IRS: Hi, Elon, it's tax time. You don't take a salary, so we don't tax that. Your stock, well, we don't tax that either. But how much did you borrow to "live" for the year? We'll be taxing that at a reduced amount (not 100% reduction) to include the interest you pay. We have decided that what you borrow in this special way - a way not open to the rest of us - will count as income because you use it same as everyone else uses their income, namely, to live. Fair enough?
Hilarious comment, well done. But I suspect that Elon doesn't just live on funds withdrawn from only one of his companies, as there are other ways in which the very rich get by, including but not limited to company-paid housing, transportation, travel and lots of very imaginative stuff as well.
The crusty old former head of General Electric, Jack Welch, comes to mind as he had finagled tons of expensive benefits and of course had GE take on all liabilities (such as poisoning the Hudson River with dioxin).
In a fast search via Google, there's a most interesting description of some of what Welch gathered up for himself: "In 1996, Welch and GE had agreed to a "retention package" worth $2.5 million, and which promised continued access after Welch's retirement to benefits he had received as CEO—including an apartment in New York, baseball tickets and the use of a private jet and chauffeured car." I'm sure there was lots more.
I wonder what a good forensic tax accountant could find in a deep dive into Elon's finances.
Promising to sell $30 billion of stock based on a twitter poll is like saying "I have such a ridiculously huge amount of money I don't know what to do with it." Why doesn't he commit to doing something useful with his money?
Would it not be possible to change the tax rules to count borrowings against stock as taxable realized gains?
yes, ken, taxing such loans as income. as we see, when the value of the collateral decreases, the capital gain would need to be recalculated. too complicated. just call it income.
John, it's probably not that complicated. If you pay $X in tax from stock-secured borrowing, it just counts as a $X advance payment on future capital gains tax. It doesn't matter whether the value of the stock subsequently goes up or down.
Unfortunately, that is what it has been dressed up to be. More likely, the foray into space using vast amounts of public money is to start up a viable 'private' space haulage industry. Billionaires are not here to save humanity, they can see what is on the horizon and it doesn't involve airlifting humanity from a scorching, war-ridden hell-scape.
I had a hunch that it was more about that and also getting in on the 'ground floor' of space dominance. Certainly not a noble cause like saving humanity.
Robert, thanks for sharing information that most of us would never know about otherwise. I try to stay informed by reading news magazines and newspapers, watching news show. etc., but your information is unique. Thanks for doing what you're doing!
As far I know, he started his empire out of a loan in the amount of $ 465 millions from the department of energy. He used this money to develop the manufacturing facility in Fremont, California. So he used "TAX PAYERS MONEY" to starting his business, still he refuses to pay fair taxes? such a freaking double face moron. The people of United States, the tax payers, the same people that now he refuses to help back just by doing the right thing, These people help him to be what he is now...there is a very old proverb that says, "Do not bite the hand that feeds you". Soon or later. This Immigrant, son of a Canadian woman and a South African father and raised in Pretoria, should know that the American dream and the Idea of this experiment called America, is what allowed him to become the rich man he is today, I not taking away his merits and intellectual capacity, but intellectual capacity and merits are not a substitution for common sense, the sense of social responsibility and the moral and ethical obligation to do the right thing, in this case, PAY BACK YOUR DEBT WITH THE NATION AND THE PEOPLE THAT GIVES YOU THE OPPORTUNITY AND THE FINANCIAL ACCESS TO FULFILL YOUR "OWN AMERICAN DREAM" in other words," don't be a freaking moron"
and he is moving his Fremont operation to TX now that CA hit the point of holding him accountable to follow the laws protecting labor (nondiscrimination, health and safety, etc.)
People like that need to be shamed. Avoiding tax is a reflection of their narcissism. Make it uncomfortable to be a narcissist and you might get somewhere.
Some countries have repealed their wealth tax due to the complexity of determining a person's wealth, particularly if illiquid assets which are difficult to value properly, such as a privately owned business or a Van Gogh painting, or assets that are hidden in other countries, are the main portion of a person's wealth. The result is lots of effort to track down and value assets and fighting never ending court battles. The tax revenue obtained was not worth the effort. Why not tax a portion of the billionaire bank loans? Why not impose a consumption tax on people with a net worth over 1 billion?
The whole "some countries" is very misleading, we as a nation shall not act like "some other countries". We are totally different from other nation starting from the whole concept and idea that "all men are created equally "...therefore everyone of the citizens of our nation have the same rights, duties, privileges and obligations. Big corporations and the top 400 richest families shall be abiding under the same rules, and as a nation, we, the people shall demand from our political leaders to correct, modify and enforcing legislations tha reflect the nature of the principles stated in the declaration of independence and in the constitution. An idea have no value if not applied and enacted
One of the things that's different about America is that the wealthy have enormous influence over the writing of tax laws through their campaign contributions, media ownership, lobbyists, investment managers, and accounting firms who represent their financial interests.
There's a long history of the wealthy avoiding taxes by changing the tax laws to give themselves advantages.
I have to agree partially with you in this topic, but also we shall add that the reason why this is happening is due to the fault or criminal intentions of the Republican party. For example; the GOP and the corrupted administration of Gerald Ford, and let me explain how and when. In 1905 The president Theodore Roosevelt recognized the deep need for campaign finance reforms and along the congress they enacted a ban for corporate contributions for political purposes. By 1971 Congress made these reforms more regulated by the Federal Campaign act, still a very difficult law to enforcing, after the scandal and financial abuses during the Nixon administration , the congress amended the legislation in 1974 (after Nixon impeachment) making illegal for corporations to donate toward political campaigns. This changed in 1976 when the Supreme court decisions were "Buckely V/S Valeo" Changing legislation and allowing "marketing and advertising contributions". Later under The Bush Administration (Republican again) The supreme court allowed in the case of "Citizens United V/S Federal election commission in 2010 allowed money to flow from the corporations to the politicians running for office, specially Republicans while they are the guys behind cutting taxes to the rich and corporations. Since then the Senators and congressmen from the GOP not any longer have to try to convincing you about their "better ideas" while their funding is coming from the same people they are serving, the corporations and the top 400 richest families in this nation. There is our big problem.
Rodrigo, have you read the Powell memorandum from 1971? You might find it informative. It was a blueprint for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to dominate the political system for years. Possibly forever. We are seeing the fruition of this plan and Trump was the bugle call to start the war. Divide the country and keep us fighting each other while the 0.1% go about their business and dominate the world. Shortages are created to make the common people unhappy with the government. The government is in place so we can be angry at someone without bothering them. When we have a solidarity movement, such as unionizing, they, the billionaires, create a new issue for the "great unwashed masses" to fight about. Funny how easily we are manipulated.
I agree. The reason I mentioned influence over the writing of tax laws is that many people have argued we shouldn't criticize the wealthy over paying their fair share, they're just following the rules. What they may not realize is that some accounting firms have actually arranged for employees to leave the firm, take a government job where they could influence the tax laws, and then return to the firm to receive huge bonuses for saving their clients millions of dollars.
Personally I'm very interested in root causes. History proves that if the gap between the haves and have nots becomes too large, civilization will fail and even the wealthy don't want that. Investing in each others well being is the foundation of civilization.
Today the corruption is out in the open for all to see. While it can be disheartening, it also affords an opportunity to begin cleaning it up.
I am not opposed to having the ultra-wealthy pay more tax, but if we are going to impose a wealth tax, we should study the experience of other countries to avoid making the same mistakes they made. You are right that we are different from other nations and therefore some of their experiences with a wealth tax may not apply to us. I agree that the elites are playing "favorites" with the wealthy and this must stop.
Mumbo jumbo, whiz bang, okey doke, casino economics........the bottom line: it is now clear, we must find a way to FORCE the elite to pay a fair share. We need to determine, firmly, what the fair share will be--and get on with the business of forcing them to pay. It could not have arrived at this point, graphs of wealth distributions like Olympic ski jump slopes on steroids, without malevolence towards average joe population, who in turn are forced to eat the burden.
Mr. Musk used government money to pay his start up expenses? that had to be worth something. People who get help with say, a medical degree, often must work in an area where there is a particular need. for a specific time. But the scale of wealth and it's changeability or volatility makes this not compute well. What about Elizabeth Warren's idea of a simple 2% per dollar (?) tax on wealth?
I have no sympathy for Elon Musk. His fortune has reached the point where it is self-sustaining, and if his only reason to not want to pay taxes is that he would have to sell stock, that puts him way above many of my friends, who, when the last round of "tax cuts" (which were really just withholding changes, along with the loss of quite a few deductions for work-related expenses) hit, had to tap their savings, or, in a few cases, take out loans to pay their unexpectedly high taxes.
Unlike many people, I have no problem with the billionaire space race; lots of valuable discoveries and inventions have come from exploration. I do, however, have a problem with them engaging in such a contest *instead* of paying taxes, especially given that some of the funding they are using comes from the very taxes they avoid paying. I also have a problem with the ultra-wealthy refusing to pay their workers - who ultimately provide those riches - a living wage, while making more in a minute, and in some cases a second, than their workers will make in a lifetime. These people are so rich that paying all of their workers a living wage wouldn't make a dent in their fortunes, and would, by increasing peoples' disposable income, make it more possible for those workers to buy products from their companies and improve the economy in general - which would ultimately improve their profits anyway. It seems like a win-win to me, and I don't understand why they don't seem to care. Perhaps they've become so rich they've forgotten about the peons they stepped on, and continue to step on, to reach the rarified heights they inhabit. Or perhaps they're just greedy.
Seems like a ridiculous exercise overall. Let's establish a consistent and fair way to determine wealth, and use that to determine everyone's fair share of taxes. It would create a standard measure that could simplify taxation overall, similar to the impact pure Medicare For All would have on healthcare.
Mark, the ultra-wealthy basically have two means of avoiding taxes: bribing lawmakers to create (or keep) tax loopholes, and paying their accountants to find and use them. If the first didn't occur, there'd be no need to worry about the second. So again, it comes down to getting big money (and its corruption) out of our politics.
Dr Reich, I doubt that any "bribing" actually takes place. A campaign contribution is not a bribe. Almost all candidates for public office rely on them. Limits exist to avoid abuse. Similarly, a tax loophole is not always a bad thing. They are most often passed to encourage certain behavior.
People pay accountants to deal with the huge complexity of the US Tax Code, and most who do so are not wealthy. Don't like it? Change the law. Simplify the Tax Code. Close the loopholes.
Is not raising the SALT deduction by 700% a loophole that primarily benefits the wealthy? Who recently proposed that? Democrats. Who bribed them to do it?
If not for loopholes (mostly involving the use of trusts) the wealthy would pay a 40% estate tax at death and all of their wealth would be taxed away within two or three generations. Can't we just close those loopholes? Would that not suffice to make all progressives happy? If it is unjust for one person to earn billions of dollars, is it not even more unjust for a person to simply inherit that much?
It can be like stealing from the future. How do we know what lies ahead? If we do not care for our environment, what will food cost? What will the cost of living actually be? Volatility can affect everyone. If water is polluted or drying up, even billions would be worthless. Taking care of a sustainable planet should be the goal. It is more valuable than money. It has the real value. Actually the only value for us all.
I'd suggest that the standard wealth measurement, applied to everyone, would eliminate all loopholes, and preferably all deductions. Keep it as simple and consistent as possible, so everyone plays (and pays) by the same set of rules.
Regarding the just/unjust questions, I think billionaires are ok if honestly built, and paying an honest fair share for their footprint.
Wealth, by inheritance, is another issue. Is someone's good fortune (pun not intended) unjust? My jury's out on that one.
Re: "paying an honest fair share for their footprint."
Consider a company making 10's of billions in annual profits. There's no way they can be paying their workers a significant portion of the value they are producing. It's mathematically impossible.
Markets are only efficient at reaching a fair price when buyers and sellers have roughly equal market power and access to information. There's nothing "free" about markets where one side can dictate terms to the other. Keeping workers financially insecure gives employers much greater market power. So it's not just greed in the sense of acquiring more wealth, it's also control over others.
It also reveals the absurd degree of entitlement he thinks he has earned and how his view of reality is absurdly different from others, including most of those who follow him on Twitter.
Isn't the whole point of taking $1 per year for being CEO, or having "only" stocks and options to avoid taxes at all? This game has been played to the billionaires' advantage for decades and never seems to leave them short of available funds. Even without substantial salaries, the billionaire class has space programs more significant than NASA's, and yachts that cost more than many small country's budgets.
I saw that twitter poll. Now if someone could give me his email so I can ask him for a new car. He wouldn't even miss the 25 or 30K. Boy if only. Anyone know how I could convince him to do it? Ahhh I'm only wishing and dreaming and screaming my head off as all this is such a heavy load that Billionaires get such big breaks with everything.
I think RR wants to indulge the unimportant but satisfying ad hominem on Elon Musk more than use Musk's disrespectful social media games as a way to expose the oft-overlooked snake oil at the heart of capitalist finance i.e. society's conflation of money (mostly arbitrary) with value (mostly objective); rewarding confidence trickery with fabulous reward because honest people let their best years be exploited for pennies by an insouciant market built on bullshit.
And here, again, I must point out where all that wealth came from and why it can be hoarded this way. So many of the rules regarding stocks, bonds, real estate, and other assets were crafted and purchased by the wealthy. Their ability to accumulate and manipulate their hoarded wealth was designed by them. Meanwhile, there's not a state in the union that can claim to truly have a "representative" in terms of federal elected officials who consistently votes for what the majority of their constituents support. We have a handful of puppets masquerading as leaders whose primary role is to take hits and provide cover for the companies and lobbying groups that allow Musk and all those like him to rule.
I swear to god, we're just a few years away from these same oligarchs wishing all the masses did was protest their wealth in local parks. If they don't start to balance things out, I worry we're in for quite the uncivil war.
.....those weren't black folks tearing up cities across the country last summer--those were our children, finally woke up to the fact they are the "minimum-wage generation", deep in student loan debt, who will never have a standard of living equal to their parents......their luxuries: being able to get their teeth cleaned/doctor's appointment. Formally hardworking middle class, living in tents in our cities is the indicator of the dysfunction of our economics [which is allegedly the efficient distribution of scarce resources]; how's that workin fer ya ?
This is why I think if Biden doesn't take a major swipe at wiping out student loans, the Dems are out of their mind and finally ruin themselves with teens - 30 somethings. Right now, young people feel totally manipulated. They've watched and voted in Dems under the premise of holding people accountable for Iraq, for the real estate collapse, for the mishandling of COVID, for the endless Trump-era corruption...and yet none of that was done. Once again, the young feel totally used. But the larger issue is about money. They've watched trillions in tax dollars fly out the door for wars with no end goals....for banks and executives that broke the world...for companies that didn't need it during COVID while people starved. We have undeniable proof that money in the hands of people is better than money in the hands of corporations, but here we are, again, giving billions to the private sector. If we can find trillions for banks that don't deserve it and who never use it the way they say they will, surely we have the money to help students with their debt, which would be life changing and spur saving AND spending like we've never seen. But no, donors wouldn't like that, so Dems won't do it.
In the end, maybe Nader was right during the Bush/Gore fiasco...everyone was obsessing on him for ruining things when he was pleading with us to see just how much the Democratic party had become another enemy of the people. If this tech-savvy, repeatedly exploited generation wakes up to that, best to join in o hide, because it's going to be wild.
I don't believe the United State will engage in a civil war because of income inequality any time soon. More likely it will be over something that sparks real anger. But America's poor still has more stuff and lives better than most other countries. And most of our comfort comes from our stability. If we engage in any civil war for any reason, we will no longer be the global superpower and China will be. And leadership has its priviledges.
America is excellent at justifying immoral acts. As inequality goes up, crime will rise up also.
I don’t think you’re right. I think it’s the drowning middle class currently trying to keep its head above water who will trip a switch towards Revolution. I’ve been working hard since my teens, college educated, paid off student loans and facing living in vehicle in the next few years because cost of living is outpacing salaries. I was shocked to find out how many people like me are already living on family’s & friends couches, sharing a small apartment with a group of people or in vehicles.
Historically, political revolutions occur when peoples' expectations for better lives are thwarted. The vast American middle class, created largely in the wake of World War II, created a boomer generation that (on the whole) continued to do better for themselves, "trading up" in America. But their children have not fared nearly as well. This is especially true of whites in rural areas, without college degrees. They've been on a sharply downward escalator. They began the revolution by voting for a demagogue in 2016, and many are sticking with his lie that the 2020 election was stolen from him.
This is why the Federal minimum wage should be a living wage of $18.75 per hour and Medicare for all should be implemented to save our country from revolution. Social Security was the first Safety net, then Medicare for seniors and the Minimum wage was a livable wage for the boomers. The Minimum wage should catch up to the living wage and medical care should improve to meet the needs of our society. When Unions were strong, the entire workforce rose up with the union members as a template. Davis-Bacon, Taft- Heartily protected all workers but today, States have taken away rights for unions to organize or exist financially.
That is precisely why I feel the middle class WILL lead the charge, if we can get out of our own way, of course.
If Social Media is anything to go by, I saw the masses headed that way in early to mid aughts - the masses eyes opening to climate change, corporate excesses, our quickening downward economic slide, and saying so in a fairly united way.
Then the dis/misinformation & amplification tactics started. Suddenly it was mass fighting: women against men, Black against White, Young against Older, and leading towards Conservatives against Liberals, etc.
We’re only now starting to come back to the awareness of who is holding us back from improving ourselves, but unfortunately the masses are greatly divided and unwilling to see past the ideological red herrings pulling our focus away. Now we’re losing the tools of democracy which would help us fix the problem without violence.
After that, the masses will have little recourse to make changes in the time honored way, and have a real Revolution, only it won’t be an attack on the Capitol, it will be attacks on the money giving certain people power over us.
Young and tech-savvy individuals from our own country will learn from other countries and hold corporations & institutions computer systems hostage.
Wealthy people won’t be able to leave their homes for fear of being kidnapped.
It will be very ugly.
Corporation owners, their Board Members, their stockholders had better open their eyes to the future they’re setting themselves up for and stop funding anti-democracy politicians.
It seems to me that if I am required to take required distributions on my pre-tax investments at age 72, then all investors should at the very least be required to do the same … and in my mind unrealized gaines are pretty much the same as pre-tax investments.
IRS: Hi, Elon, it's tax time. You don't take a salary, so we don't tax that. Your stock, well, we don't tax that either. But how much did you borrow to "live" for the year? We'll be taxing that at a reduced amount (not 100% reduction) to include the interest you pay. We have decided that what you borrow in this special way - a way not open to the rest of us - will count as income because you use it same as everyone else uses their income, namely, to live. Fair enough?
ELON: But but but
Hilarious comment, well done. But I suspect that Elon doesn't just live on funds withdrawn from only one of his companies, as there are other ways in which the very rich get by, including but not limited to company-paid housing, transportation, travel and lots of very imaginative stuff as well.
The crusty old former head of General Electric, Jack Welch, comes to mind as he had finagled tons of expensive benefits and of course had GE take on all liabilities (such as poisoning the Hudson River with dioxin).
In a fast search via Google, there's a most interesting description of some of what Welch gathered up for himself: "In 1996, Welch and GE had agreed to a "retention package" worth $2.5 million, and which promised continued access after Welch's retirement to benefits he had received as CEO—including an apartment in New York, baseball tickets and the use of a private jet and chauffeured car." I'm sure there was lots more.
I wonder what a good forensic tax accountant could find in a deep dive into Elon's finances.
yep.
Promising to sell $30 billion of stock based on a twitter poll is like saying "I have such a ridiculously huge amount of money I don't know what to do with it." Why doesn't he commit to doing something useful with his money?
Would it not be possible to change the tax rules to count borrowings against stock as taxable realized gains?
Yes indeed. I'd target over $100K.
And with an enhanced tax rate for that sort of income.
yes, ken, taxing such loans as income. as we see, when the value of the collateral decreases, the capital gain would need to be recalculated. too complicated. just call it income.
John, it's probably not that complicated. If you pay $X in tax from stock-secured borrowing, it just counts as a $X advance payment on future capital gains tax. It doesn't matter whether the value of the stock subsequently goes up or down.
more money than brains?
I read that he plans to take humanity to a better planet that is not burning up.
Unfortunately, that is what it has been dressed up to be. More likely, the foray into space using vast amounts of public money is to start up a viable 'private' space haulage industry. Billionaires are not here to save humanity, they can see what is on the horizon and it doesn't involve airlifting humanity from a scorching, war-ridden hell-scape.
I had a hunch that it was more about that and also getting in on the 'ground floor' of space dominance. Certainly not a noble cause like saving humanity.
The Vulcans will contest this will to power.
As if we don't have enough challengers! Haha!
Robert, thanks for sharing information that most of us would never know about otherwise. I try to stay informed by reading news magazines and newspapers, watching news show. etc., but your information is unique. Thanks for doing what you're doing!
Thanks for your thanks, Donna.
Yes, Dr. Reich's Behind the Curtain insights are why I subscribe.
I just upped my subscription to a year!
As far I know, he started his empire out of a loan in the amount of $ 465 millions from the department of energy. He used this money to develop the manufacturing facility in Fremont, California. So he used "TAX PAYERS MONEY" to starting his business, still he refuses to pay fair taxes? such a freaking double face moron. The people of United States, the tax payers, the same people that now he refuses to help back just by doing the right thing, These people help him to be what he is now...there is a very old proverb that says, "Do not bite the hand that feeds you". Soon or later. This Immigrant, son of a Canadian woman and a South African father and raised in Pretoria, should know that the American dream and the Idea of this experiment called America, is what allowed him to become the rich man he is today, I not taking away his merits and intellectual capacity, but intellectual capacity and merits are not a substitution for common sense, the sense of social responsibility and the moral and ethical obligation to do the right thing, in this case, PAY BACK YOUR DEBT WITH THE NATION AND THE PEOPLE THAT GIVES YOU THE OPPORTUNITY AND THE FINANCIAL ACCESS TO FULFILL YOUR "OWN AMERICAN DREAM" in other words," don't be a freaking moron"
and he is moving his Fremont operation to TX now that CA hit the point of holding him accountable to follow the laws protecting labor (nondiscrimination, health and safety, etc.)
but don’t forget that exercising stock options is a taxable event. that’s why they sell shares. to pay the tax.
He is crazy like a fox.
People like that need to be shamed. Avoiding tax is a reflection of their narcissism. Make it uncomfortable to be a narcissist and you might get somewhere.
sigh
I will never stop saying that I think it was a great mistake when the US mainstream decided that White male assholes were adorable and hilarious.
Some countries have repealed their wealth tax due to the complexity of determining a person's wealth, particularly if illiquid assets which are difficult to value properly, such as a privately owned business or a Van Gogh painting, or assets that are hidden in other countries, are the main portion of a person's wealth. The result is lots of effort to track down and value assets and fighting never ending court battles. The tax revenue obtained was not worth the effort. Why not tax a portion of the billionaire bank loans? Why not impose a consumption tax on people with a net worth over 1 billion?
The whole "some countries" is very misleading, we as a nation shall not act like "some other countries". We are totally different from other nation starting from the whole concept and idea that "all men are created equally "...therefore everyone of the citizens of our nation have the same rights, duties, privileges and obligations. Big corporations and the top 400 richest families shall be abiding under the same rules, and as a nation, we, the people shall demand from our political leaders to correct, modify and enforcing legislations tha reflect the nature of the principles stated in the declaration of independence and in the constitution. An idea have no value if not applied and enacted
One of the things that's different about America is that the wealthy have enormous influence over the writing of tax laws through their campaign contributions, media ownership, lobbyists, investment managers, and accounting firms who represent their financial interests.
There's a long history of the wealthy avoiding taxes by changing the tax laws to give themselves advantages.
I have to agree partially with you in this topic, but also we shall add that the reason why this is happening is due to the fault or criminal intentions of the Republican party. For example; the GOP and the corrupted administration of Gerald Ford, and let me explain how and when. In 1905 The president Theodore Roosevelt recognized the deep need for campaign finance reforms and along the congress they enacted a ban for corporate contributions for political purposes. By 1971 Congress made these reforms more regulated by the Federal Campaign act, still a very difficult law to enforcing, after the scandal and financial abuses during the Nixon administration , the congress amended the legislation in 1974 (after Nixon impeachment) making illegal for corporations to donate toward political campaigns. This changed in 1976 when the Supreme court decisions were "Buckely V/S Valeo" Changing legislation and allowing "marketing and advertising contributions". Later under The Bush Administration (Republican again) The supreme court allowed in the case of "Citizens United V/S Federal election commission in 2010 allowed money to flow from the corporations to the politicians running for office, specially Republicans while they are the guys behind cutting taxes to the rich and corporations. Since then the Senators and congressmen from the GOP not any longer have to try to convincing you about their "better ideas" while their funding is coming from the same people they are serving, the corporations and the top 400 richest families in this nation. There is our big problem.
Rodrigo, have you read the Powell memorandum from 1971? You might find it informative. It was a blueprint for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to dominate the political system for years. Possibly forever. We are seeing the fruition of this plan and Trump was the bugle call to start the war. Divide the country and keep us fighting each other while the 0.1% go about their business and dominate the world. Shortages are created to make the common people unhappy with the government. The government is in place so we can be angry at someone without bothering them. When we have a solidarity movement, such as unionizing, they, the billionaires, create a new issue for the "great unwashed masses" to fight about. Funny how easily we are manipulated.
I agree. The reason I mentioned influence over the writing of tax laws is that many people have argued we shouldn't criticize the wealthy over paying their fair share, they're just following the rules. What they may not realize is that some accounting firms have actually arranged for employees to leave the firm, take a government job where they could influence the tax laws, and then return to the firm to receive huge bonuses for saving their clients millions of dollars.
Personally I'm very interested in root causes. History proves that if the gap between the haves and have nots becomes too large, civilization will fail and even the wealthy don't want that. Investing in each others well being is the foundation of civilization.
Today the corruption is out in the open for all to see. While it can be disheartening, it also affords an opportunity to begin cleaning it up.
I am not opposed to having the ultra-wealthy pay more tax, but if we are going to impose a wealth tax, we should study the experience of other countries to avoid making the same mistakes they made. You are right that we are different from other nations and therefore some of their experiences with a wealth tax may not apply to us. I agree that the elites are playing "favorites" with the wealthy and this must stop.
Mumbo jumbo, whiz bang, okey doke, casino economics........the bottom line: it is now clear, we must find a way to FORCE the elite to pay a fair share. We need to determine, firmly, what the fair share will be--and get on with the business of forcing them to pay. It could not have arrived at this point, graphs of wealth distributions like Olympic ski jump slopes on steroids, without malevolence towards average joe population, who in turn are forced to eat the burden.
Mr. Musk used government money to pay his start up expenses? that had to be worth something. People who get help with say, a medical degree, often must work in an area where there is a particular need. for a specific time. But the scale of wealth and it's changeability or volatility makes this not compute well. What about Elizabeth Warren's idea of a simple 2% per dollar (?) tax on wealth?
I have no sympathy for Elon Musk. His fortune has reached the point where it is self-sustaining, and if his only reason to not want to pay taxes is that he would have to sell stock, that puts him way above many of my friends, who, when the last round of "tax cuts" (which were really just withholding changes, along with the loss of quite a few deductions for work-related expenses) hit, had to tap their savings, or, in a few cases, take out loans to pay their unexpectedly high taxes.
Unlike many people, I have no problem with the billionaire space race; lots of valuable discoveries and inventions have come from exploration. I do, however, have a problem with them engaging in such a contest *instead* of paying taxes, especially given that some of the funding they are using comes from the very taxes they avoid paying. I also have a problem with the ultra-wealthy refusing to pay their workers - who ultimately provide those riches - a living wage, while making more in a minute, and in some cases a second, than their workers will make in a lifetime. These people are so rich that paying all of their workers a living wage wouldn't make a dent in their fortunes, and would, by increasing peoples' disposable income, make it more possible for those workers to buy products from their companies and improve the economy in general - which would ultimately improve their profits anyway. It seems like a win-win to me, and I don't understand why they don't seem to care. Perhaps they've become so rich they've forgotten about the peons they stepped on, and continue to step on, to reach the rarified heights they inhabit. Or perhaps they're just greedy.
Both!
Seems like a ridiculous exercise overall. Let's establish a consistent and fair way to determine wealth, and use that to determine everyone's fair share of taxes. It would create a standard measure that could simplify taxation overall, similar to the impact pure Medicare For All would have on healthcare.
Mark, the ultra-wealthy basically have two means of avoiding taxes: bribing lawmakers to create (or keep) tax loopholes, and paying their accountants to find and use them. If the first didn't occur, there'd be no need to worry about the second. So again, it comes down to getting big money (and its corruption) out of our politics.
Dr Reich, I doubt that any "bribing" actually takes place. A campaign contribution is not a bribe. Almost all candidates for public office rely on them. Limits exist to avoid abuse. Similarly, a tax loophole is not always a bad thing. They are most often passed to encourage certain behavior.
People pay accountants to deal with the huge complexity of the US Tax Code, and most who do so are not wealthy. Don't like it? Change the law. Simplify the Tax Code. Close the loopholes.
Is not raising the SALT deduction by 700% a loophole that primarily benefits the wealthy? Who recently proposed that? Democrats. Who bribed them to do it?
I feel like I've been here before. ;-)
If not for loopholes (mostly involving the use of trusts) the wealthy would pay a 40% estate tax at death and all of their wealth would be taxed away within two or three generations. Can't we just close those loopholes? Would that not suffice to make all progressives happy? If it is unjust for one person to earn billions of dollars, is it not even more unjust for a person to simply inherit that much?
It can be like stealing from the future. How do we know what lies ahead? If we do not care for our environment, what will food cost? What will the cost of living actually be? Volatility can affect everyone. If water is polluted or drying up, even billions would be worthless. Taking care of a sustainable planet should be the goal. It is more valuable than money. It has the real value. Actually the only value for us all.
I'd suggest that the standard wealth measurement, applied to everyone, would eliminate all loopholes, and preferably all deductions. Keep it as simple and consistent as possible, so everyone plays (and pays) by the same set of rules.
Regarding the just/unjust questions, I think billionaires are ok if honestly built, and paying an honest fair share for their footprint.
Wealth, by inheritance, is another issue. Is someone's good fortune (pun not intended) unjust? My jury's out on that one.
Re: "paying an honest fair share for their footprint."
Consider a company making 10's of billions in annual profits. There's no way they can be paying their workers a significant portion of the value they are producing. It's mathematically impossible.
Markets are only efficient at reaching a fair price when buyers and sellers have roughly equal market power and access to information. There's nothing "free" about markets where one side can dictate terms to the other. Keeping workers financially insecure gives employers much greater market power. So it's not just greed in the sense of acquiring more wealth, it's also control over others.
Absolutely!
It also reveals the absurd degree of entitlement he thinks he has earned and how his view of reality is absurdly different from others, including most of those who follow him on Twitter.
Isn't the whole point of taking $1 per year for being CEO, or having "only" stocks and options to avoid taxes at all? This game has been played to the billionaires' advantage for decades and never seems to leave them short of available funds. Even without substantial salaries, the billionaire class has space programs more significant than NASA's, and yachts that cost more than many small country's budgets.
Don’t forget private islands too!
I saw that twitter poll. Now if someone could give me his email so I can ask him for a new car. He wouldn't even miss the 25 or 30K. Boy if only. Anyone know how I could convince him to do it? Ahhh I'm only wishing and dreaming and screaming my head off as all this is such a heavy load that Billionaires get such big breaks with everything.
he could learn a lot from oprah lol and rawlings
This article falls between two stools.
I think RR wants to indulge the unimportant but satisfying ad hominem on Elon Musk more than use Musk's disrespectful social media games as a way to expose the oft-overlooked snake oil at the heart of capitalist finance i.e. society's conflation of money (mostly arbitrary) with value (mostly objective); rewarding confidence trickery with fabulous reward because honest people let their best years be exploited for pennies by an insouciant market built on bullshit.
And also just because he can! and why not? And we still have the haves and the have nots!
And here, again, I must point out where all that wealth came from and why it can be hoarded this way. So many of the rules regarding stocks, bonds, real estate, and other assets were crafted and purchased by the wealthy. Their ability to accumulate and manipulate their hoarded wealth was designed by them. Meanwhile, there's not a state in the union that can claim to truly have a "representative" in terms of federal elected officials who consistently votes for what the majority of their constituents support. We have a handful of puppets masquerading as leaders whose primary role is to take hits and provide cover for the companies and lobbying groups that allow Musk and all those like him to rule.
I swear to god, we're just a few years away from these same oligarchs wishing all the masses did was protest their wealth in local parks. If they don't start to balance things out, I worry we're in for quite the uncivil war.
.....those weren't black folks tearing up cities across the country last summer--those were our children, finally woke up to the fact they are the "minimum-wage generation", deep in student loan debt, who will never have a standard of living equal to their parents......their luxuries: being able to get their teeth cleaned/doctor's appointment. Formally hardworking middle class, living in tents in our cities is the indicator of the dysfunction of our economics [which is allegedly the efficient distribution of scarce resources]; how's that workin fer ya ?
This is why I think if Biden doesn't take a major swipe at wiping out student loans, the Dems are out of their mind and finally ruin themselves with teens - 30 somethings. Right now, young people feel totally manipulated. They've watched and voted in Dems under the premise of holding people accountable for Iraq, for the real estate collapse, for the mishandling of COVID, for the endless Trump-era corruption...and yet none of that was done. Once again, the young feel totally used. But the larger issue is about money. They've watched trillions in tax dollars fly out the door for wars with no end goals....for banks and executives that broke the world...for companies that didn't need it during COVID while people starved. We have undeniable proof that money in the hands of people is better than money in the hands of corporations, but here we are, again, giving billions to the private sector. If we can find trillions for banks that don't deserve it and who never use it the way they say they will, surely we have the money to help students with their debt, which would be life changing and spur saving AND spending like we've never seen. But no, donors wouldn't like that, so Dems won't do it.
In the end, maybe Nader was right during the Bush/Gore fiasco...everyone was obsessing on him for ruining things when he was pleading with us to see just how much the Democratic party had become another enemy of the people. If this tech-savvy, repeatedly exploited generation wakes up to that, best to join in o hide, because it's going to be wild.
History repeats itself, and the greed goes on!
You mean French style Revolution if the masses could all smarten up and stop fighting each other.
Sounds workable
To say nothing of planet disintegration! It will make Watts look like a picnic!
I don't believe the United State will engage in a civil war because of income inequality any time soon. More likely it will be over something that sparks real anger. But America's poor still has more stuff and lives better than most other countries. And most of our comfort comes from our stability. If we engage in any civil war for any reason, we will no longer be the global superpower and China will be. And leadership has its priviledges.
America is excellent at justifying immoral acts. As inequality goes up, crime will rise up also.
I don’t think you’re right. I think it’s the drowning middle class currently trying to keep its head above water who will trip a switch towards Revolution. I’ve been working hard since my teens, college educated, paid off student loans and facing living in vehicle in the next few years because cost of living is outpacing salaries. I was shocked to find out how many people like me are already living on family’s & friends couches, sharing a small apartment with a group of people or in vehicles.
HARDWORKING. COLLEGE EDUCATED.
Historically, political revolutions occur when peoples' expectations for better lives are thwarted. The vast American middle class, created largely in the wake of World War II, created a boomer generation that (on the whole) continued to do better for themselves, "trading up" in America. But their children have not fared nearly as well. This is especially true of whites in rural areas, without college degrees. They've been on a sharply downward escalator. They began the revolution by voting for a demagogue in 2016, and many are sticking with his lie that the 2020 election was stolen from him.
This is why the Federal minimum wage should be a living wage of $18.75 per hour and Medicare for all should be implemented to save our country from revolution. Social Security was the first Safety net, then Medicare for seniors and the Minimum wage was a livable wage for the boomers. The Minimum wage should catch up to the living wage and medical care should improve to meet the needs of our society. When Unions were strong, the entire workforce rose up with the union members as a template. Davis-Bacon, Taft- Heartily protected all workers but today, States have taken away rights for unions to organize or exist financially.
Dear Mr Reich,
That is precisely why I feel the middle class WILL lead the charge, if we can get out of our own way, of course.
If Social Media is anything to go by, I saw the masses headed that way in early to mid aughts - the masses eyes opening to climate change, corporate excesses, our quickening downward economic slide, and saying so in a fairly united way.
Then the dis/misinformation & amplification tactics started. Suddenly it was mass fighting: women against men, Black against White, Young against Older, and leading towards Conservatives against Liberals, etc.
We’re only now starting to come back to the awareness of who is holding us back from improving ourselves, but unfortunately the masses are greatly divided and unwilling to see past the ideological red herrings pulling our focus away. Now we’re losing the tools of democracy which would help us fix the problem without violence.
After that, the masses will have little recourse to make changes in the time honored way, and have a real Revolution, only it won’t be an attack on the Capitol, it will be attacks on the money giving certain people power over us.
Young and tech-savvy individuals from our own country will learn from other countries and hold corporations & institutions computer systems hostage.
Wealthy people won’t be able to leave their homes for fear of being kidnapped.
It will be very ugly.
Corporation owners, their Board Members, their stockholders had better open their eyes to the future they’re setting themselves up for and stop funding anti-democracy politicians.
It seems to me that if I am required to take required distributions on my pre-tax investments at age 72, then all investors should at the very least be required to do the same … and in my mind unrealized gaines are pretty much the same as pre-tax investments.