7 ms·

I don't think people realize how much evening out society will impact them. This is a very US (and probably EU) way of thinking. Everyone thinks they are midd

I don't think people realize how much evening out society will impact them. This is a very US (and probably EU) way of thinking. Everyone thinks they are middle class but when it comes down to it there are far more people in poverty and that evening things out will bring down the quality of life for the people advocating for evening out things.

juvvel 2mo ago
No. This is what capitalists want you to believe. The truth is that we are all subsiziding the capital gains of the wealthiest 2%. You could easily pay for generous social security programs by taxing property and capital more (as opposed to labor). But the ultra-wealthy point at the weakest and poorest and tell the average worker "look, they're coming for your house and your humble savings!". This is a very deliberate distraction.
- WarmWash 2mo ago
  Have you looked at wealth distribution or do you just read social media headlines and comments all day? https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/dataviz/dfa/distribute/chart/ https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/dataviz/dfa/distr... See that 50-90% and 90-99%? That's where all the money is. Moreover, the top 1% have tons of assets, but not much actual money. Any "evening out" will come mostly from the 50-99% class. If you want to see a crack in the echochamber, ask yourself why no publication has ever published this chart?
  - gilbetron 2mo ago
    That data is published quite often, no conspiracy here. The point is that the top 1% can be taxed more heavily, not that they own the majority of wealth.
    - welshwelsh 2mo ago
      I'm not sure taxing them more heavily will actually result in significantly more tax revenue in the long run. Think about it: to pay for this tax, the rich will need to sell their assets. Who is going to buy those assets? What impact would that have on the asset price?
      - inigyou 2mo ago
        Reduced inequality brings its own benefits already by itself.
      - juvvel 2mo ago
        We could start by taxing capital gains progressively, similar to salaries. In my country, you pay a flat 25% no matter if you make one dollar or a billion. Why should a worker have to give away up to 50% of their salary when people with capital only have to pay 25% tax?
inigyou 2mo ago
Shouldn't we do it anyway?

juvvel 2mo ago

No. This is what capitalists want you to believe. The truth is that we are all subsiziding the capital gains of the wealthiest 2%. You could easily pay for generous social security programs by taxing property and capital more (as opposed to labor). But the ultra-wealthy point at the weakest and poorest and tell the average worker "look, they're coming for your house and your humble savings!". This is a very deliberate distraction.

WarmWash 2mo ago
Have you looked at wealth distribution or do you just read social media headlines and comments all day? https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/dataviz/dfa/distribute/chart/ https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/dataviz/dfa/distr... See that 50-90% and 90-99%? That's where all the money is. Moreover, the top 1% have tons of assets, but not much actual money. Any "evening out" will come mostly from the 50-99% class. If you want to see a crack in the echochamber, ask yourself why no publication has ever published this chart?
- gilbetron 2mo ago
  That data is published quite often, no conspiracy here. The point is that the top 1% can be taxed more heavily, not that they own the majority of wealth.
  - welshwelsh 2mo ago
    I'm not sure taxing them more heavily will actually result in significantly more tax revenue in the long run. Think about it: to pay for this tax, the rich will need to sell their assets. Who is going to buy those assets? What impact would that have on the asset price?
    - inigyou 2mo ago
      Reduced inequality brings its own benefits already by itself.
    - juvvel 2mo ago
      We could start by taxing capital gains progressively, similar to salaries. In my country, you pay a flat 25% no matter if you make one dollar or a billion. Why should a worker have to give away up to 50% of their salary when people with capital only have to pay 25% tax?

inigyou 2mo ago

Shouldn't we do it anyway?