Ephraïm de Rooij
Robert ReichBy the way, a tax of up to 5% on the world’s multi-millionaires and billionaires could raise $1.7 trillion/year.
That would be enough to lift 2 billion people out of poverty and fund a global plan to end hunger.
We can't afford NOT to tax the rich.
Debbie Hill@rbreich yeah, but we all know the Republicans want the poor to pay it!!
Jasper 🍉
Jamie Nordmeyer
The BEST Words@rbreich America cannot afford to lift our country on the backs of the middle class. We need all hand on deck. That includes corporations and billionaires. Pay your taxes, or go elsewhere. We support your courts, airports, police, Military, roads and schools.
bysteveguthrie@rbreich But that would be fair. Have you lost your frigging mind?
Mary M. Redoutey@bysteveguthrie @rbreich It is , of course, much more fair than the regressive 30% sales tax on purchases which GOP is floating ... Of course, the tax they like hits those with lower incomes hardest as they must spend all of their income on just basic necessities... And must pay higher costs as well on goods and services because they are not well connected.
@MaryMRedoutey @rbreich I meant wouldn't. But points are taken!
Nichol Brummer@rbreich Actually, we could, as government can create money and take on debt as is necessary for important expenditure.
But taxing the rich is important to reduce their extraordinary and undeserved power. As Keynes said: euthanasia of the rentiers.
Aijustice@rbreich ya. That’s what federal income tax is suppose to do. but we see how that’s going.
Mike@aijustice @rbreich It used to do that — until Reagan’s second term.
Bodhi O'SheaGreat idea! How about a #MichaelHudson type tax on land! He seems more Georgist than Anarchist, but let's make lending for rentals or real-estate less desirable or profitable for bankers and make housing inflation equal to CPI or commensurate with wage inflation. If we're working in the capitalist paradigm of economics and finance, then land tax ought to be a good first step. Means test it - of course. As Hudson says, "That's the only way it works." But, isn't that what the in-fighting among the Republicans is all about - old school land aristocracy and real estate capitalism vs finance capitalism - not talking about what they say but what they do. And, along those lines, let's tax cap gains, royalties, rent, interest, profit from employees, and so on. Isn't that the point of taxes? Namely to control or dictate behavior? Let's control the capitalists - the 6%
DeanBaker13@rbreich Can we afford to not change the structures, like government-granted patent and copyright monopolies, that make some people hugely rich?
Shingo Mouse 🌳@DeanBaker13 @rbreich Well, patent, copyright, and trademark monopolies is something I'm somewhat concerned about. The reason being is because I get afraid if there is an idea I come up with, and there are many ideas that I do come up with, one of the monopolies in question may already have a patent, copyright, or trademark on it.
Richservo 
@rbreich as if any of it would go back into the country! It would ALL go to corporations.
@rbreich
Totally agree.
This is almost a rhetorical statement. Of 100 people possibly 95 would agree. It holds as unquestionably true.
So why would it need "strong popular support" to pressure the govs, etc, etc. People, I guess, don't need to change their minds, or be better informed, about it.
The super rich control the govs and control the narrative for the common good.
So taxing them to alleviate the poor is nice no doubt, but how about taxing then out of existence.
TQdemocrat@rbreich love the idea. Not how we get the Russians and Saudis on board
Joe D@rbreich. Consider a small privately owned business ( construction, car dealer, manufacturer, farm, etc) Owners' assets make them a " multi- millionaire " Let's assume wealth = $5 million. But it is all tied up in the business assets. Tax them an additional 5%? $250,000 IN ADDITION to taxes already paid? Impossible for that to be paid without major economic harm, especially employees being laid-off.
Trust me, this is what would happen.
--A small business owner
Julescelt@joedangerdan @rbreich Marginal tax rate...
They're talking about what you pocket in earnings, yearly, not total assets. That is all taxed differently.
@julescelt01 @rbreich
Respectfully, not sure what you mean by "pocket the earnings." Our S corp earnings are already taxed (b/w Fed and state, we pay 40+% annually - unlike Trump!) Rest is always kept in the business. We take salaries (& pay 40+% tax on that!).
All I am saying is that for small business w/ very narrow margins, 5% will come from operating capital, & something will have to give.
We may appear "wealthy" on paper, but looks can be deceiving. Different world from Musk, Bezos, etc.
Respectfully, not sure what you mean by "pocket the earnings." Our S corp earnings are already taxed (b/w Fed and state, we pay 40+% annually - unlike Trump!) Rest is always kept in the business. We take salaries (& pay 40+% tax on that!).
All I am saying is that for small business w/ very narrow margins, 5% will come from operating capital, & something will have to give.
We may appear "wealthy" on paper, but looks can be deceiving. Different world from Musk, Bezos, etc.
@joedangerdan @rbreich The saying is; 'what you put into your pocket in earnings.' In other words your 'takehome'.
Tips for Overcomers@rbreich
If we raised taxes on the rich, then who would pay all the politicians?
If we raised taxes on the rich, then who would pay all the politicians?
nobodyzhome 
@rbreich
The biggest problem is they don't have much income. And they borrow against their massive (on paper) wealth to fund their lifestyles. Buy, borrow, die. They have capital Gaines on what they cash in to pay the loan, but that pales in comparison to the wealth they can borrow against.
The biggest problem is they don't have much income. And they borrow against their massive (on paper) wealth to fund their lifestyles. Buy, borrow, die. They have capital Gaines on what they cash in to pay the loan, but that pales in comparison to the wealth they can borrow against.
KingoftheWhackadoodles@rbreich What would that number be for only the US?
William Hawkins@rbreich That’s where the money is…
Stargeezer Smith@rbreich
The trouble is, the best investment some of these billionaires have made is buying their own political party.
The trouble is, the best investment some of these billionaires have made is buying their own political party.
Raphael Kaitz@rbreich Why is $1.7 trillion enough to get 2 billion people out of poverty? Is less than $1,000 a person enough?
PampaThe figure, and the statement, come from this report:
[I think the small per capita figure you mention relates to (one of) the many definitions of poverty, and just how compressed the income curve is at the bottom.]
Scott Bailey@rbreich persuasive but not as full-feeling as ‘eat the rich’.
Old Man Miller@rbreich Or that would be enough to keep the Repuglicans happy for at least a month.
pizzapal@rbreich i got a kind of honger
Alex Bardsley 
@rbreich How about we just rescind the Trump tax cuts to start?
schoolingdiana@rbreich Let’s go back to Eisenhower’s tax rates for individuals and corporations. No need to use kid gloves.
meowomonYeah, funny how all those tax breaks failed to trickle down. And people are still falling for that crap. Fool me once...
C0ppertop@rbreich the CSs should be bled.
Christopher Neitzert@rbreich now all we need are uncorrupted politicians to make that tax happen. Due to a shortage of those, i suspect we'll be told to make due. meanwhile, you're an astute man, what sort of wines pair well with roast billionaire?
NicholasR@rbreich Let’s avoid attacking the wealthy and make the case a low rate tax on wealth can help them. Most people aspire to be wealthy and Democracy allows anyone to prosper. I suggest we call it an Elite levy.
@rbreich To make it palatable to the elite dedicate the revenue to defense, commerce and public safety. And give them the opportunity to allocate a portion to health & human services. As a further enticement offer a forum for their ideas to be heard directly by government agencies. In other words a bargain they can live with. And include all other entities in the tax base. They pay their money managers a percentage so shouldn’t they pay for their security?
elegantwino@rbreich Seems to me that as costs continue to rise governments worldwide will have to find revenue to keep nations afloat. Perhaps if some of the larger democracies do this there could still be a chance.
@rbreich Have you already figured out how to stop tax avoidance by the rich with the current tax rates, however small they are? Cause if not, this idea is entirely theoretical...
Only once you can make billionaires pay the tax they already owe on the wealth they really control it would make any sense to discuss if their share is fair.
Shar_shar
RichardOntario@rbreich In someone’s fantasy utopia it could but let’s talk real Your country will take that money and give it to your war industry to bring democracy to an impoverished country rich in resources. It will be funneled into the pockets of the already wealthy under the guise of social welfare programs so they’ll recoup the taxes. Now HOW Will any of this new found wealth help the poorest? How will it find its way to them? I await your response
copsewood@rbreich It's why larger nations need to ensure compliance by the tax havens by otherwise denying them direct flights or taxing flights from havens disproportionately, and other economic sanctions, e.g. by taxing property assets of tax haven companies higher than those locally owned.
Mads Grymer Ejstrup@rbreich One of the biggest obstacles is the cult of the super rich genius. And of cause campaign money. But this believe that the super rich a somehow special peopl is permeating society.
@rbreich Tax the rich and feed the poor till there no poor no more. Steve Miller Band ( Fly like an Eagle)
ZingerLearns@rbreich can we also do away with the argument that if we tax billionaires at even up to 90% that they will lose motivation to work and tank the economy?
All it will do is reduce the opportunity hoarding and improve working conditions for the people on whose backs these billionaires extracted their billions from.
All it will do is reduce the opportunity hoarding and improve working conditions for the people on whose backs these billionaires extracted their billions from.
Linda Fiabane
Kevin Carson@rbreich Even better would be eliminating all the artificial scarcities and artificial property rights that facilitate the extraction of economic rents, which are the source of multi-millionaire and billionaire wealth in the first place: landlordism, absentee title to colonially and neocolonially enclosed natural resources, intellectual property, the credit monopoly...
Simply abolishing the patents that enable transnational corporations to extract rents from outsourced/offshored production, and giving the peoples of the Global South full claim to all the proceeds of their land and mineral wealth, would give billions a stable income and halt the bleeding of hundreds of billions in wealth flowing to Western capitalists every year.
Simply abolishing the patents that enable transnational corporations to extract rents from outsourced/offshored production, and giving the peoples of the Global South full claim to all the proceeds of their land and mineral wealth, would give billions a stable income and halt the bleeding of hundreds of billions in wealth flowing to Western capitalists every year.
PJT North@rbreich That same 5% translated into a corporate flat tax would raise an additional $5T or so. That would easily fund climate change solutions too, including regenerative agriculture practices.
Steven Molnar@rbreich There was a time when some rich people, who were primarily aristocrats, did at least some good with their money, but these days the rich are invariably Philistines, so even that benefit is lost.
Frank Cote@rbreich yes please
@rbreich Wasn't there a time when Millionaires were taxed 50%? or could it have been even 90%? And the railroad and manufacturing giants still managed to build enormous wealth?