Musk and most of the filthy rich ARE the problem! Too much money, too much power and influence. We have to stop this raping of America. The way is to tax them and we the people can decide what to do with their excess money.
Agree. Capitalism is an efficient wealth-producing system (just look at East and West Germany after WWII - there couldn't be a better advertisement for capitalism).
BUT:
When capitalism wriggles free from the constraints of good government, you have:
Low taxes on the wealthy and on corporations, leading to:
Monopoly.
Government by the wealthy.
Collusion by corporations against the public interest.
In other words, the things Adam Smith stated in his 1776 warning to the American experiment.
You are quite correct, dump Reagan, dump Bill Clinton, dump George W. Bush, dump Hillary Clinton (Ugh!), dump Barack Obama, and above all DUMP DONALD J. TRUMP:
There are no antitrust or anti-monopoly laws any more; say thank you to Clinton economics-Neoliberalism, also neo-liberalism, is a term used to signify the late-20th century political reappearance of 19th-century ideas associated with free-market capitalism, which had fallen into decline following the Second World War. These economic principles are a direct contrast to policies of FDR: The New Deal included new constraints and safeguards on the banking industry and efforts to re-inflate the economy after prices had fallen sharply. New Deal programs included both laws passed by Congress as well as presidential executive orders……
Everything started with Ronald Reagan. The end of the Fairness Doctrine, ketchup as a vegetable in school lunches, welfare queens, pull yourself up by the bootstraps (which, BTW, literally means "impossible task.") which helped the turn toward conservatism and fundamentalism, and victimization of the poor, and all that claptrap about trickle down economics. Not to mention Iran/Contra. Read this Wikipedia article, Scandals of the Reagan Administration (I'm sorry I couldn't catch a good link.)
And LaVelle explained where the name comes from: "a term used to signify the late-20th century political reappearance of 19th-century ideas associated with free-market capitalism" ... see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism
Jival, the name "neo liberal" is very confusing to people. It has nothing to do with being liberal, in fact, it is the opposite. When money becomes the be all to end all, one can see that what happened in the last 20 years or so of the 20th century was inevitable or nearly so. Workers were being paid less and less so the owners and money-grubbers could take more and more. I don't know what to call that except unchecked corporate greed. That is fewer syllables than neoliberalism but more words. It does not play as well with fast-moving business guys. It is also a truth and can't have that.
Neoliberals absolutely did call themselves that. (The word “liberal” to anyone outside the US referred and refers to someone who believes in unregulated commerce and laissez-faire economics, which were not dominant in post-war democracies, hence the “neo-“, in part. The Neo’s of course were a bit different in character because their approach in that context was reactionary, hence angry and vengeful.
Joe, there are antitrust laws to stop the kind of stuff Musk is doing, but somehow, we just don't get around to enforcing them. It is as though our own government officials are scared of the rich guys and don't want to rock their boats. We need some boat rocking, wealth taxing, higher tax rates on wealthy individuals and corporations, etc. We need to get these things going now because global warming is cutting in on our lives and will break us as a nation and planet if we don't put our efforts into stopping it. Right now, we are wrapped up with worshipping money and are distracted from what needs to be done.
Well said Ruth... Warren, Sanders, and others "Have a plan for this"... Climate change is coming for all of us in one way or another. Let the $ from the wealthy apply towards our major global warming and ecosystem challenges... Make it a nobel action to request they change the focus with their money and redirect it to leave a legacy to save the planet.
Musk is a bad actor - a bombastic, arrogant, thinks he knows it all kind of dangerous jerk. Boycott Tesla, and replace our contracts with SpaceX with something else. Any communication modality or media entity these days with that much power or that many viewers/users they can influence and gaslight- should be dismantled for the protection of democracy.
Biden is trying to enforce them but I think they are fighting him. The two cases I know of right now that are in the courts are the Exxon/Mobil merger and the Kroger/Albertson merger neither of which we want to see happen. So keep fighting.
GOP are lawless. We have no money to run certain agencies since Bush closed and downsized so many. They been doing that with the IRS yet military are in the trillions now. Where were they on 911 and Jan.6th? Right. A big stand down by the most powerful military in the world.
Biden won't regulate corporations for their fraud and Fascist funds. Corporations are owned by workers, shareholder and the community. All parties are represented not just one. Politics should be out for all corporations to be fair and equal. Where is their "Corporate Governess and Responsibility"?
"Capitalism is an efficient wealth-producing system (just look at East and West Germany after WWII - there couldn't be a better advertisement for capitalism)."
Nonsense ... there were many differences besides the presence or absence of capitalism. There's no reason to think that a democratic socialist East Germany--as opposed to the totalitarian DDR--would not have thrived.
"When capitalism wriggles free from the constraints of good government"
The only way to prevent it is democratic socialism.
To some, “socialism” means absolute government control of the economy. To others, the slightest whiff of government control is “Socialism!” (Used as an epithet.) In reality, there are many degrees of socialism. A little can be very beneficial to the disadvantaged, while too much can bring an economy to its knees. Nordic capitalism has a degree of socialism that would horrify the American right, but here you deny it is socialist at all. Cuban socialism is actually more of a kleptocratic oligarchy, and is no more true socialism than the “Democratic Republic of North Korea” is democratic.
The countries you you mentioned as socialism are not socialism, they are instead communists. Britain is not a socialism state. I think you need to learn what a socialism state is because you have no idea what it is because you actually think communism and socialism are the same thing and they absolutely positively not in any way shape or form whatsoever the same.
You are right wing. I expressed no binary thinking--you have no idea what other categories are in my ontology, you simply leapt to an ad hominem as right wingers do. And I am a critical thinker, but no one who says that democratic socialism "does not exist" is--that's childish trolling, as right wingers do. And your deeply ignorant and unintelligent and--given your accusation--hypocritical--list is the ultimate in binary thinking--there is vastly more variety even in that list of only 5 items than you make out. And the claim that socialism is "played out" based on that list is deeply dishonest.
Why doesn't blocking work here? Anyway, I won't be responding to Lonny again.
That’s an ignorant statement. I’ve lived in two democratic socialist states, though under Margaret Thatcher the British neoliberals decided they wanted to imitate the US and by now have surpassed us in greed, cruelty and infrastructure collapse.
Have you lived there and participated in its politics and studied its history? Sounds like maybe not.
Its government is now of course pro-capitalist on steroids—without even the (rather trivial) virtues of classic capitalism such as prudence or efficiency, and hampered by the isolationist nationalism of Brexit—once a merely unpleasant fantasy, now a disastrous reality.
"... Agree. Capitalism is an efficient wealth-producing system (just look at East and West Germany after WWII - ..." For me wealth is a poor second to relationships. The death of my partner the third grade teacher left me relatively wealthy (her teaching annuity and savings.), but I'm intensely sad, not just from her absence, also, because of so few close friends.
Re: The comparison. The BRD was subsidized by the US while Russia striped the East even to taking train rails.
I attended a German language class in Dresden the last year of the DDR. I weekly would train to Berlin and cross over to the West for bananas and oranges, but couldn't wait to return to which I found so much more pleasant.
It's not Capitalism since there is competition but huge, International Monopolies who destroy the market. Monopolies destroy competition, research and innovation, fix high prices and destroy products. Less on the market of choice.
Capitalism is running as intended. There is nothing wrong with it. It is performing exactly as devised. When are people going to realize this. This system has to be replaced. Adjustments have been tried before but the end result is always the same. Producing ever more billionaires and multi-millionaires. Power and influence being gifted to corporations and we wonder how to fix it? We can’t. This is how it’s supposed to operate.
And the rich make money by having money/wealth, but wealth isn't taxed, only labor is. Also, "we just dont tax everyone" is a standard issue right wing lie. Not everyone pays *income* tax, because they pay such a large percentage of their income as sales and payroll taxes.
Used to be if you obtain wealth regardless of type of work you paid a big chunk to Uncle Sam. Our country had money to fix our roads, pay our government employees, do research, health care, etc. Bridges were falling apart and airports not safe, etc. without money to fix them. Money went to the few in control, etc.
There were high marginal income tax rates pre-Reagan, as high as 91% under Eisenhower (these are marginal rates, not on the entire amount, so it wasn't confiscatory, contrary to right wing claims) but there's never been a wealth tax. Many of the rich obtain most of their wealth by having money, not by doing any sort of work. Someone like Paris Hilton does no work.
Listen up. I don't know if your statistics are right or wrong. Let's assume they're right. Then I'm already assuming you're talking Federal rates of 26% for the top 1%, which is way too low. Now, that doesn't even include State and Local taxes.
But even that's not the point. The top 1-10% bear most of the tax burden. I get it, and I agree. But here's the point. The top 0.1% pay very little and the top 0.01% pay almost nothing. But that's where the real money is.
As for Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg, Gates, Buffett, and the Koch Brothers, well they pay, in relation to their actual wealth, nothing.
You think that's right, pal? You think this is a good system?
Bingo. The people aren't the problem so much as the rules which give them unbridled political power which effects us all and which snuffs out the voices of others.
Poorly educated, misinformed, disinformed, & thoughtless people without critical thinking skills who've been successfully propagandized by demagogues, lobbyists, & klepto-corporatists are just as much to blame as the latter, who work tirelessly to groom them to be obedient social automatons who are happy to believe all the lies they're spoonfed & primed to accept w/o question. The mass of humanity don't want to think (admittedly, thinking is difficult & often creates doubt, which is why Martin Luther, during the Reformation, advised all his followers not to think but only to trust their feelings); they want to be told what to believe & what to do. They crave brief, simple to digest slogans that they can parrot so that they can believe themselves intelligent & informed. And the wretched Calvinism that is the foundation of so much of Western culture & religion has poisoned almost all the "faithful". Westerners are doomed to every type of poverty, especially intellectual poverty. They're inherently anti-intellectual & obdurately stupid. They revere the morbidly wealthy because they hope that someday they too will join the ranks of the self-righteously selfish & the insatiably self-serving like the virulent, arrogant racist Elon (Apartheid Clyde) Musk & Jeff Bezos. Ha! Dreamers all & bound for the sorry hell of bitter disappointment.
Nice analysis. Calvinist capitalists believe that not only will morbid wealth guarantee them a place on the heavenly board of the Elect but justifies any criminal behavior for the same reason. That they are beloved of the Supreme Being. It is an ideology of Winners and Losers and narcissistic individualism.
How we reset our society’s structural bases to be built upon a collective consciousness and raise empathy and intellectual acuity above wealth in the ladder of social goods is a Herculean moral task🐈⬛
And it's a vicious circle as they vote for those who want to keep them uniformed and watch Faux and listen to radio that misinforms, thereby supporting their own deception.
Chen, a simple slogan you describe is "capitalism is rotten". The truth is closer to "how we regulate capitalism can be improved". But, as you say, the latter is too complicated.
A maximum wage about 20 times the minimum wage would fix it. That would be about $300,000 a year for a single and for a married couple it would be about $600,000. That is at $7.50 an hour minimum wage. Double the minimum wage to $15 an hour and that would be about 1.2 million dollars for a married couple a year. Maybe 10 times the minimum wage maybe 15? 20 may be too much, the greedy may still try to bribe our shady politicians.
I agree with Jibal Jibal. The electorate is not likely to impose such a law, even if it were constitutional. A better solution is to tax capital gains as ordinary income. This is the low hanging fruit that is politically feasible. California taxes capital gains as ordinary income. England allows the basis of real property to increase with inflation before calculating capital gains. But for equities, I find no reason not to tax a gain from sale of a stock as ordinary income. For those who work for companies and receive stock options, the gain on the stock value when the option is exercised is a form of compensation so should be taxed as the same rate as ordinary income. The work I do to select a stock to buy in my after-tax account is less than the work I do on my job. Why should I be taxed less for income from passive activity compared to income from my profession. Some argue that the lower capital gains tax rate incentivises investment. But most investors own stock in their retirement plans where capital gains tax is irrelevant. Respectfully, my proposal is much more practical than that of Bob Johnson.
I don't think you're agreeing with me at all, or understanding what I wrote, which has nothing to do with what the best policy is. The electorate doesn't make (or "impose") laws, Congress does, and they have to be signed by the President. Many Americans would favor a higher minimum wage and/or taxing capital gains at a higher rate, but the preferences of Americans don't correlate with the policies passed by Congress except for wealthy Americans (this is a demonstrated statistical reality). In order to change that requires political power, but that power currently rests with the wealthy and with corporations (which is largely the same thing), and they will fight tooth and nail to resist any such shift in power. Who will win such a battle? They will, of course, unless there is a significant change in the strategies and weapons we use.
Agree with the sentiment, but your analysis of Martin Luther is incomplete at best and generally just wrong. His own words:
Feelings come and feelings go,
And feelings are deceiving;
My warrant is the Word of God--
Naught else is worth believing.
Luther pointed out to an illiterate congregant the importance of being able to read and study the Scriptures. His rediscovery of the message of grace in Romans led to the 95 theses nailed to the wall which marked the Reformation and Enlightenment. Luther had a large hand in the rediscovery of literacy, learning, and the wonder of understanding God's creation. Calvinism and Lutheranism were two distinctly different influences on the Church. It is true that some used Luther's name to advocate doctrine and actions which he later learned of and was appalled about. Humans, whether Christians or not, are complicated, imperfect.
The message of the Gospel and the teachings of Christ are definitely not aligned with capitalism as we know it. In fact, they are much more closely aligned with socialism. Witness how the early church shared all that they had with those in need.
Chen, much of what you say was said by Thomas Jefferson two hundred years ago, and he too loathed Calvin. Now your expression "inherently anti-intellectual" doesn't impress me as being very intellectual.
When one is gifted 1 billion dollars, one's mind CAVES IN ON ITSELF. (No moral man or woman can legally EARN that amount.) You cannot convince me otherwise.
I think your claim needs clarification. I hear that Taylor Swift is up to $1 billion, and one would think that she earned a substantial part of that.
Musk at 200-300 Billion didn't start out up there. Nor did he 'earn' it. But, he did legally aquire it. How? Because he started several companies that grew in size, with him in control of lots of shares. That is allowed in our system.
The question is did he 'earn' it. I agree, he didn't 'earn' it. That would imply that somehow he designed and built a ziaeable portion of all of the machines, that he wrote a sizeable portion of the software, that he funded a sizeable portion of the growth, that he occupied a significant portion of the positions earning wages. That obviously didn't happen.
Our property laws allow the owners to get the benefit of the growth. They get to deduct the expenses from their tax bills. They get to set control the company. If the company does poorly, they get to go bankrupt, and structure the debt, thus avoiding paying the debt themselves.
Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm no expert on such matters. But that is the way it seems to me.
Without making it technical you are correct .The company goes bankrupt,not the individual.The wealth is shared around through pension funds ( 401K etc).Musk is a minority shareholder in Tesla owning ~ 13% of the shares.Pension funds ,individuals,insurance companies etc own the rest.Anybody that cares to spend money to buy them.
Buffett teaches compounding through the price of a BRK share.Start at a share price of ~ $14 in 1965 and compound that @20 % for 58 years and you will be somewhere around the price of a BRK share now,$550K?. A very simple concept and a simple equation that people will deny every day of their lives,denial to the grave.
Wal Mart ( and many other companies) have employee share purchase plans within the limits of what the IRS will allow..Wal Mart has turned $1650 into around $30 million for people that have been there long term,and pass that wealth on through the generations.
The price of a Wal Mart share was $16. 50 at the IPO. They have had 9 X 2 for 1 splits since then so 100 shares grows to 504,000 ,just double 100 9 times ( exponential growth).Check the numbers ,I'm old now so mental arithmetic powers are on the wane .
The best way to see reality is google Grace Groner and the foundation she created,ordinary people doing extraordinary things by having a bit of common sense ,and doing a small amount of thinking.Anyone for that wonderful book title Think and grow rich.
Other people in the style of Grace would be Sylvia Bloom,Anne Scheiber,Ronald Reed and many more .
The human race has an infinite ability to deny reality and believe the delusions they have created for themselves.Then the enter echo chambers such as this one and get positive reinforcement of those delusions
My apologies,perhaps I was thinking of a different company ( McDonalds? ).Wal mart have had 11 X 2 for 1 stock splits ,so 100 shares grows to 204,800 shares now.Multiply $162 by 204.8 K and there you have $33 million. Dividend would be ( you'll need to check this ) 204.8K X $2..Call it annual income of $400 K.A family trust minimises tax. Otherwise the IRS would be notified of your income on form 1099 - DIV. Avoiding tax on dividend income is impossible.Avoiding CGT is easy,don't sell anything.
The inevitable disclaimer.Author ( me) did Australian financial analysis,with a working ( but not specific ) knowledge of other countries.
SEC forms will give the holdings of wealthy people ,SEC form 4. Bezos is easy 1 billion shares in the company he started in his garage so he is worth 1 billion X whatever the Amazon share price is.
The human race of course works on the basis of never let the facts spoil the stories they want to believe in. AKA popular delusions and the madness of crowds.
Your numbers are correct. But you also miss other factors. Like inflation. My parents bought a 2 bedroom house in 1947. Today it would sell for about $600,000. That is 77 years of 6.4% growth just due to inflation. It is not an easy task for a young poor person to put away money and expect to get over 6.4% growth in the market. But it is easier for a young rich person to do that with easy access to education, connections, and advice from rich family elders. Deducting that 6.4% inflation from the 20% over 58 years comes to $22.800, far less than $504,000.
So it is not just a factor of stupidity and stubornness, but hardship from poverty, poverty rooted in companies wanting to make as much money as possible without sharing the profits. Trump's money is a classic example of starting rich, and cheating the workers at every opportunity.
Absolutely. It is an obscene amount and entirely unjustifiable. Those with a moral conscience will turn to helping family and philanthropy. However both activities are now poisoned with emotional abuses due to our societies being structured from nursery school teaching that winning the A correlates with personal worth and in turn correlates with doing well in life now aka being wealthy. So in life terms everyone judges each other purely monetarily, everyone loses emotionally and are trapped in a brutal social hunger games nightmare of class conflict.
Then you should read his biography. He wasn't gifted with anything. He started by writing software for a year himself with his brother. He has been directly involved in the engineering in every company he owns. No, he didn't do it alone. He had great teams that he assembled. And he made some big mistakes along the way and got really lucky. But he is a far cry from the wealthy elites that are causing us problems.
You say "the way is to tax them" but you don't offer a way to get there. And "we the people can decide what to do with their excess money" is just childish nonsense. Tax rates and allocation are set by Congressional legislation signed by the President. Before putting forth all this silly "we should do this and we should do that" (personally I prefer far more radical wealth confiscation and limits) you need a concrete plan for gaining the necessary political power. Instead, large numbers of people are planning on abandoning it by voting 3rd party.
You're absolutely right. But Musk is not one of the power elites who controls the political parties and who spend billions on political campaigns and lobbying to control our government. THEY are the problem. He is as upset with it as we are from what he actually says in interviews and posts.
P.S. I find it fascinating that you first shame me for my commentary to Robert Reich (and not to you), then you mute me when I call you on your shaming, and - clearly you didn’t mute me - now you have to personally attack me. Your actions speak quite loudly.
Nothing Nonsensical here at all. We each have our own wealth in our lives and how we chose to “spend” or “enjoy” it - and this includes much more than money - is up to each of us. And how we choose to “fight” the inequities in life is also up to each of us. I am no stranger to inequality, life’s sufferings, as well as helping with the choices people make. It’s unfortunate that you have chosen to shame me without pursuing an understanding beyond your own self interests.
Good idea, that makes him an IMMIGRANT, TOO. Send him home. By the way I would like to point out that TRUMP married two immigrants, one of which he is still married to. Trump has a lot to talk about?
I know that perfectly well, it's only the non-white European immigrants that Elon and Trump and most Republicans object to.
This my solution to immigrants entering the country to find work. Let all the wealthy, rich Republicans and middle class Republicans figure out WHO is going to cultivate, tend and pick their food. I betcha you won't see too many White Republicans, Democrats, or Middle Class Americans getting out into the field, orchards or grain fields harvesting our crops. Can't get their hands dirty and they have no idea how to grow food anyway. (there are a few exceptions).
Things kind of backfired in Florida when DeSantis started harassing the farmers in Florida. You fill in the blanks.
Why do you think those Red states are pushing to legalize child labor? And guess the nationalities of the 5 or 6 children that have died in those chicken slaughter houses and the like over the last 13 months. Yep, they are from families that are living in poverty, their families are from south of the border. These deaths are occurring before child labor is legalized.
I'll tell you, it's to replace the immigrants they NEED and can't allow in anymore. They are legalizing child labor so White people don't have to replace the immigrants that they won't anyway, so there you have it.
Musk and most of the filthy rich ARE the problem! Too much money, too much power and influence. We have to stop this raping of America. The way is to tax them and we the people can decide what to do with their excess money.
Agree. Capitalism is an efficient wealth-producing system (just look at East and West Germany after WWII - there couldn't be a better advertisement for capitalism).
BUT:
When capitalism wriggles free from the constraints of good government, you have:
Low taxes on the wealthy and on corporations, leading to:
Monopoly.
Government by the wealthy.
Collusion by corporations against the public interest.
In other words, the things Adam Smith stated in his 1776 warning to the American experiment.
You are quite correct, dump Reagan, dump Bill Clinton, dump George W. Bush, dump Hillary Clinton (Ugh!), dump Barack Obama, and above all DUMP DONALD J. TRUMP:
It's very simple: Tax...the...Rich.
Unleash America.
The US recognised the dangers 150 years ago (or thereabouts) with anti trust laws. Are they now ineffective?
There are no antitrust or anti-monopoly laws any more; say thank you to Clinton economics-Neoliberalism, also neo-liberalism, is a term used to signify the late-20th century political reappearance of 19th-century ideas associated with free-market capitalism, which had fallen into decline following the Second World War. These economic principles are a direct contrast to policies of FDR: The New Deal included new constraints and safeguards on the banking industry and efforts to re-inflate the economy after prices had fallen sharply. New Deal programs included both laws passed by Congress as well as presidential executive orders……
This is simplistic fabrication. The toothlessness of anti-trust law enforcement is due to Robert Bork far more than Bill Clinton.
And to Ronald Reagan who broke up the unions, a major countervailing force to wealthy corporations.
Everything started with Ronald Reagan. The end of the Fairness Doctrine, ketchup as a vegetable in school lunches, welfare queens, pull yourself up by the bootstraps (which, BTW, literally means "impossible task.") which helped the turn toward conservatism and fundamentalism, and victimization of the poor, and all that claptrap about trickle down economics. Not to mention Iran/Contra. Read this Wikipedia article, Scandals of the Reagan Administration (I'm sorry I couldn't catch a good link.)
It's no coincidence that Reagan nominated Bork to the SCOTUS.
But note that the issue here is anti-trust laws and the lack of their enforcement specifically, and that can very much be laid at the feet of Bork: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Antitrust_Paradox
Why and how did they come up with that name?
Who is "they"? Neo-liberals don't generally call themselves that; the term comes from their critics. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism
And LaVelle explained where the name comes from: "a term used to signify the late-20th century political reappearance of 19th-century ideas associated with free-market capitalism" ... see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism
Jival, the name "neo liberal" is very confusing to people. It has nothing to do with being liberal, in fact, it is the opposite. When money becomes the be all to end all, one can see that what happened in the last 20 years or so of the 20th century was inevitable or nearly so. Workers were being paid less and less so the owners and money-grubbers could take more and more. I don't know what to call that except unchecked corporate greed. That is fewer syllables than neoliberalism but more words. It does not play as well with fast-moving business guys. It is also a truth and can't have that.
A confusing term. I knew I shouldn't have posed the question, but googled it myself. Wikipedia article is in depth.
Neoliberals absolutely did call themselves that. (The word “liberal” to anyone outside the US referred and refers to someone who believes in unregulated commerce and laissez-faire economics, which were not dominant in post-war democracies, hence the “neo-“, in part. The Neo’s of course were a bit different in character because their approach in that context was reactionary, hence angry and vengeful.
If course it all goes back to Regan and Ridiculous Reganomics! No dispute there!!!!!😳😳😳😳😳My point was WHERE WAS THE LOYAL OPPOSITION?🫨🫨🫨🫨THE VOICE OF REASON WHEN WE NEEDED IT SO DESPERATELY 35 YEARS AGO???????? Ask Mr. Reich. Read one (or more!) of his books. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/interviews/reich.html (Or read this old article- before all the political polishing). https://www.salon.com/1996/03/09/reich1/
Joe, there are antitrust laws to stop the kind of stuff Musk is doing, but somehow, we just don't get around to enforcing them. It is as though our own government officials are scared of the rich guys and don't want to rock their boats. We need some boat rocking, wealth taxing, higher tax rates on wealthy individuals and corporations, etc. We need to get these things going now because global warming is cutting in on our lives and will break us as a nation and planet if we don't put our efforts into stopping it. Right now, we are wrapped up with worshipping money and are distracted from what needs to be done.
Well said Ruth... Warren, Sanders, and others "Have a plan for this"... Climate change is coming for all of us in one way or another. Let the $ from the wealthy apply towards our major global warming and ecosystem challenges... Make it a nobel action to request they change the focus with their money and redirect it to leave a legacy to save the planet.
Musk is a bad actor - a bombastic, arrogant, thinks he knows it all kind of dangerous jerk. Boycott Tesla, and replace our contracts with SpaceX with something else. Any communication modality or media entity these days with that much power or that many viewers/users they can influence and gaslight- should be dismantled for the protection of democracy.
Biden is trying to enforce them but I think they are fighting him. The two cases I know of right now that are in the courts are the Exxon/Mobil merger and the Kroger/Albertson merger neither of which we want to see happen. So keep fighting.
GOP are lawless. We have no money to run certain agencies since Bush closed and downsized so many. They been doing that with the IRS yet military are in the trillions now. Where were they on 911 and Jan.6th? Right. A big stand down by the most powerful military in the world.
They have largely been unenforced the last several decades. Biden is now changing that, but there are changes in the law that are required as well.
Biden won't regulate corporations for their fraud and Fascist funds. Corporations are owned by workers, shareholder and the community. All parties are represented not just one. Politics should be out for all corporations to be fair and equal. Where is their "Corporate Governess and Responsibility"?
Tax capital gains on equities as ordinary income.
In socialist England (60’s), unearned income was double taxed.
Who are you directing this command to?
I think wealth should be confiscated and capped, but that's not going to happen either.
Why not? It’s happened before.
Speaking of not so smart, right winger Lonny has mastered exhibiting the Dunning-Kruger effect.
"When capitalism wriggles free from the constraints of good government, you have:" ... The UNITED CORPORATIONS of AMERICA !
"Capitalism is an efficient wealth-producing system (just look at East and West Germany after WWII - there couldn't be a better advertisement for capitalism)."
Nonsense ... there were many differences besides the presence or absence of capitalism. There's no reason to think that a democratic socialist East Germany--as opposed to the totalitarian DDR--would not have thrived.
"When capitalism wriggles free from the constraints of good government"
The only way to prevent it is democratic socialism.
Your comments are ignorant nonsense, right winger. Muting.
To some, “socialism” means absolute government control of the economy. To others, the slightest whiff of government control is “Socialism!” (Used as an epithet.) In reality, there are many degrees of socialism. A little can be very beneficial to the disadvantaged, while too much can bring an economy to its knees. Nordic capitalism has a degree of socialism that would horrify the American right, but here you deny it is socialist at all. Cuban socialism is actually more of a kleptocratic oligarchy, and is no more true socialism than the “Democratic Republic of North Korea” is democratic.
The countries you you mentioned as socialism are not socialism, they are instead communists. Britain is not a socialism state. I think you need to learn what a socialism state is because you have no idea what it is because you actually think communism and socialism are the same thing and they absolutely positively not in any way shape or form whatsoever the same.
You are right wing. I expressed no binary thinking--you have no idea what other categories are in my ontology, you simply leapt to an ad hominem as right wingers do. And I am a critical thinker, but no one who says that democratic socialism "does not exist" is--that's childish trolling, as right wingers do. And your deeply ignorant and unintelligent and--given your accusation--hypocritical--list is the ultimate in binary thinking--there is vastly more variety even in that list of only 5 items than you make out. And the claim that socialism is "played out" based on that list is deeply dishonest.
Why doesn't blocking work here? Anyway, I won't be responding to Lonny again.
"you were outsmarted"
LOL. What a troll and a clown.
That’s an ignorant statement. I’ve lived in two democratic socialist states, though under Margaret Thatcher the British neoliberals decided they wanted to imitate the US and by now have surpassed us in greed, cruelty and infrastructure collapse.
Have you lived there and participated in its politics and studied its history? Sounds like maybe not.
Its government is now of course pro-capitalist on steroids—without even the (rather trivial) virtues of classic capitalism such as prudence or efficiency, and hampered by the isolationist nationalism of Brexit—once a merely unpleasant fantasy, now a disastrous reality.
"... Agree. Capitalism is an efficient wealth-producing system (just look at East and West Germany after WWII - ..." For me wealth is a poor second to relationships. The death of my partner the third grade teacher left me relatively wealthy (her teaching annuity and savings.), but I'm intensely sad, not just from her absence, also, because of so few close friends.
Re: The comparison. The BRD was subsidized by the US while Russia striped the East even to taking train rails.
I attended a German language class in Dresden the last year of the DDR. I weekly would train to Berlin and cross over to the West for bananas and oranges, but couldn't wait to return to which I found so much more pleasant.
It's not Capitalism since there is competition but huge, International Monopolies who destroy the market. Monopolies destroy competition, research and innovation, fix high prices and destroy products. Less on the market of choice.
Capitalism is running as intended. There is nothing wrong with it. It is performing exactly as devised. When are people going to realize this. This system has to be replaced. Adjustments have been tried before but the end result is always the same. Producing ever more billionaires and multi-millionaires. Power and influence being gifted to corporations and we wonder how to fix it? We can’t. This is how it’s supposed to operate.
I'm sorry but you're wrong. I recommend Wealth of Nations, by Adam Smith. It was written 248 years ago and remains a delightful read.
Some of the rich pay less taxes than you do. Others pay none. 1% have it all.
And the rich make money by having money/wealth, but wealth isn't taxed, only labor is. Also, "we just dont tax everyone" is a standard issue right wing lie. Not everyone pays *income* tax, because they pay such a large percentage of their income as sales and payroll taxes.
Used to be if you obtain wealth regardless of type of work you paid a big chunk to Uncle Sam. Our country had money to fix our roads, pay our government employees, do research, health care, etc. Bridges were falling apart and airports not safe, etc. without money to fix them. Money went to the few in control, etc.
There were high marginal income tax rates pre-Reagan, as high as 91% under Eisenhower (these are marginal rates, not on the entire amount, so it wasn't confiscatory, contrary to right wing claims) but there's never been a wealth tax. Many of the rich obtain most of their wealth by having money, not by doing any sort of work. Someone like Paris Hilton does no work.
Elizabeth Warren wrong about how Musk got rich?
Perhaps you never read Keynes. I don't blame you, BUT:
First, the ultrarich don't pay taxes.
Second, spending is generally a good thing, it stimulates the economy.
Listen up. I don't know if your statistics are right or wrong. Let's assume they're right. Then I'm already assuming you're talking Federal rates of 26% for the top 1%, which is way too low. Now, that doesn't even include State and Local taxes.
But even that's not the point. The top 1-10% bear most of the tax burden. I get it, and I agree. But here's the point. The top 0.1% pay very little and the top 0.01% pay almost nothing. But that's where the real money is.
As for Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg, Gates, Buffett, and the Koch Brothers, well they pay, in relation to their actual wealth, nothing.
You think that's right, pal? You think this is a good system?
Hard to survive on min wage or less.
Bingo. The people aren't the problem so much as the rules which give them unbridled political power which effects us all and which snuffs out the voices of others.
Poorly educated, misinformed, disinformed, & thoughtless people without critical thinking skills who've been successfully propagandized by demagogues, lobbyists, & klepto-corporatists are just as much to blame as the latter, who work tirelessly to groom them to be obedient social automatons who are happy to believe all the lies they're spoonfed & primed to accept w/o question. The mass of humanity don't want to think (admittedly, thinking is difficult & often creates doubt, which is why Martin Luther, during the Reformation, advised all his followers not to think but only to trust their feelings); they want to be told what to believe & what to do. They crave brief, simple to digest slogans that they can parrot so that they can believe themselves intelligent & informed. And the wretched Calvinism that is the foundation of so much of Western culture & religion has poisoned almost all the "faithful". Westerners are doomed to every type of poverty, especially intellectual poverty. They're inherently anti-intellectual & obdurately stupid. They revere the morbidly wealthy because they hope that someday they too will join the ranks of the self-righteously selfish & the insatiably self-serving like the virulent, arrogant racist Elon (Apartheid Clyde) Musk & Jeff Bezos. Ha! Dreamers all & bound for the sorry hell of bitter disappointment.
Nice analysis. Calvinist capitalists believe that not only will morbid wealth guarantee them a place on the heavenly board of the Elect but justifies any criminal behavior for the same reason. That they are beloved of the Supreme Being. It is an ideology of Winners and Losers and narcissistic individualism.
How we reset our society’s structural bases to be built upon a collective consciousness and raise empathy and intellectual acuity above wealth in the ladder of social goods is a Herculean moral task🐈⬛
And it's a vicious circle as they vote for those who want to keep them uniformed and watch Faux and listen to radio that misinforms, thereby supporting their own deception.
*uninformed
Chen, a simple slogan you describe is "capitalism is rotten". The truth is closer to "how we regulate capitalism can be improved". But, as you say, the latter is too complicated.
A maximum wage about 20 times the minimum wage would fix it. That would be about $300,000 a year for a single and for a married couple it would be about $600,000. That is at $7.50 an hour minimum wage. Double the minimum wage to $15 an hour and that would be about 1.2 million dollars for a married couple a year. Maybe 10 times the minimum wage maybe 15? 20 may be too much, the greedy may still try to bribe our shady politicians.
And how are you going to accumulate the power necessary to put your fix into place? Voting 3rd party sure won't do it.
I agree with Jibal Jibal. The electorate is not likely to impose such a law, even if it were constitutional. A better solution is to tax capital gains as ordinary income. This is the low hanging fruit that is politically feasible. California taxes capital gains as ordinary income. England allows the basis of real property to increase with inflation before calculating capital gains. But for equities, I find no reason not to tax a gain from sale of a stock as ordinary income. For those who work for companies and receive stock options, the gain on the stock value when the option is exercised is a form of compensation so should be taxed as the same rate as ordinary income. The work I do to select a stock to buy in my after-tax account is less than the work I do on my job. Why should I be taxed less for income from passive activity compared to income from my profession. Some argue that the lower capital gains tax rate incentivises investment. But most investors own stock in their retirement plans where capital gains tax is irrelevant. Respectfully, my proposal is much more practical than that of Bob Johnson.
I don't think you're agreeing with me at all, or understanding what I wrote, which has nothing to do with what the best policy is. The electorate doesn't make (or "impose") laws, Congress does, and they have to be signed by the President. Many Americans would favor a higher minimum wage and/or taxing capital gains at a higher rate, but the preferences of Americans don't correlate with the policies passed by Congress except for wealthy Americans (this is a demonstrated statistical reality). In order to change that requires political power, but that power currently rests with the wealthy and with corporations (which is largely the same thing), and they will fight tooth and nail to resist any such shift in power. Who will win such a battle? They will, of course, unless there is a significant change in the strategies and weapons we use.
Capitalism is rotten and accumulates political (and other) power which is why we're heading toward less (a lot less) regulation rather than more.
Agree with the sentiment, but your analysis of Martin Luther is incomplete at best and generally just wrong. His own words:
Feelings come and feelings go,
And feelings are deceiving;
My warrant is the Word of God--
Naught else is worth believing.
Luther pointed out to an illiterate congregant the importance of being able to read and study the Scriptures. His rediscovery of the message of grace in Romans led to the 95 theses nailed to the wall which marked the Reformation and Enlightenment. Luther had a large hand in the rediscovery of literacy, learning, and the wonder of understanding God's creation. Calvinism and Lutheranism were two distinctly different influences on the Church. It is true that some used Luther's name to advocate doctrine and actions which he later learned of and was appalled about. Humans, whether Christians or not, are complicated, imperfect.
The message of the Gospel and the teachings of Christ are definitely not aligned with capitalism as we know it. In fact, they are much more closely aligned with socialism. Witness how the early church shared all that they had with those in need.
Chen, much of what you say was said by Thomas Jefferson two hundred years ago, and he too loathed Calvin. Now your expression "inherently anti-intellectual" doesn't impress me as being very intellectual.
Definitely the people are problem... they are the ones who have bastardized and used every known loophole to get us where we are
They created the loopholes via a corrupt political system.
Which the people did…
When one is gifted 1 billion dollars, one's mind CAVES IN ON ITSELF. (No moral man or woman can legally EARN that amount.) You cannot convince me otherwise.
Just ask Jared Kusner and his wife, they walked away from the White House flush with cash. A royal cash deal and no one said a word.
Saudis gave them $2B for a business deal which does not exist. Trump robbed our treasury for himself and his family.
I think your claim needs clarification. I hear that Taylor Swift is up to $1 billion, and one would think that she earned a substantial part of that.
Musk at 200-300 Billion didn't start out up there. Nor did he 'earn' it. But, he did legally aquire it. How? Because he started several companies that grew in size, with him in control of lots of shares. That is allowed in our system.
The question is did he 'earn' it. I agree, he didn't 'earn' it. That would imply that somehow he designed and built a ziaeable portion of all of the machines, that he wrote a sizeable portion of the software, that he funded a sizeable portion of the growth, that he occupied a significant portion of the positions earning wages. That obviously didn't happen.
Our property laws allow the owners to get the benefit of the growth. They get to deduct the expenses from their tax bills. They get to set control the company. If the company does poorly, they get to go bankrupt, and structure the debt, thus avoiding paying the debt themselves.
Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm no expert on such matters. But that is the way it seems to me.
"That is allowed in our system."
Well, see, that's the problem.
Without making it technical you are correct .The company goes bankrupt,not the individual.The wealth is shared around through pension funds ( 401K etc).Musk is a minority shareholder in Tesla owning ~ 13% of the shares.Pension funds ,individuals,insurance companies etc own the rest.Anybody that cares to spend money to buy them.
Buffett teaches compounding through the price of a BRK share.Start at a share price of ~ $14 in 1965 and compound that @20 % for 58 years and you will be somewhere around the price of a BRK share now,$550K?. A very simple concept and a simple equation that people will deny every day of their lives,denial to the grave.
Wal Mart ( and many other companies) have employee share purchase plans within the limits of what the IRS will allow..Wal Mart has turned $1650 into around $30 million for people that have been there long term,and pass that wealth on through the generations.
The price of a Wal Mart share was $16. 50 at the IPO. They have had 9 X 2 for 1 splits since then so 100 shares grows to 504,000 ,just double 100 9 times ( exponential growth).Check the numbers ,I'm old now so mental arithmetic powers are on the wane .
The best way to see reality is google Grace Groner and the foundation she created,ordinary people doing extraordinary things by having a bit of common sense ,and doing a small amount of thinking.Anyone for that wonderful book title Think and grow rich.
Other people in the style of Grace would be Sylvia Bloom,Anne Scheiber,Ronald Reed and many more .
The human race has an infinite ability to deny reality and believe the delusions they have created for themselves.Then the enter echo chambers such as this one and get positive reinforcement of those delusions
My apologies,perhaps I was thinking of a different company ( McDonalds? ).Wal mart have had 11 X 2 for 1 stock splits ,so 100 shares grows to 204,800 shares now.Multiply $162 by 204.8 K and there you have $33 million. Dividend would be ( you'll need to check this ) 204.8K X $2..Call it annual income of $400 K.A family trust minimises tax. Otherwise the IRS would be notified of your income on form 1099 - DIV. Avoiding tax on dividend income is impossible.Avoiding CGT is easy,don't sell anything.
The inevitable disclaimer.Author ( me) did Australian financial analysis,with a working ( but not specific ) knowledge of other countries.
SEC forms will give the holdings of wealthy people ,SEC form 4. Bezos is easy 1 billion shares in the company he started in his garage so he is worth 1 billion X whatever the Amazon share price is.
The human race of course works on the basis of never let the facts spoil the stories they want to believe in. AKA popular delusions and the madness of crowds.
Your numbers are correct. But you also miss other factors. Like inflation. My parents bought a 2 bedroom house in 1947. Today it would sell for about $600,000. That is 77 years of 6.4% growth just due to inflation. It is not an easy task for a young poor person to put away money and expect to get over 6.4% growth in the market. But it is easier for a young rich person to do that with easy access to education, connections, and advice from rich family elders. Deducting that 6.4% inflation from the 20% over 58 years comes to $22.800, far less than $504,000.
So it is not just a factor of stupidity and stubornness, but hardship from poverty, poverty rooted in companies wanting to make as much money as possible without sharing the profits. Trump's money is a classic example of starting rich, and cheating the workers at every opportunity.
Musk grew rich on our tax dollars not his big brain.
It's the lower tan on capital gains that creates the problem you describe.
Absolutely. It is an obscene amount and entirely unjustifiable. Those with a moral conscience will turn to helping family and philanthropy. However both activities are now poisoned with emotional abuses due to our societies being structured from nursery school teaching that winning the A correlates with personal worth and in turn correlates with doing well in life now aka being wealthy. So in life terms everyone judges each other purely monetarily, everyone loses emotionally and are trapped in a brutal social hunger games nightmare of class conflict.
We need to rethink the way we think.
Then you should read his biography. He wasn't gifted with anything. He started by writing software for a year himself with his brother. He has been directly involved in the engineering in every company he owns. No, he didn't do it alone. He had great teams that he assembled. And he made some big mistakes along the way and got really lucky. But he is a far cry from the wealthy elites that are causing us problems.
Utter nonsense, stan.
You say "the way is to tax them" but you don't offer a way to get there. And "we the people can decide what to do with their excess money" is just childish nonsense. Tax rates and allocation are set by Congressional legislation signed by the President. Before putting forth all this silly "we should do this and we should do that" (personally I prefer far more radical wealth confiscation and limits) you need a concrete plan for gaining the necessary political power. Instead, large numbers of people are planning on abandoning it by voting 3rd party.
You're absolutely right. But Musk is not one of the power elites who controls the political parties and who spend billions on political campaigns and lobbying to control our government. THEY are the problem. He is as upset with it as we are from what he actually says in interviews and posts.
He bought and is manipulating a huge platform for spreading disinformation and fomenting bigotry. He's up to his neck in the authoritarian project.
"He is as upset with it as we are"
Yeah, sure, stan.
Hey, let's stop the raping of America by electing a rapist as president!
what the Plan B just in case Congress and the states cant bring themselves to raise taxes on the super rich?
Tax the filthy rich who are too greedy and dangerous.
The trick here is to be content in our own lives so that we can remove ourselves from theirs. Vote by holding on to the riches you make.
Sounds rather airy fairy and elitist. Some people are working 3 jobs and needing to decide between medicine or food for their children.
That goes both ways, doesn’t it.
No, of course not.
Muted for nonsensical whataboutism.
P.S.
"It’s unfortunate that you have chosen to shame me without pursuing an understanding beyond your own self interests."
What a thoroughly unpleasant person.
P.S. I find it fascinating that you first shame me for my commentary to Robert Reich (and not to you), then you mute me when I call you on your shaming, and - clearly you didn’t mute me - now you have to personally attack me. Your actions speak quite loudly.
Nothing Nonsensical here at all. We each have our own wealth in our lives and how we chose to “spend” or “enjoy” it - and this includes much more than money - is up to each of us. And how we choose to “fight” the inequities in life is also up to each of us. I am no stranger to inequality, life’s sufferings, as well as helping with the choices people make. It’s unfortunate that you have chosen to shame me without pursuing an understanding beyond your own self interests.
What about forbidding blatant lies? Robert can give the DOJ some criteria about what lies and truths are... I feel the need of prosecution
If we're going to crack down on immigrants, let's start by sending him back to South Africa.
Good idea, that makes him an IMMIGRANT, TOO. Send him home. By the way I would like to point out that TRUMP married two immigrants, one of which he is still married to. Trump has a lot to talk about?
Oh but you see, it’s not immigrants of European heritage that are objected to!
I know that perfectly well, it's only the non-white European immigrants that Elon and Trump and most Republicans object to.
This my solution to immigrants entering the country to find work. Let all the wealthy, rich Republicans and middle class Republicans figure out WHO is going to cultivate, tend and pick their food. I betcha you won't see too many White Republicans, Democrats, or Middle Class Americans getting out into the field, orchards or grain fields harvesting our crops. Can't get their hands dirty and they have no idea how to grow food anyway. (there are a few exceptions).
Things kind of backfired in Florida when DeSantis started harassing the farmers in Florida. You fill in the blanks.
Why do you think those Red states are pushing to legalize child labor? And guess the nationalities of the 5 or 6 children that have died in those chicken slaughter houses and the like over the last 13 months. Yep, they are from families that are living in poverty, their families are from south of the border. These deaths are occurring before child labor is legalized.
I'll tell you, it's to replace the immigrants they NEED and can't allow in anymore. They are legalizing child labor so White people don't have to replace the immigrants that they won't anyway, so there you have it.
Same thing happened in Georgia: all the crops rotted in the field.
That won't happen after the state laws are changed to legalize child labor, which will be immigrant children.
Rush to the bottom of the labor chain for profit. Shame.