How many billions of dollars worth of tax breaks do we need to give the billionaire class before the wealth trickles...

How many billions of dollars worth of tax breaks do we need to give the billionaire class before the wealth trickles down to the regular people?

Other urls found in this thread:

heritage.org/taxes/commentary/how-enron-papa-johns-and-the-ritz-got-taxpayer-subsidies
wsj.com/articles/china-was-bill-clintons-russia-1488585526
cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/04/07/clinton.china/
partners.nytimes.com/library/world/asia/030900clinton-china-text.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>Still waiting for those Reagan era tax cuts to trickle down to you.

This.

Any moment now.

all of it

Shut the fuck up. No one cares about your cause, you God damn hippie!

I don't really care if Trump & Co. fuck over the economy and usher in a new Great Depression as long as Hillary Clinton isn't president.

What episode is that from?

3edgy5me

Any billionaires here?

the trickle is gonna be 'UGE
belieb me

kek

stop whining, you fags voted for him.

LIVE WITH IT.

(irony, I'm a Bernie-bro, i'm going to get a huge tax break KEK)

I'm a chef at Wendy's who makes $8.50 an hour.

Tru dat brah. Those libtard cucks are just a bunch of whiney crybabies! They're all like, "Whaa! Whaa! My son is dead!" Poor little snowflake! Do you need your safe space to mourn your dead kid?

who's dead

BILLIONS AND BILLIONS AND BILLYIONS AND BILLIONS AND BILLYONS AND BILLYONS AND BILLYONS AND BILLIYONS

what you guys forget is that rich people are always putting their money to work and its rarely sitting idle. I say at least 80%-90% gets reinvested all the time. So in reality while on paper the are richer than gods the money is tied up in investments of businesses.

achually megacorps get to many tax cuts and hes going to start making them pay their fair share more than Bernie could have even.

>you fags voted for him
>forgetting he lost the popular vote
>forgetting he squeaked out an electoral vote

nb4
>muh 600 gorillian illegals

Hmmm. They're rich, but they're using that money to get richer, so we shouldn't tax them because they'd have to not use some of it to get richer. Seems like a fair argument.

kek

It's from season 13 episode 13. I just happened to have watched it a little while ago.

A literal member of the corporate class is not going to do shit to hurt his prole. Might talk about it, though. He's good at pretending he'll do something.

>Prole
Freudian slip. Meant people.

...

In the process of getting richer the businesses create jobs dumbass. Also much more efficient than any gov't bureaucracy can do on their own. I never said they should never get taxed but 25% is a fair rate.

see

You don't think Gov't jobs and programs have massive waste compared to corporations. Alot of that tax money is used to pay interest on gov't debt.

see

>plebs who dont understand basic economics
>think money is handed to them for doing nothing

>forgetting the government spends most of your tax dollars on corporate subsidies

That's funny because right now interest on government bonds is less than inflation.

So whats the point then? Lets line gov't pockets? Your not seeing any of that money. At least rich people hire at good rates.

Yeah the gov't bond market is about to implode when those IRs get ticked up. You will see the stock market explode to ridiculous heights before crashing.

Literally who?

>At least rich people hire at good rates.

I want this post framed and hung in a gallery of stupid posts.

when you get brainwashed you go all in huh. imagine if you channeled all of that single mindedness into something useful.

I guess you guys aren't skilled workers then. I do consulting and can usually get $20-30/hr extra out of private companies vs public contracts.

...

Cool story. Tell me the one where you have a 12 inch dick and fuck supermodels on the regular.

"I'm alright Jack" isn't actually a defense of corporate tax policy, fyi.

that's not that much money. it's about the median us income

I am basing it of observations that private industry is more effective at hiring and distributing wealth than public industry. My public contracts take about 2x-3x longer to get paid and usually less for equal work. The less bureaucracy in my opinion makes for a more functional business and economic environment.

I also don't believe the rich should be punished for being well off. The estate tax is the only thing I agree upon because it prevents American "Royality"

>implying

>In the process of getting richer the businesses create jobs dumbass
In your fantasy world.

>You don't think Gov't jobs and programs have massive waste compared to corporations
I don't think that's a problem, since at least they're not willing to sacrifice part of their mission to serve US, on shekels for some jew's pocket that don't serve US. Does it make sense now?

"I'm alright jack" is a good heuristic for where to aim the bullets.

>I also don't believe the rich should be punished for being well off
They're still well off. They just have to pay their share for the society that didn't take the competition meme seriously enough to kill them.

You obviously have never worked with or for the government before. There is more waste than you can comprehend. Alot of that money is "Missing".

Firstly, no one here has advocated for abolishment of private industry.
Secondly, corporate tax is not "punishing the rich".

Way to strawman though.

My argument is 25% is more than fair share.

Yes those all equity indexes they dump loads of money in are really benifiting the common guy on the street.

The 2008 financial crisis demonstrated that investments are made in investments, not "brick-and-mortar" investments.

It is estimated that as much as $65 trillion of American investment is in those kind of derivatives - more than the GDP of the entire planet.

When it crashes it's gonna make a big sound.

so where do you think they get the money to open up more stores and hire people?

profits maybe?

trickle down economics doesn't work because of greed simple as that

How do we translate the cash into Rubber Duckies?

>What are corporate subsidies?

trickle down economics doesn't work because it's a straw man only talked about by people who oppose it.

The majority of non finical guys where relatively unharmed. The CDO bubble mostly affected the middle-upper middle class.

see

Not everyone gets them... Especially not Pizza Hut.

>You obviously have never worked with or for the government before. There is more waste than you can comprehend. Alot of that money is "Missing".
I can believe it.

You pulled that number our of your ass. I say 90% is fair share, based on the Eisenhower administration's top marginal rate and the vast number of deductions available to a large business. Once you get past a certain point, you shouldn't get to play on easy mode.

Right, because to the neoliberals who support it, it is the very definition of "economics"

That doesn't make any sense, you're implying that the people in favor of trickle down economics understand that it doesn't work?

I wasn't implying that people in favor of trickle down economics insist it works I was just making an observation

This could also be explained by illegal immigration and the opening of Chinese market to US by Clinton.

Actually, it's Papa Johns. You'd know that if you could read.
And actually they did.

heritage.org/taxes/commentary/how-enron-papa-johns-and-the-ritz-got-taxpayer-subsidies

>1980-1990
>Clinton
pick one

I don't know. But what I DO know, is that no poor person has EVER given me a job.

Its combination of both. in 1989 NAFTA was created. Not to mention illegals start coming in the mid 80's.

So cut the subsidies and you make up for the taxes. See its simple.

>needs a job
>too fat to make their own
Kill yourself, jew.

>Clinton was in office in 1989
>Clinton was in office in the mid 80's

Dumbass I was stating that those particular actions caused a downturn. Illegal immigrants in the 80's + NAFTA = Initial Down turn due to cheap labor domestically and abroad. Clinton in the 90's doubled down with cheap labor abroad with opening Chinese Markets to the US. I Never said Clinton served in the fucking 80's and Yes Reagan did some shitty stuff too, but supply side stuff wasn't the root cause.

I'm pretty sure you meant Nixon?

>supply side stuff wasn't the root cause
>i-it's j-just a c-coincidence th-that we see a h-huge sh-shift during the i-implementation of it

No Clinton, look it up.

wsj.com/articles/china-was-bill-clintons-russia-1488585526

cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/04/07/clinton.china/

partners.nytimes.com/library/world/asia/030900clinton-china-text.html

median household income in 1952 had the purchasing power of $36,052 today. The Median household income last year was $59,000. Clearly we are much worse off now, you know being able to buy more things.

Hilarious joke, bud.

It is why you see the Rich doing well, the poor got fucked for the reasons I gave you.

Also the graph just shows the distribution of the earnings. Not the actual earnings.

I love the false dichotomy being thrown around ITT. The idea that if you're against excessive profiteering, then you must be for more govt. spending, and vice versa.
Nothing could be further from the truth. But you guys seem to love the name calling. I sure hope someone grows up before it all burns to the ground. But somehow, I get the feeling most of you want to see your lives severely disrupted by violent conflict.

>cites WSJ opinion section as "proof"
kys neckbeard.

I just pulled a couple links that talked about China's admission to the WTO which fucked American Manufacturing even further.

banks stopped lending. millions of people were out of work. many have never gotten back.

middle and lower-class families were devastated.

Yeah cause Obama didn't pay back the hedge fund donors that put him in office

>the billionaire class

Nothing effects the billionaire "class" unless you actually seize them and all of their holdings.
They don't give a shit about a slight increase in taxes because they have massive legal and accounting teams that move the money around making sure the government can't grab too much of it.
And if you took all of the actual money the billionaire class and millionaire "class" has in their bank accounts right now it wouldn't even scratch the current debt of just our social services, and then you would have no more rich people or incentive to become the rich people, who are the ones who actually pay for everything.
Which is exactly what happens in every country that actually implements socialism.
The left is living in some warped version of the past constructed by the former protesting Marxist hippies of the 60s who just put suits on.
Most of the biggest richest companies of today are backing the left right now because they are globalists, like the left, who don't give a shit about anything but their bottom line which hinges on cheap labor and low tarrifs.
But the left carries on like it's the 1960s with everything, because it's all they know how to do, even thought they are the establishment now, they are the bourgeoisie who are fucking the actual working class. With politicians who buy votes from the welfare class with the working class's money taken by force.

It's rich kids who don't want to take hard math classes but still want money, power and control who are leading the leftwing charge.
That is who has always been leading the leftwing charge.
The big guys behind them are smarter and have very different motives.

>what is inflation

Trickle-down doesn't work. It's bullshit to get the ill educated to blame "liberals" for wanting services like roads and fire fighters, and wanting those services paid for by all the beneficiaries. (You know, all of us.)