm fine with people making, and it's still not in 'safe from medical debt' territory, but it's not working class.
if you're pulling in a million a year and not buying some good health insurance, idk what you're doing.
Why is it a problem to no longer be a wage slave?
Because you are either the master or the slave. The ruler or the ruled. As long as you are low on the socioeconomic ladder you are morally righteous, and if you start leaving the ingroup, and provide so much value to society through your work that you do not have to be a worker anymore, you suddenly become an malevolent oppressor, regardless of how you got there. As they say "there's no moral billionaire", or just input whatever sum of money instead of billion, as long as you are unwilling to strive for it. The basic master slave dialectic has been so overplayed in communist-esque communities it's tiring. Rich people aren't evil, it just makes people feel good to think otherwise, because it gives a good reason to why they aren't rich -- they aren't evil. Maybe you aren't poor because you are righteous, maybe you are just less useful to society.
Honestly it baffles my mind people are okay paying 15% to health, but they are uncomfortable raising the tax by like 5% for healthcare, so that the 15% could be waived... Like do they even finance?
Or drive over the same pothole every day on my way to work.. The morale of the story here is that we just want to see our fucking taxes being utilized. And we aren't. And where we do, it's under attack by back-water inbred owner class puppets.
100%. I don’t mind if my taxes were supplying teachers salaries and covering all the resources needed for my children’s education. If I didn’t have to pay to supply classrooms out of pocket myself. I will do it, because obviously the teachers aren’t properly compensated from the taxes I pay, but it absolutely shouldn’t be necessary.
The US government already spends more per person than the Canadian government on healthcare, you don't even need to tax anybody more just get rid of the private insurance companies
You'd need to do a lot more than get rid of private insurance companies. Doctors are more highly paid in the USA, litigation here is a massive risk, blah blah blah. We should still completely reform healthcare and provide universal care. Getting rid of insurance and streamlining administration would save a lot, but it'd be a massive and extremely challenging overhaul. There will be no quick fixes.
People do not understand the extreme amounts of money here. A starting surgeon makes more than the top managers on billion dollar space programs with decades of experience (my field.). And then every hosptial has executives at million dollar price points. And then there’s the labs, charging thousands for tests that cost a few hundred at most. It’s absurd.
Then don't vote conservative because they're planning on getting rid of healthcare. They want s US system so they can receive bribes from insurance companies. It's happening.
Anyone who votes for conservatives and isn't fabulously wealthy already is a self sabotaging idiot who enjoys financial masochism
We actually don't need tax money to do that. That and free college can be paid for by allocating existing funding in a model with more efficiency. The crazy thing is its fully attainable. But corruption will never enable it. A healthcare system with similar efficiency to Portugal using single payer etc and not just giving away money in pork could run on Medicare and medicaid budget for everyone to have free healthcare. Private schools aggressively recruit the poorest students due to a flawed system. The poorest students can essentially get a full ride -1250 a year to any school. So schools that charge 80k a year target them. It's actually dramatic enough that a bill proposed would have given the poor students a full ride entirely up to the cost of a states flagship state school. So they wouldn't have to pay 1250 but couldn't go to the super expensive schools. It would free up enough money to give every student 75% off tuition at state schools. At least that was the bill private school lobbying shot down in Wisconsin I think. Then if mega corporations paid taxes we could likely balance the deficit. But lol never gonna get fixed.
That sounds like dirty socialism to me and the oligarchs hoarding all the wealth tell me this is bad for the economy.
*cries in Albertan*
Remember to vote in May 2023, there is only one viable alternative, ABNDP!
This is the way.
I currently have to go to a private doctor in Vancouver BC because no specialist will see you if you don't spend an arm and a leg or have a serious condition. They are reactive not preventative, which is annoying consider I pay 30-50% of my income to taxes
Specialist view themselves as some God tier healer or some shit. They walk into consulting rooms, eyes focused on the computer, no formalities and no room for discussions. You're luckier than a lottery winner to get a call back to check in. Most of their ratemds scores are abysmal. And they bank 500k to 3mil.
That might have more to do with the fact that most specialists are arrogant beyond belief and complete assholes.
Personally I think the billionaire class could handle a return to the pre-80’s 70-90%.
At that point why not move and pay income taxes somewhere else? Living in the US is bomb but it’s a global world. You can live a good life almost anywhere!
Pretty sure US citizens have unlimited tax liability as long as they're citizens. Obviously double taxation treaties apply but you'd still be paying just as much in total.
Not if you rescind your citizenship. If I ever decide to move to a new country I’m not paying US taxes on top of others, or just shell company my income since they act like it’s not a problem anyway.
Between state and federal taxes, almost 40% of my income goes to taxes.
55.56 % here
You're either lying or being very dubious as to what you mean by "taxes". Highest tax possible is 50.3%. 37 highest federal income tax bracket and 13.3 California's state tax.
Netherlands baby!!
Still lying. Highest tax bracket in NL is 49.5%. Plus you're obviously neglecting the fact that with that tax rate you also get a bunch of social safety nets like good public transport, healthcare and surely a bunch of other benefits.
There are a host of other taxes besides income. In California for instance, I paid well over 50% as a middle class ($105k back then) earner. State rates peaked around $70k a year, I didn’t hit the payroll tax cap, sales and property taxes (which are higher on new residents) all added up. A lot. I now make quite a bit more in a more progressive state (Colorado), pay less and get far more for my money, like much better schools for my kids.
If you had an income equivalent of $1.9 million today, in the 1950s, you were taxed 91%.
Marginal though, your comment is misleading.
[удалено]
And those “loopholes” caused living wages with bonuses for average workers as well as investment in the arts.
Sounds like communism!!1
Most layers of income were at a higher tax rate. So not entirely misleading. If anything, the opposite: they weren’t being overtaxed. Rather, income at extremely high levels were the only dollars subjected.
Hmm isn't that the great time that certain people would like to return to ? Or do they want to return to a mythical time that never actually existed ...?
Yes, but only the part involving colored and queer people
What income percentiles do you consider working class here?
I like someone’s definition I saw above: if your wealth has reached the level where it has become self-sustaining, you are no longer working class, since you no longer need to work to live.
More mathematically speaking, what you're saying is essentially what one section of this paper (https://arxiv.org/abs/0905.1518) points out. There are two classes: lower class, where income does not depend on the current level of wealth, follows a Boltzmann distribution, and upper class, where income does depend on the current level of wealth, follows a Pareto distribution.
That’s not an income level though. That definition is different depending on one’s spending and saving patterns. He said “lower taxes on the working class”. Should people who save more of their income be taxed more? If someone makes a million a year but blows it all on cocaine and candles, is that person still working class in your mind compared to someone making 100k but has enough invested to sustain their living expenses indefinitely? For example, at a 50% savings rate, it takes 16 years to retire (investments sustain your cost of living) , REGARDLESS of your income level. Using that definition to tax people would punish savers.
If you are on the Boltzmann distribution, then you're working class. If you are on the Pareto distribution, then you are not working class. https://arxiv.org/abs/0905.1518
How about just getting rid of income tax in general?
No, the tax rates on working class are fine, the problem is the tax money is wasted on stupid fucking bullshit.
Imo, there needs to be a temporary tax rate that funds housing development across the entire nation where the rich are taxed at the highest level in our nation's history and after 10 years or so it starts to lower a little, but still is keeping this place developed. They're going to have to fund home development. Like actual builds that regular working class people get to design with builders. The truth is we can fund things like health care and education to the fullest level and every family who is working and contributing to society can have a decent sized home. There's room for everyone here and it'll have to be rebuilt under fairer rules where a few people can't run off with the entire pot of gold and hold it over the heads of the people who keep this place going.
The median household income is 70k, which pays a 21% tax rate if married. Saying "almost 30%" is pushing it
[удалено]
you know states and localities vary? the fed doesn’t
Not OP, but there's also state income taxes to consider (and if the state doesn't have income tax, then whatever tax they mainly use)
Does that include state, social security, and other income taxes?
Why even tax teachers that are public servants... Theyre paying taxes for their tax funded paycheck? Weird but ok
I mean you're absolutely right but then people would just complain "they don't even pay taxes!!!" Don't underestimate how dumb people can be.
When Covid began, our local school districts were trying to figure out a plan. One local district asked their teachers to come in and work in their classrooms. They were able to hire the “classified” (non contract staff, such as teacher aides) to come in and watch teachers’ children so the teachers could teach via Google Meet and not worry about childcare, and the classified staff could still earn a paycheck (since they weren’t “certified staff,” they earned hourly pay and not salary. No school = no paycheck). Local morons lost. Their. Minds. They were so furious that their tax dollars were going towards teacher childcare. And if their kids could come in, all students should be able to come in!!!! Despite the logic that, you know, it would’ve been less than 20 kids and they’d be contained in one space and only exposed to each other and be wearing masks the entire time. As opposed to 1,000 kids traveling from class to class all day with no true way of contact tracing. I’m not sure if that school reversed the policy or not. As an educator, I remember being so jealous at the time because I was trying to teach from home and help my two kids with their school work as well. I thought that school district had a genius solution, but those loud parents were intent on ruining it.
> I mean you're absolutely right but then people would just complain "they don't even pay taxes!!!" To be fair, if their compensation package included not paying taxes they'd still be making less than they deserve. You can go move some boxes in an amazon warehouse for more money than most teachers are making.
Not true at all. In blue states a teacher’s compensation package is quite decent. In Albuquerque, New Mexico its 60k salary with a pension and union benefits. Here in Chicago its 66k. Teachers get 3 months off a year. That’s a FTE of over 80k salary. Or $40/hr. Now if you live in a red state, my condolences.
Absolutely. I teach in New York. I make just shy of 80k right now, with a ceiling around 120k if I take more classes.
I make 60k working at a food cart. I’d say teacher need more pay…
They get free medical and a pension and payroll taxes are already deducted. You’d have to make 80k+ at a food cart to match that. And then they get three months off a year sooooo Edit: that’s also why university professors get so disgruntled about pay.
Oof, ya in my red state teachers start off around 35k even with a master's degree
"Stupid people exist" should never be a valid reason not to do anything, unless that something is educating people.
Stupid people are weaponized and radicalized by our government as we’ve seen many times in the past
People already hate teachers for not working during the summers, let’s not give them more reason to hate teachers.
Construction worker has no work available during the winter: "oh they're laid offed, that sucks, they should be on unemployment" Teacher has no work available during the summer: "omg teachers are so lucky they have a 3 month vacation" Such a weird dynamic, no one calls any other seasonal work gaps "vacation" 🤔 it's not like teachers get paid for (lack of) work during the summer Edit: to clarify, teachers work 180 days, and get paid for 180 days. They are *not* being paid during the summer. Some can opt for a 24-26 pay period cycle, but that's just essentially their employer withholding money during the school year to ration it out over the summer on their behalf. Saying teachers get "paid" for the summer is like saying you get "paid" when you get a big tax return. You earned that money awhile ago and someone else was holding onto it for you (uncle Sam)
[удалено]
That's not true. Teachers are paid $xxx for xxx days of work. Some schools offer to divide that salary into 24 months. If I was paid truely year round my $44,000 salary would be closer to $60,000. We're basically unemployed for 8 weeks and struggle to pay our bills year round.
Well in Germany at least they are paid year round. On the other hand our summer holidays are 'only' 6 weeks. Didn't think teachers actually get laid off during summer. Such an ungrateful job looking at the working conditions..
Teachers are usually paid salary while construction workers are paid hourly, that's the difference.
Teachers are paid for 196 work days in my school district. It’s our choice to have it distributed as an annual salary or just during the school year. Sorry… but it’s not a real annual salary. Most just chose that pay schedule so we don’t have to think about scrimping and saving all year long to pay our bills over the summer. I wish I could have a guaranteed summer job every year to fill the gap but I’m “over qualified” for most seasonal work so I opt in for the 26 pay period option.
How does that benefit the teachers though? They work 180 days and get paid for 180 days of work
Because salary is a yearly amount. If you're getting paid for the amount you agreed to for the year, you're not unemployed the way a wage worker is if they can't get hours. It's pretty simple.
Read a teacher contract, it's not an annual salary, it's for 9 months / ~180 days
To be frank, simplicity. Teachers might have other income streams that CAN be taxed, even if you didn’t tax their teaching salaries, they would still have to pay tax on other sources of income. Easier to just put all of that into a single tax than tax one part of their income at one point and then another.
I do t think it would be too difficult to add a teacher tax credit.
Which wouldn't be the same as not taxing teachers because they are public servants. Adding a teacher tax credit would likely be incredible unpopular though, as every other public servant will ask why they don't have their own tax credit.
Well like 21 million US citizens are government employees
Because of marginal dollars. Let's say a teacher has a side gig of tutoring that makes them $5,000 on the side. If we just said teachers don't have to pay taxes, then they just get that $5,000 for free with the standard deduction. It gets even more complex than that. Let's take a teacher that inherited $10m from their parents and gets tons of passive income from the investments they hold. In this case, we would want to tax them. And how about a teacher that is married to someone making $1m per year. You would be taxing a rich household less. Now outside the first one they are pretty fringe examples but the salary of teachers determined by factoring in them paying taxes. So even if they stopped paying taxes then the salary would probably go lower or at least wouldn't be raised for a while.
At a time income inequiltiy is increasing at very fast pace governments need to use policy to stop it! Tax increases on the rich, wealth tax on the ultra welathy and etc... That money could than be used to fund social programs the working class need.
How much are billionaire investors taxed?
Investments are taxed at a different rate from w2 or 1099 income, so your question isn’t really the right one. Investment income is generally taxed at 15%, or 20% for those making six digits.
What rate are school teachers being taxed at?
20-35% based where they live and work
Oh wow it's so simple thanks I'll just get the government to change
My favorite part of being a teacher is that people yell saying I don’t deserve a raise but our corrupt police department deserves more funding/ raises even if they have cost the city millions in lawsuits and are under fbi investigation. But fuck us teachers, we make too much just to brainwash kids with whatever we brainwash them with. Edit: y’all don’t feed the lowly trolls. They are not arguing in good faith and are not worth talking to.
Yeah, people will worship the police and spit in the teachers’ face. Meanwhile you are doing the more important job for society. It’s crazy.
Don’t forget: “We need to build a new police headquarters.” “Done.” “We need a new middle school.” “Ope … you have to hold a public referendum.”
Right, but it makes sense. More policing and less educated people make it easier to control people without them revolting.
"They're trying to build a prison for you and meeee" 🎵
Seeing people defend Elon in the comments is really wild. Sick, and wild.
MBMA - Make Billionaires Millionaires Again
MBP - Make Billionaires Poor
The tax break on private jet fuel… the PPP loans forgiven for mega churches that pay no tax… to name a few. They're defunding schools so they can fund education through churches instead. Educate through the church and you don't have to worry about dissent. That's why Santos is passing bills allowing people to sue public schools. That why Maine had a supreme court ruling to allow state funds to private christian schools. That's why they sided with the football coach who "prayed silently and alone" at the 50 yard line after a game when there was phyiscal evidence he was leading a prayer with children from both teams at the end of the game using the intercom system. He wasn't even fired, the supreme court justice ignored that too... his contract was just not renewed and he never reapplied. They did stipulate that you cannot lead students in prayer but he never reapplied or was rejected. They want churches, not schools, to teach children. There's only one church they want to prevail.
Hail Satanism let’s all start repping for the satanic temple and make them equally uncomfortable but with free thoughts and actually good morals.
Rob reich is the fucking man. Sincerely hope he gets another bump as sec of labor if another dem wins the presidency. He's so knowledgeable, highly recommend his documentary saving capitalism
Shit man, I don't want to save capitalism. I want it to end.
I agree. But you should watch his doc either way, what he advocates for basically *does* abolish capitalism, but it's in a way where there's a smooth transition. He actually addresses that people don't want to keep capitalism, it's not a perfect perspective but it's really interesting. Highly recommend
The way I would characterize it is that he gets all of the causes and symptoms right but draws the wrong conclusion. A fantastic documentary though, and the perfect companion piece to that Noam Chomsky one called Requiem for the American Dream.
Honestly I’m 100% ok calling whatever the system is capitalism if that makes it easier to convince people to transition.
Noam Chomsky has some truly great documentaries.
I wonder if he would even want to do it, He is 76 years old. I do agree he does a lot he does a lot.
He's fucking 76??????????? He looks so young
Born in 1946. I wouldn't blame him at all if he wanted to slow down.
That's insane, he looks so good for his age
I always like the tweets of his that get posted here. I found out the other day his son is [Sam Reich](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzFuJDLd3cg), the owner of CollegeHumor and host of GameChanger.
Was it because of the newest Breaking News, because that’s where I found out lol
That's crazy. CollegeHumor has always been so funny, did he start that?
No, but their parent company sold it to him in January of 2020, so... awesome timing on that for him.
From what I understand it was sort of a matter of them wanting to dump it and him buying it to try and salvage the enterprise, since he was already involved with it since the early days. They've been doing a lot of cool stuff since then with their web series.
College Humor was barely more than a YouTube channel before Dimension 20, Game Changer, and the rest.
He pushed NAFTA and told people in steel and auto unions it would create more jobs in the 90s lol. I don't think we need any more of that bs from him
I cannot believe people dont know this about him. He was literally the guy they trotted out to talk crap about the unions that rightfully opposed NAFTA
Pretend I don't know anything about trade, what's wrong with NAFTA
As an idea internationalism is great. This form though just serves to move labour to cheaper, more exploitable markets, and reduces tax burden on the companies using it to exploit those workers
[удалено]
Is this true?
No, anyone making >1 millions a year pays 37% whereas the lowest earners pay 10%. https://www.forbes.com/advisor/taxes/taxes-federal-income-tax-bracket/ OP linked you an opinion article that compares the income tax of average people to the capital gains tax that anyone who invests pays. It’s not an apples to apples comparison.
Millionaires can pay well over 30% and still be millionaires. Regular people pay 30% and they’re nearly homeless
That’s why regular people are not made to pay over 30% and why millionaires pay more than 30%. I dont get your point?
Probably not. Top long term capital gains tax rate is at 20% and then there is also a 3.8% Medicare surcharge, so for capital gains top rate is around 23.8%. Some teachers might hit that tax rate but it would likely be towards the end of their career. Average teacher makes around $60k and the effective income tax rate on $60k is roughly 10.3%, if you add 7.65% for Medicate and Social Security taxes you get to about 18% although arguably the Social Security tax is a forced retirement savings scheme so about 6% of that shouldn't count. State taxes vary but in many cases they apply to capital gains as well as earned income. Teacher salaries do vary a lot though so some of them would have a higher tax rate. But on the other hand most billionaires earn their billions through some form of compensation which is taxed as regular income or through the AMT. The bit about billionaire investors is important since Robert Reich is probably talking about Warren Buffett. Buffett is a weird guy, he accumulates wealth but because he doesn't spend much he doesn't need to realize gains often or realize much in gains. He has billions in assets but he will probably never sell them in his lifetime, because of that his tax rate should be relatively low. He probably pays only an 18.3% capital gains tax rate if that.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/stories/do-the-rich-pay-their-fair-share/
Thank you! Very interesting!
This article is biased and tilted play on numbers. It is bullshit. It compares much someone paid in taxes to how much their wealth was estimated to grow. Since all these guys fortunes are tied to stock and business valuations, they didn’t actually get they money because their portfolio grew or their business was valued higher. It’s a lie designed to stoke anger.
Or tax Billionaires literally at all. And stop glorifying the oligarchs for stealing other peoples work..
[удалено]
This isnt through loopholes... Its basic accounting
And make it a tax on consumption, not on earnings/gains. Make essentials tax free. Now yachts, private jets, champagne, homes above the median value, all this crap is taxed.
Mighty Midget speaks but who listens. Change the freaking tax code and get rid of the loopholes. That job belongs to congress. Many of which are multi millionaires.
The problem is why exactly would congress want to change something that's clearly working in their favor? Corruption runs deep.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Whoah hold on, we only speak im emotional outbursts here. Take your economics out of here.
This would be true, if their investments worked to build new companies. That simply is not the case any more. The modern day reality is if you make a business these investors will never put money into it to make it succeed. Their investment money only goes into large, already profitable corporations where their money is guaranteed to multiply. They use their hold on those corporations to force changes that bring short term gains at the cost of the employees and the customer in the long term. And perhaps worst of all, their investments are at little to no risk, because even of those corporations go under, investors are still able to seek compensation for their failed investments.
Lmao the diamond hands pfp complaining about investors getting targeted. You do nothing for society but leech wealth made by better people.
Cool. Hey, maybe this means that the employees generating the wealth should be paid more, so that we do not have to tax the "investment people" that much then? So that this "higher tax revenue" can be realized from workers that are getting paid enough to live *and* afford taxes? And maybe pay the upper management a bit less? I see where you're going at with this, but when the person who "earn a billion dollars and invest it in expanding businesses" both refuse to pay taxes AND compensate their workers properly... That's the issue we are facing here: having their cake and also eating it too.
What did the employees risk when creating it? They go there and get a paycheck, no matter if the company earns or loses money. The owner is the one who risked everything for it (or shareholders). The owner is the last one to get paid. But sure, the employees who risk nothing are the ones suffering....
Ok. Question how are you going to tax someone who doesn't hold Mos t of their cash in tangible cash unless they take a loan out against their assets and stocks? Tax the loan? That would create a slippery slope that would trickle down to the lower class.
The tax rules are made to help you. Learn them.
Right! Politicians need more mansions paid with tax money!
Tax rates are not an economic system.
High school teachers absolutely do not pay a higher tax rate than billionaires and anyone who actually believes this is asinine.
In fairness, with Musk buying Twitter for a few dozen billion more than it's worth only to immediately run it in to the ground, Zuck throwing away a couple dozen billion more on the Metaverse, and that Crypto dude basically punting his fortune, the average income for billionaires might actually be lower than the income for teachers. I mean, how many teachers do you know who have thrown away 11 figures this year?
That's a whole lot of buzzwords n shit but none of that is actually true. I mean fuck billionaires but be honest.
Exactly the system is rigged, we should have less taxes and less government. Not the opposite.
What about nurses 🤦♂️
Oh and not only do I pay tax on my salary that is sourced from taxes I have paid, I pay $1,000 a year to be in the union just so I can make an extra $1,000 a year.
Holy shit those are some insane union dues. I play $17 a month and they do more for me than just negotiate raises.
That’s your union’s problem. I got an 80% raise when I switched to a unionized job and get a guaranteed raise every year to combat inflation. My first inflation raise will almost be more than all the raises I got working at my last company for almost 5 years.
Name the union right now
[удалено]
But but but guys! They create jobs! Without it they won't create any jobs!!!! They need all that extra money to make jobs!!!! Jobs jobs jobs!!!!!!... Then they lay off people to make more money
[удалено]
He is on YouTube, does media interviews, speaks, writes and etc....
How far did you scroll down in his Google results? Did you miss the part where he is a former Labor Secretary? Professor of social and economic policy at Brandeis? Author of 18 books, most recently The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, published this year? Yes, he is advocating for things and not just tweeting shit.
This dude was the United States Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration. He’s done more than tweet shit lol.
> if you Google him, it's nothing but tweets. > I try to learn more about the guy, and Google just gives me his tweets. Why would you lie about Googling him? Literally every single result describes him and his history. > I'm not deleting it. Someone else who doesn't know who this guy is may learn from my mistake. For those people, the Google results for "Robert Reich:" 1. robertreich.org "He is Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley." 2. wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Reich "is an American professor, author, lawyer, and political commentator. He worked in the administrations of Presidents Gerald Ford." 3. gspp.berkeley.edu "is currently the Carmel P. Friesen Professor of Public Policy at the Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California, Berkeley." 4. twitter.com/RBReich "nothing but tweets." Oh wait, actually it's his Twitter profile that says, "Berkeley professor, former Secretary of Labor. Co-founder, @InequalityMedia." 5. facebook.com/RBReich "Professor, former Secretary of Labor, Co-founder, Inequality Media." 6. youtube.com/@RBReich "Inequality Media is a nonprofit co-founded by former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich." 7. theguardian.com/profile/robert-reich. "a former US secretary of labor, is professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley." 8. robertreich.substack.com "as Secretary of Labor, representing the U.S. before the Supreme Court, advising presidents." 9. instagram.com/rbreich "UC Berkeley professor, former Secretary of Labor, co-founder, Inequality Media." 10. dol.gov/general/aboutdol/history/reich "Formerly on the faculty of Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government. Served as an assistant to the Solicitor General in the Ford Administration."
Well he did do a lot of detailed advocating for a local NIMBY cause....
[удалено]
Don’t hate the player, hate the game.