Post physique and jawline

I'd be down for a death tax of 100% over $50m per child with that increases 1:1 with inflation. When Jeff Bezos dies his children get $50m worth and the rest is a controlled way via SEC rules over a period of time with all proceeds going to the govt. Forces billionaires to have personal philanthropic arms of their family office to ensure the govt doesn't waste their money after death.

Honestly who needs more than $50m of todays spending power passed onto them? Trust fund kids are chit anyways.

Where I live, there's a TON of old money that gets passed onto the next generations. Really divides the haves and have nots here. Plenty of kids with new cars and homes that most people take a lifetime to obtain. I personally don't get jealous cuz it provides me with drive.

One thing I really like about a large death tax...small companies might actually pay their employees better wages since they can't take that money with them. But there's always work arounds with any tax, and they typically don't work. The well-off people are there because they are financially smart and there's always ways around it.

I'm not sure the best way to go about this. I'd hate to see money leave a local area too. The local govt does a lot for local businesses and is quite favorable, so I just think that money should at least stay in the local area if some sort of tax or death tax ever comes about. Each situation is different as well.

Our area has a few billionaires and some have been quite generous by giving money to uni's and hospitals, but it doesn't do a whole lot for the average person. Most of those entities would be just fine without the money and find other means to get it. What bothers me is how many companies they own where people aren't paid relatively well, the billionaires reap the profits and do what they see fit with it. Most people that are pro-capitalism see that as fair, and I do too to a degree. I just don't see why people worship these local billionaires when so many of their employees barely make it financially. The employees are paid a fair market wage, and that's all. And the only reason they buy these companies is to make more money.

It's not like their businesses are changing the world or making the community a better place other than offering jobs. Props to them for creating so many jobs, but that's where my praise sort of ends.

Is it really any different from income tax brackets or covid payments? I'm pro flat tax btw.

Crony capitalism.The government has not done chit in maintaining fair play ever. Most monopolies that are broken up are only created thanks to big government encouraging them in the first place. Unions are more worthless than welfare leeches and evil.I don't think you realize how retarded you have to be to become impoverished. I can work a minimum wage (at the federal level) job 40 hours a week for 50 weeks out of the year and still be above the poverty line by a comfortable couple grand. "Poor" is a different discussion.All of this garbage is because we have too much government. End the fed. End all taxes but sales. End most spending programs. End 99% of regulation.False. We have too much damn spending with social programs.

Our military is the welfare program for NATO. All western countries are leeches who do not want to invest in a big military. It is time we went isolationist and trimmed defense spending or started asking them to pay their fair share.

False. The 70s was one of the worst periods in recent history thanks to stagflation. Higher taxes did not do anything because there were so many tax credits and deductions.

Agreed.Well I do remember some monopolies at least being broken up in the past, though it may be that the government did encourage them.

I was so angry when the "fix" for our banks was to make them bigger instead of breaking them up into smaller regional banks. So they went from "too big to fail" to "too bigger to fail". Should have broken them each up into 4 or 5 chunks to put us back in a state of actual market competition and so taxpayers aren't on the hook to save them when their greed clouds their judgement to a fatal extent.

Unions can go either way. They can become corrupt, same as any hierarchy involving humans [governments, organized religions, universities, etc.]. But like those other institutions unions can do some good if they properly function as leverage for workers to claim better working conditions or compensation.Wasn't really referring to the official federal poverty line, which even the government knows is BS. I believe it is something like 5X the cost of a month of groceries per a Frugal Eating Plan made up by someone way back when most families had a full time homemaker to carefully shop for the best prices, and plan and cook meals.

Housing seems like a fair measurement IMO which is why I post that chart a lot. Apartments want 3X the rent in gross income. Most decent ones are at least $1200 just for a one bedroom so you would need an income of $43,200 per year to qualify.

A lot of individuals do not earn that much. Yes, I know, you could live with someone and not alone, just like you could ride the bus and live on beans and rice. Still think that it is a fair approximation of a "living wage" in the US at this time.If you mean the Federal Reserve Bank, then I'm good with that.

Sales taxes are regressive. But I would like to have a simpler and more fair tax system.

Our social spending really isn't that high and mostly goes to minor children, the elderly, and the disabled. If wages were higher the small percentage of social spending that goes to working able bodied adults would probable go down a lot.

This is dated, but they found 90% of social spending went to the elderly and disabled:

https://www.cbpp.org/research/contra...benefits-go-toFine by me.We did have stagflation. And that is one of the biggest reasons we ended up with Reagan and Carter wasn't re-elected. Carter was the one who wanted to keep a balanced budget, while Reagan wanted to cut taxes under the premises that it would improve the economy so much there wouldn't be an actual shortfall in revenue...everyone would be making so much money the revenue would be about the same; aka trickle down economics.

I'm actually old enough to remember. First president I really recall was Ford. I don't know about the credits and deductions in the 70s. I was a kid that watched the news and read the papers, but I wasn'tthatinto it.

Category? If you mean % of U.S. adults with a mental illness or serious mental illness:If someone can't hold down a job because of a mental illness then those three rules become entirely irrelevant.

Most millionaires reinvest their money back into the market.

So, they're doing the right thing.

Pure strawman by you. No source for your claim?