• Advertisement
To advertise, place classifieds free ads by category in a forum as a new topic, or in the classified display ads section, or start a classifieds free blog.

Democratic White House hopeful Sanders urges 'wealth tax' on richest 180,000 Americans

Democratic White House hopeful Sanders urges 'wealth tax' on richest 180,000 Americans

Postby smix » Tue Sep 24, 2019 3:19 pm

Democratic White House hopeful Sanders urges 'wealth tax' on richest 180,000 Americans
Reuters

URL: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKBN1W91I3
Category: Politics
Published: September 24, 2019

Description: WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. presidential contender Bernie Sanders released a plan on Tuesday to tax fortunes worth more than $32 million, in a move that follows his Democratic rival Elizabeth Warren’s own wealth-tax proposal. Sanders, a U.S. senator from Vermont, said his “extreme wealth tax” would address historically high levels of inequality and fund his healthcare plan, known as Medicare for All, as well as plans for affordable housing and universal childcare. “Enough is enough. We are going to take on the billionaire class, substantially reduce wealth inequality in America and stop our democracy from turning into a corrupt oligarchy,” Sanders said in a statement. Sanders, one of 19 Democratic candidates hoping to challenge Republican President Donald Trump in the November 2020 election, is calling for a dramatic economic restructuring that would limit corporate influence and level the economic playing field. Fellow progressive Warren, who has overtaken Sanders in some recent opinion polls, has gained momentum via rallies where crowds chant: “Two cents!” - a reference to her own wealth-tax plan on those with more than $50 million. Both Sanders and Warren trail former Vice President Joe Biden in national polls among Democrats. Sanders said his proposed tax would begin at 1% for those with a net worth above $32 million and rise in increments to 8% on wealth over $10 billion, hitting the wealthiest 180,000 Americans, Sanders said. Like many of Sanders’ proposals, a tax on wealth would require approval from Congress. The Senate, if it stays in Republican hands after next year’s elections, would be almost certain to oppose a wealth tax, and there is an open debate over whether it is even constitutional. Sanders’ campaign distributed a letter from Gabriel Zucman and Emmanuel Saez, professors of economics at the University of California at Berkeley, who analyzed the plan and estimated it would raise about $4.35 trillion over a decade. The pair wrote a similar letter in January in support of Warren’s wealth-tax proposal. Some governments, including France, have in the past abandoned wealth taxes after they found they were difficult to administer and sometimes led to the wealthy leaving the country.

bernie-gulag.jpg

To prevent evasion of the tax, Sanders said he would create a national wealth registry, bolster reporting requirements and foreign account rules, and increase funding for the Internal Revenue Service in order to audit all billionaires.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1895013
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

'Billionaires should not exist': Bernie Sanders tries to outdo Elizabeth Warren with tougher wealth tax proposal

Postby smix » Tue Sep 24, 2019 3:27 pm

'Billionaires should not exist': Bernie Sanders tries to outdo Elizabeth Warren with tougher wealth tax proposal
CNBC

URL: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/24/bernie- ... arren.html
Category: Politics
Published: September 24, 2019

Description: Sen. Bernie Sanders unveiled a tax on wealth Tuesday as he aims to cut income inequality and fund his sprawling social programs. The 2020 Democratic presidential candidate's proposal follows a similar plan from Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, who has made a wealth tax a centerpiece of her White House campaign. But the measure from Sanders, who has long railed against an economic system that he says favors corporations and the rich, would tax the richest Americans' assets more heavily than his rival's. The Sanders campaign said the levy would apply to net worth above $32 million and raise an estimated $4.35 trillion over the next 10 years. It plans to put the funds toward an affordable housing plan, universal child care and "Medicare for All" — the candidate's signature proposal. The campaign said the tax would cut the wealth of billionaires in half over 15 years. In a pair of tweets after he released the proposal, Sanders said "billionaires should not exist." He added: "We are going to tax their extreme wealth and invest in working people." The Vermont independent senator's plan adds another wrinkle to a primary race shaped by Democrats' efforts to rein in the excesses of the largest U.S. businesses and wealthiest Americans. Pockets of the business and investing community have warned about Sanders and Warren's policies hurting the economy — though the candidates have worn the criticism as a badge of honor. Democrats have also looked for ways to finance vast expansions in government spending on health care and student loan forgiveness, among other programs. Sanders and Warren, two of the top contenders for the presidential nomination, have usually ranked as the top choices among primary voters who identify themselves as liberal. Under his wealth tax, Sanders proposes these rates for married couples:
* A 1% tax on net worth above $32 million
* A 2% tax on net worth of $50 million to $250 million
* A 3% tax on net worth of $250 million to $500 million
* A 4% tax on net worth of $500 million to $1 billion
* A 5% tax on net worth of $1 billion to $2.5 billion
* A 6% tax on net worth of $2.5 billion to $5 billion
* A 7% tax on net worth of $5 billion to $10 billion
* An 8% tax on net worth above $10 billion
* All of those brackets would be cut in half for single filers
By comparison, Warren's plan would slap a 2% annual tax on net worth above $50 million. It would tax household net worth above $1 billion at 3%. Her campaign said it would raise an estimated $2.75 trillion over a decade. It is unclear if either candidate would even be able to impose a wealth tax or if the Supreme Court would strike it down before they could. Warren's campaign has pointed to arguments from scholars in justifying the legality of her plan. The Sanders campaign did the same Tuesday. It leaned in large part on a column from Yale Law School professors Bruce Ackerman and Anne Alstott arguing for a wealth tax.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1895013
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Bernie Sanders Proposes a Wealth Tax, Taking Aim at Billionaires

Postby smix » Tue Sep 24, 2019 5:43 pm

Bernie Sanders Proposes a Wealth Tax, Taking Aim at Billionaires
The New York Times

URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/24/us/p ... h-tax.html
Category: Politics
Published: September 24, 2019

Description: Mr. Sanders is embracing an idea at the center of Elizabeth Warren’s presidential campaign. His proposal goes further in who would be taxed and how much money would be raised.
WASHINGTON — Senator Bernie Sanders on Tuesday unveiled a proposal to create a new tax on the wealth of the richest Americans, including a steep tax on billionaires that could greatly diminish their fortunes. With the proposal, Mr. Sanders is embracing an idea that has been a centerpiece of the campaign of his top progressive rival, Senator Elizabeth Warren. But while Ms. Warren came first, Mr. Sanders is going bigger. His wealth tax would apply to a larger number of households, impose a higher top rate and raise more money. Mr. Sanders’s plan to tax accumulated wealth, not just income, is particularly aggressive in how it would erode the fortunes of billionaires. His tax would cut in half the wealth of the typical billionaire after 15 years, according to two economists who worked with the Sanders campaign on the plan. Mr. Sanders would use the money generated by his wealth tax to fund the housing plan he released last week and a forthcoming plan for universal child care, as well as to help pay for “Medicare for all.” “Let me be very clear: As president of the United States, I will reduce the outrageous and grotesque and immoral level of income and wealth inequality,” Mr. Sanders said in an interview. “What we are trying to do is demand and implement a policy which significantly reduces income and wealth inequality in America by telling the wealthiest families in this country they cannot have so much wealth.” Asked if he thought billionaires should exist in the United States, Mr. Sanders said, “I hope the day comes when they don’t.” He added, “It’s not going to be tomorrow.” “I don’t think that billionaires should exist,” he said, adding that there would always be rich people and others with less money. “This proposal does not eliminate billionaires, but it eliminates a lot of the wealth that billionaires have, and I think that’s exactly what we should be doing.” The proposal from Mr. Sanders is the latest sign of the push in the Democratic Party to develop policies for collecting substantially more revenue from the wealthiest Americans by rethinking how they are taxed — a move that could provide large sums of money that could be used to finance new social programs. And it is a significant development in the competition of ideas between Mr. Sanders and Ms. Warren, the two leading progressive candidates in the Democratic primary race. Both of their plans would need to be passed by Congress in order to take effect — a virtual impossibility unless Democrats win control of the Senate in the 2020 elections, and far from a sure thing even then. Ms. Warren’s plan touched off a number of questions about the feasibility of creating a wealth tax, including whether such a tax would be constitutional, how it would be enforced and whether it would generate as much money as has been projected. Mr. Sanders, of Vermont, would create an annual tax that would apply to households with a net worth above $32 million — about 180,000 households in total, or about the top 0.1 percent, according to the economists who worked on the plan. He would create a 1 percent tax on net worth above $32 million, with increasing marginal rates topping out at 8 percent on net worth over $10 billion. For single filers, the brackets would be halved, meaning the tax would kick in at $16 million. By contrast, the wealth tax proposed by Ms. Warren, of Massachusetts, would apply to households with a net worth above $50 million — an estimated 70,000 households in total. The structure of her plan is simpler: She would apply a 2 percent tax on net worth from $50 million to $1 billion, and a 3 percent tax on net worth above $1 billion. Unlike the Sanders plan, the tax brackets would be the same for married and single filers. Mr. Sanders’s tax is projected to raise $4.35 trillion over a decade, while Ms. Warren’s is projected to raise $2.6 trillion over the same time period. Those estimates were produced by Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman, two economists at the University of California, Berkeley, with whom both the Sanders and Warren campaigns consulted as they developed their proposals. (The projection for Ms. Warren’s plan differs slightly from their original estimate of $2.75 trillion earlier this year.) “The Sanders plan is really pitched at the idea that we don’t want billionaires and decabillionaires to be billionaires and decabillionaires for as long as they currently are,” Mr. Saez said. “It’s going to erode their fortunes much faster than the Warren wealth tax.” Mr. Sanders included several steps in his plan to enforce the tax, including creating a “national wealth registry,” increasing funding for the Internal Revenue Service and requiring audits of many taxpayers who are subject to the wealth tax, including all billionaires. Mr. Saez and Mr. Zucman calculated how the Warren and Sanders wealth taxes would have affected the fortunes of the richest Americans had each been in effect since 1982. The fortune of Jeff Bezos, the Amazon founder who Forbes said was worth $160 billion last year, would have been $87 billion under the Warren plan and $43 billion under the Sanders plan. Over all, the economists found, the cumulative wealth of the top 15 richest Americans in 2018 — amounting to $943 billion — would have been $434 billion under the Warren plan and $196 billion under the Sanders plan. Mr. Sanders is hardly a newcomer to the idea of a wealth tax. In a 1997 book, he wrote that it was “time, high time, to establish a tax on wealth similar to those that exist in most European countries.” In 2017, he included a wealth tax on a list of financing options for Medicare for all. Ms. Warren was quick to harness the idea in the 2020 race. She released her wealth tax proposal in January, weeks before Mr. Sanders began his campaign. Since then, the proposal has become a centerpiece of Ms. Warren’s campaign and a fixture of her stump speech, even prompting chants of “Two cents!” from crowds. The money would go toward other Warren policy plans, including her proposals for universal child care, student debt cancellation and tuition-free public college.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1895013
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Sanders ups ante with higher wealth tax proposal than Warren’s: ‘Billionaires should not exist’

Postby smix » Tue Sep 24, 2019 6:00 pm

Sanders ups ante with higher wealth tax proposal than Warren’s: ‘Billionaires should not exist’
Fox News

URL: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sander ... rrens-plan
Category: Politics
Published: September 24, 2019

Description: Sen. Bernie Sanders on Tuesday unveiled a massive tax on the wealthiest Americans that aims to diminish income inequality -- a central theme of his campaign -- and at least begin to finance the steep price tags for the numerous government programs the Democratic presidential candidate is proposing. The release of the independent senator from Vermont's ‘Tax on Extreme Wealth’ follows a similar plan from one of his top rivals for the 2020 Democratic nomination, fellow progressive and populist lawmaker Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. “There should be no billionaires. We are going to tax their extreme wealth and invest in working people,” Sanders said on Twitter as he urged supporters to read his new plan. His campaign also sent an email under the subject line: "Billionaires should not exist." In his decades in Congress and during both of his runs for the White House, Sanders has railed against an American economic system that he says favors corporations and the rich, at the expense of the working class. Sanders' plan, if enacted into law, would place a 1 percent tax on net worth over $32 million, a 2 percent tax on net worth between $50 million and $250 million, and a 3 percent tax on net worth between $250 million and $500 million. The proposed Sanders tax would increase to 4 percent net worth from $500 million to $1 billion, 5 percent for net worth from $1 billion to $2.5 billion, and ultimately reach 8 percent for wealth over $10 billion. The Sanders campaign says their plan would impact approximately 180,000 households nationwide, and would raise about $4.35 trillion in government revenue by the 2028 budget year. “Our tax on extreme wealth would only apply to the wealthiest households in America and would cut the wealth of billionaires in half over 15 years, which would substantially break up the concentration of wealth and power of this small, privileged class,” Sanders said in an email to supporters announcing his plan. And he said that he would “use the revenue to fund our affordable housing plan, universal childcare, and help fund our work to guarantee health care as a right for every man, woman, and child in this country." Warren’s plan – which she unveiled at the beginning of the year-- by comparison would place a 2 percent annual tax on net worth above $50 million and would slap a 3 percent tax on net worth above $1 billion. Her campaign says it would affect the top 70,000 households in the county and would bring in an estimated $2.6 trillion over 10 years. Sanders, in order “ensure that the wealthy are not able to evade the tax,” is calling for creating a national registry and beefing up third-party reporting requirements, increasing funding for the Internal Revenue Service and requiring the IRS to perform audits of 30 percent of those in the 1 percent bracket and audits of all billionaires. He’s also calling for a 40 percent exit tax on the net value of all assets under $1 billion and a steeper 60 percent on assets over $1 billion “for all wealthy individuals seeking to expatriate to avoid the tax.” President Trump’s re-election campaign took aim at Sanders, not specifically over his new plan but for vows by the senator and the rest of the Democratic field to repeal the tax cuts passed in 2017 by the then-GOP controlled Congress and signed into law by the president. “By repealing President Trump’s tax cuts, Sanders and the rest of the Democrats would raise taxes on almost all Americans, not just the very rich,” campaign spokesperson Erin Perrine said.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1895013
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Bernie Sanders Unveils Radical Redistribution Scheme: ‘Billionaires Should Not Exist’

Postby smix » Tue Sep 24, 2019 8:24 pm

Bernie Sanders Unveils Radical Redistribution Scheme: ‘Billionaires Should Not Exist’
Breitbart News

URL: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019 ... not-exist/
Category: Politics
Published: September 24, 2019

Description: Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) declared on Tuesday that “billionaires should not exist” as part of the rollout of his massive proposal to redistribute wealth in America via an “extreme wealth” tax, which he claims will “reduce the outrageous level of inequality that exists in America today.” Sanders unveiled his plan to redistribute wealth in the U.S. via an “extreme wealth tax,” which the socialist senator says will apply to the “top 0.1 percent.” While Sanders’ plan is reminiscent of Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-MA) proposed wealth tax, it goes even further, taxing more individuals at even higher rates. For example, Sanders proposes to implement a one percent tax on couples with a net worth over $32 million. The percentage increases alongside the value of assets:
The tax rate would increase to 2 percent on net worth from $50 to $250 million, 3 percent from $250 to $500 million, 4 percent from $500 million to $1 billion, 5 percent from $1 to $2.5 billion, 6 percent from $2.5 to $5 billion, 7 percent from $5 to $10 billion, and 8 percent on wealth over $10 billion.

“These brackets are halved for singles,” Sanders explains. The socialist senator admits the goal of his ultra-progressive redistribution proposal, boasting that — under his plan — the wealth of billionaires “would be cut in half over 15 years” and declaring that “billionaires should not exist”:
Billionaires should not exist.
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) September 24, 2019

There is no justice when three billionaires are able to own more wealth than the bottom half of the entire country.
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) September 24, 2019

There should be no billionaires. We are going to tax their extreme wealth and invest in working people. Read the plan:
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) September 24, 2019

Sanders’ proposal would also spur the creation of a “national wealth registry” and provide an “increase in IRS funding” in order to manage a swell of new audits. It states:
In order to ensure that the wealthy are not able to evade the tax, the proposal includes a number of key enforcement policies. First, it would create a national wealth registry and significant additional third party reporting requirements. Second, it includes an increase in IRS funding for enforcement and requires the IRS to perform an audit of 30 percent of wealth tax returns for those in the 1 percent bracket and a 100 percent audit rate for all billionaires. Third, the wealth tax includes a 40 percent exit tax on the net value of all assets under $1 billion and 60 percent over $1 billion for all wealthy individual seeking to expatriate to avoid the tax. Finally, the wealth tax proposal will include enhancements to the international tax enforcement and anti-money laundering regime including the strengthening of the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act.

The presidential candidate argues the U.S. already taxes inherited wealth via the estate tax and says his proposal is constitutional, citing two Yale law professors, Bruce Ackerman and Anne Alstott, who have expressed support for the radical concept. Sanders adds that it is “not radical” to ask the wealthy to “pay their fair share.” His proposal is expected to result in $4.5 trillion over the next decade, according to University of California, Berkeley, economists Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman. Nonetheless, that number does not come close to paying for his expansive, expensive proposals, such as his $16 trillion Green New Deal proposal or Medicare for All, which could — by some estimates — cost the U.S. over $60 trillion over the next decade alone. Sanders’ ideological ally, Warren, has also introduced a wealth tax, although it does not go as far. She proposes implementing a two percent wealth tax on those with $50 million in assets, as opposed to Sanders’ $32 million. Warren’s plan increases the tax to three percent for those with assets of $1 billion or greater, with no distinction between couples or single filers. She, like Sanders, plans to fund her costly proposals via the wealth tax, although Saez and Zucman estimate that her proposal would result in $2.6 trillion over the next decade, $1.9 trillion less than Sanders’ proposal. “If we make the top 0.1% pay their fair share in taxes, their quality of life would not change at all,” Sanders tweeted following the announcement of his redistribution scheme. “But we would be able to invest in housing, child care and health care and improve the lives of millions of working people,” he added:
If we make the top 0.1% pay their fair share in taxes, their quality of life would not change at all. But we would be able to invest in housing, child care and health care and improve the lives of millions of working people.
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) September 24, 2019
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1895013
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Bernie's Ever-changing Definition Of What It Means To Be Rich

Postby smix » Tue Sep 24, 2019 8:33 pm

Bernie's Ever-changing Definition Of What It Means To Be Rich
Townhall

URL: https://townhall.com/tipsheet/timothyme ... h-n2553568
Category: Politics
Published: September 24, 2019

Description: Vermont Democratic Socialist Bernie Sanders is an idiot when it comes to the economy, but he certainly is not stupid when it comes to his own money. The man owns three homes and is officially a millionaire after his best-selling book. But, Sen. Sanders thinks you are an imbecile who will not notice that as soon as he reached the six-zero threshold, he stopped attacking his new "class" of citizens and started exclusively demonzing billionaires. Has inflation really be so dramatic that you are no longer rich if you are not a billionaire? No, but Sanders cannot attack millionaires while simultaneously being one, so he just hoped nobody would say anything about his word choice change. He thought wrong. On Tuesday, Sen. Sanders tweeted, "Billionaires should not exist."
Billionaires should not exist.
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) September 24, 2019

His economic plan essentially wants to tax them out of existence, confiscate their wealth, and redistribute it amongst the masses. You know, like socialism. As the satire Twitter account Hale_Razor pointed out, Sanders Twitter history shows his hypocrisy.
2015: MILLIONAIRES ARE EVIL
2016: MILLIONAIRES AND BILLIONAIRES ARE EVIL
2017: MILLIONAIRES AND BILLIONAIRES ARE EVIL
*becomes millionaire*
2019: BILLIONAIRES ARE EVIL
— Razor (@hale_razor) September 24, 2019

Even the leftist Center for American Progress has noticed that Sanders is a phony when it comes to the rich. In April, they released a blistering video showing how his rhetoric has changed.



"This counterproductive negative campaigning needs to stop...The Democratic primary must be a campaign of ideas, not of bad-faith smears. Please help play a constructive role in the effort to defeat Donald Trump," Sanders wrote in response. Poor Senator Sanders (Or maybe Rich Senator Sanders?). He is just trying make a buck while trying to take your money. What a tough life. Abraham Lincoln is often quoted as saying, "Do I not defeat my enemy by becoming their friend?" or something along those lines. Perhaps Sanders is thinking, "Do I no defeat the millionaires by becoming one?" Who knows. It is tough to understand liberal logic sometimes.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1895013
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Sanders plan would have billionaires taxed more than they earn

Postby smix » Sun Oct 20, 2019 11:35 am

Sanders plan would have billionaires taxed more than they earn
Washington Examiner

URL: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/poli ... -they-earn
Category: Politics
Published: October 20, 2019

Description: Bernie Sanders’ tax plan would impose annual tax rates of well over 100% on the richest 400 Americans, according to his economic advisers, mostly through his new wealth tax. The idea that the federal government should take more from the very wealthy than they earn in a year is a policy innovation, one the Democratic candidate has advanced as part of a sweeping anti-inequality platform. Critics, however, argue that it's unrealistic and would harm the economy by reversing billionaires' incentives to innovate and invest.

bernie-socialist-ussr.jpg

Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman, the Berkeley economists who've advised Sanders on his wealth tax plan and the authors of a new book on inequality, calculate on their website that Sanders' tax proposals would result in a 97.5% tax rate for the richest 400 Americans, who have pre-tax incomes above $456.5 million — and that rate would rise above 100%, depending on how the specifics of Sanders' plan were spelled out. Today, in contrast, the tax rate for the same group is 23.1%, they estimate. The proposal has elicited criticism from analysts on the basis that high tax rates discourage people from working or investing, and thereby slow economic growth, and ultra-high tax rates would amplify those effects. "What’s the incentive to grow your own company if your wealth is decreasing every year?” asked Marc Goldwein, the senior policy director for the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a group that advocates for deficit reduction. And tax rates near or above 100% wouldn't just reduce the incentive to invest and build wealth ⁠— they could incentivize wealth destruction or rampant tax evasion. “The idea that someone like Jeff Bezos is going to pay 97% or more of their income in taxes is on its face ridiculous,” said Ben Ritz, an economist at the Progressive Policy Institute, a left-of-center think tank. At the same time, though, it's not so clear that Sanders' proposals would create the same ill effects that income tax rates above 97% would, because the novel wealth tax would create much different incentives. In fact, comparing the tax burden imposed by the income plus wealth taxes in Sanders' plan to typical average tax rates based solely on income taxes would be an apples-to-oranges comparison, Goldwein noted. For example, if an individual had $20 billion of total wealth in properties, stocks, and investments and an income of $500 million in salary, business profits and capital gains, then his tax bill would be dominated by the wealth tax: He would owe approximately $1.45 billion, a little over 7% of his total wealth ⁠— much more than his income. And that tax is imposed regardless of how much or how little a person earns in a year. So while a person's effective tax rate, calculated as total tax paid divided by their income, might be well over 100%, that does not mean that the person faces a similarly high marginal tax rate, meaning the tax incurred on each additional dollar of income. “A billionaire starts with a huge tax liability and needs a large income to be able to offset that initial liability, but the initial liability does not work as a marginal tax,” Saez told the Washington Examiner. Saez, an expert on inequality, argued that the wealth tax, unlike marginal tax rates, wouldn't in theory discourage people from working to become wealthy. “Would a billionaire tax reduces the incentives of a youngster to start a new business? That seems unlikely to us,” he said via an email. Sanders' wealth tax plan would raise $4.35 trillion over 10 years, Saez and Zucman estimated, to pay for programs such as "Medicare for all" and universal child care, by taxing household wealth over $32 million at a 1% rate, rising to 8% for couples with over $10 billion. Beyond raising money for social programs, however, the wealth tax would also create an inducement not to pursue or maintain billion-dollar fortunes. That incentive is in line with Sanders' statement that “billionaires shouldn’t exist.” “It's not ridiculous in that it is accomplishing its goal, which is to end multi-billionaires," said Goldwein. "This will, in theory, accomplish it.” Of course, Sanders also does favor much higher income tax rates. Saez estimated that while the marginal income tax rates under the Sanders plan wouldn't be 100%, they would be around 60% to 70%, much higher than the top marginal rate of 37% set by the 2017 Trump tax cuts. “High-marginal tax rates on incomes and salaries were normal when we had rates well above 70%. Those are also common in other countries,” said Mike Konczal, a fellow who specializes in economic policy at the Roosevelt Institute, a progressive think tank. “Other countries have rates at this level and they do very well as well.” Konczal argued that the high income tax rates and the wealth tax would work together to prevent the accumulation of wealth by the top 1% of income earners. For example, he said, corporate boards would be less likely to give high-level CEOs massive salaries if the government would simply tax that wealth away once it was accrued. Sanders' critics, at least, give him credit for ideological consistency and honesty in acknowledging the level of taxation that would be necessary to finance the programs he favors. He has straightforwardly said, for example, that middle-class taxes would rise to implement "Medicare for all" (which he argues would leave the middle class better off overall). “I think to Bernie’s credit, he wants to show that he can pay for things, for all of his faults, unlike a lot of other left wingers," Ritz said. "He says if you want more government spending, you have to pay more for it — not just the rich, but everybody."
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1895013
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)


  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to Wealth


Mobile Device
  • 1
  • FREE CLASSIFIED ADS
    Free Classified Ads
    There are 3 ways to advertise - your choice: you can place free ads in a forum topic, in the classified display ads section, or you may start your own free blog. Please select the appropriate category and forum for the ad content before you post. Do not spam.
    Caveat emptor - let the buyer beware. Deal at your own risk and peril.
  • Advertisement