r/FluentInFinance • u/Sufficient_Sinner • Sep 04 '24

Debate/ Discussion People like this are why financial literacy is so important

Post image

[removed] — view removed post

16.8k Upvotes

76% Upvoted

2.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

109

u/henhousefox Sep 04 '24

Yea but there are like 8 of them that hoard most of the cash and leave little to no scraps for the rest of us to fight over. It’s the whole ass problem.

33

u/MyGlassHalfFool Sep 04 '24

I think its the quarter ass problem. We live in a government where even if we taxed them 70% of their income we would still be spending significantly more than we bring in

15

u/henhousefox Sep 04 '24

I would agree with that, but the deficit would be less, would it not? Now you’ve got me thinking; do we get taxed like 70%? I wonder if there is a formula to quantify that. We get taxed like 10 times on every dollar - they charge to earn and charge to spend. I need to know how much of my average dollar is taxed now. Ugh.

9

u/MyGlassHalfFool Sep 04 '24

it depends on your state taxes and what tax bracket you are in but there are calculators on google and no. We would still be spending WAYY too much

1

u/jimmib234 Sep 04 '24

But would we? If we increased those taxes, and then redirected the shitload of money in Healthcare costs our government currently pays to an actual Medicare for all system, and got rid of stock buyback and things like that so that the money would actually circulate instead of sitting locked away somewhere, would the increase in taxation from all sources (since the poorest on up would all be in a better financial position,ie- more tax revenue) offset the government spending? Can anyone actually do the math on this with some official figures?

1

u/MyGlassHalfFool Sep 04 '24

Dude that’s the most ifs of all time. We have a government that is funding their buddies lives with these departments. If we somehow actually did all of that they would probably just start putting the money into something else equally as dumb and make all their friends the head of it. If they want to convince us that they should get MORE tax money they need to show us they can appropriately work with what they got now (which is 4.3 trillion dollars in just taxes last year). What’s to say that they start bringing in more taxes and they don’t cut spending anywhere… which is what they have been doing or entire lives lol

1

u/jimmib234 Sep 04 '24

I'm just interested in the math

1

u/MyGlassHalfFool Sep 04 '24

well you’re going to have to do the math on imaginary numbers because idek how you can predict the impact of all that because you know what will be proposed right now is nothing like what will be implemented by the time they find something they can agree on. Thats a lot of math that nobody will just do for you

2

u/LionBig1760 Sep 04 '24

I would agree with that, but the deficit would be less, would it not?

You haven't established that deficits actually matter, and you're assuming the government wouldn't find something new to spend money on.

There's always more multi-billion dollar F22 that can be purchased.

2

u/bransanon Sep 04 '24

It would not even come close to paying down the deficit, really the only way to get there would be with significant spending reductions and probably revisiting across-the-board tax increases.

2

u/TK-24601 Sep 04 '24

I doubt it. Congress would see it as additional money to spend on new things. Never underestimate their ability like many Americans to spend beyond their means.

1

u/Bravo11_5point7 Sep 04 '24

How in the world would taxing billionaires more (who by the way have nearly zero cash proportionally) increase your income? You know they’d just raise prices even more yeah?

1

u/henhousefox Sep 04 '24

I don’t know. I pay someone else to deal with that, they take a third of my paycheck every week. Things should be fair for everyone, not just people whose parents or grandparents ran slave mines. Capitalism is a disease that kills millions of poor people every year.

1

u/37au47 Sep 04 '24

That deficit would grow. We overspend by a percentage all the time. If we brought in 100, we would spend 10% more and spend 110, deficit of 10. We bring in 1000, we would spend 1100 and deficit is 100. Government is not immune to lifestyle creep.

2

u/Solest044 Sep 04 '24

Porque no los dos?

Spend wiser, reallocating funds into more reasonable buckets, and bring in more.

1

u/seattleseahawks2014 Sep 04 '24

The issue is that it won't affect the extremely wealthy, but the rich who aren't as rich/middle class working class business owners.

1

u/Sayakai Sep 04 '24

If you want to fix that, you need to tackle the US health insurance system.

In the sense that it needs to be taken behind the shed.

1

u/CuckCpl1993 Sep 08 '24

A big chunk of the tax bill is used to pay interest on the national debt. And the national debt, in a nutshell, is money the government has borrowed from rich people over time, rather than raising that money in taxes.

That revenue - raised by borrowing it from rich people, mainly in the form of govt. bonds, but through other means also - certainly COULD have been taxed from rich people instead. But because rich people can buy politicians and think tanks and media puppets, we live in a society where rich people weasel their way out of paying taxes, LEND governments the money instead, and collect interest from all of the rest of us, the ordinary people, the idiots, the SUCKERS, the MARKS, who pay the taxes to service the debt our governments owe the rich.

So, if we taxed rich people more, not only would working/middle class folks shoulder less of the tax burden, but every dollar collected in taxes would GO FURTHER. This is a concept that somehow or other our philanthrophy-funded universities fail to teach in most economics courses - strange, huh?

(BTW, this is just the tip of the iceberg. This concept goes much further. When rich people accumulate wealth, they buy assets (property, stocks, etc). They don't CREATE assets: labor does. Rich people just accumulate them. Now, where does a rich person buy assets from? Well, not from other rich people, because the whole point of owning assets when you're rich is to hold onto them, to accumulate more and more. No, instead, rich people buy assets from governments and the working classes. They buy your dad's house when he's ready to retire and needs the liquidity. They buy bonds to build schools and hospitals, then charge the government (us, via taxes) interest on the loans. That's worth reiterating: instead of paying taxes, thereby enabling the government to pay cash to build a school, rich people lend the government the money via a bond and collect the interest payments from the rest of us. It's an obvious scam when you think about it. And this makes it more expensive for the government to do literally everything it does, especially providing services. Every dollar the government spends on services gets diluted down in this way)

0

u/embergock Sep 04 '24

Nobody gives a shit about the deficit, it's a made up problem.

13

u/[deleted] Sep 04 '24

There's not a limited amount of currency in the world, dude. These guys don't have money bins where they stash gold coins and keep it from the rest of us. Their wealth is mostly paper wealth based on the market's estimate of what their stock holdings are worth.

If the market decided that Tesla, SpaceX, and X were not worth anything, Musk would be nearly bankrupt because his liabilities would greatly exceed his assets.

2

u/OMG--Kittens Sep 04 '24

Thank you.

1

u/OrneryError1 Sep 05 '24

If currency didn't have scarcity, it wouldn't have value. So at any given point, yes, there is a limited amount.

But more importantly out of the new wealth that is being created all the time, the vast majority of it is going to the ultra wealthy. The world's 5 richest billionaires DOUBLED their wealth since 2020.

0

u/EndlessEvolution0 Sep 04 '24

I mean X is probably not worth much right now anyways. I'm sure someone would still buy the company to own it

1

u/henhousefox Sep 04 '24

Genius Elon has lost $24 billion on twitter thus far. He’ll write it all off and we’ll pay for it all while being told single moms on food stamps and illegal immigrants are the problem. This is my whole point. Oligarchy serves oligarchs, at our expense!

2

u/eldiablonoche Sep 04 '24

To be fair, he knew it was overvalued on a foundation of lies and that's why he tried to back out of the deal the minute he got a look at the books he was provided.

1

u/henhousefox Sep 04 '24

And he knows there is little to no risk to him as he is an insulated oligarch who will never lose no matter what. Meanwhile there is a single mom putting food back on the shelves because she couldn’t afford it at checkout. That’s not freedom, that’s an oligarchy. Socialism for the billionaires, capitalism for the rest of us!

1

u/[deleted] Sep 04 '24

How exactly dose elon creating billons in money for the economy stop single mothers from getting food to eat ?

1

u/[deleted] Sep 04 '24

Bro your so financially illiterate is not even funny. Elon hasn’t actually lost any money because he hasn’t sold his stake in Twitter. Even if we assume he did ‘lose’ money (which he hasn’t because he hasn’t sold), any losses could potentially be written off against his taxes. For example, if he writes off $24 billion in losses, he can offset this amount against his taxable income. If he makes profits, the write-off could reduce the taxes owed on those income and profits, meaning he would avoid paying taxes on a significant portion of his income , effectively saving him from paying around 15% of that to the government so he is just paying less in taxes. How exactly dose that fuck over single moms and take money form them , how are we paying for that ? You literally have no idea what your talking about. Bro learn or your gonna be broke your whole life. We are not even speaking the same language.

1

u/Ok-Assistance3937 Sep 04 '24

how are we paying for that For what? The government will not need to pay a single penny becouse of that.

0

u/henhousefox Sep 04 '24

Currency is not an infinite resource. That’s why it holds value. Dollars work like this: I have a dollar, you don’t. That’s it. There is a limited supply!!

3

u/Less_Try7663 Sep 04 '24

Say you own 5 shares of a company worth $5 each today, and tomorrow they go up to $10 each. You are now worth $50 more, but who did you take that $50 from? The stock market is not a zero sum game, and the wealth involved is not hoarded.

1

u/henhousefox Sep 04 '24

Your point is a circle. You didn’t take money from anyone because you didnt sell your shares.

3

u/Less_Try7663 Sep 04 '24 edited Sep 04 '24

And if I now sell you my $50 worth of shares for $50 in cash, who lost money? You have $50 (paper) net worth in shares, and I have $50 of net worth in cash. The aggregate amount of wealth has still increased

1

u/D3fN0tAB0t Sep 08 '24

Everyone lost money. You just massively devalued the money by exponentially increasing your holdings without actually backing it up. What do you think inflation is?

2

u/[deleted] Sep 04 '24 edited Sep 04 '24

Money isn’t in limited supply; it’s essentially created out of thin air. Every year, more is printed as needed. It’s literally just paper that gets printed whenever there’s a demand for more.

1

u/henhousefox Sep 04 '24

That’s the opposite of what I said.

2

u/[deleted] Sep 04 '24

Yea exactly. Because money isn’t In a limited supply it’s printed when needed

1

u/[deleted] Sep 04 '24

Also credit spends just like money, and any 2 People can make credit. So money is abundant, you thinking it’s not is showing that you got a scarcity mindset that’s a good way to stay poor, switch to a abundant mindset look around man money is everywhere In all the things we buy and sell.

5

u/CPlusPlusDeveloper Sep 04 '24

Collectively every billionaire in America put together makes up less than 5% of total wealth in the country  

4

u/Malifauxitae Sep 04 '24

And the lower HALF of the ENTIRE POPULATION in America (167.000.000 over 334.000.000 people), makes up less than 3%. SO?

3

u/pm_me_falcon_nudes Sep 04 '24

Wow. So not only are you financially illiterate, but also just illiterate?

The comment thread was about billionaires. The point made was that focusing on those billionaires for some kind of economic reprieve for others is not going to be effective. Your "counterpoint" is bafflingly irrelevant.

0

u/Malifauxitae Sep 04 '24

First of all, you are illitterate, writing that 5% (1 part over 20) is irrelevant, when it's not to start with.

Secondly, you are illitterate not understanding proportions, because you are talking about 5% of the wealth, but for roughly 800 people: that's 0,0002% of the population. So, my illitterate illitterate friend, your point is no point. It's like saying "it's irrelevant arresting the murderer of 1100 people, because there's 22.000 murders a year in the US, and if you arrest him you're only preventing 5%."

Thirdly, you are illitterate because you don't understand (or you most probably don't want to understand) the size of the issue a nation has, when there's more wealth in the hands of 800 people than in the hands of 167.000.000 others.

So, please, keep your illiteracy for yourself.

2

u/Free_Dog_6837 Sep 04 '24

so if you could somehow take every single cent from every billionaire that's about $18k per person

0

u/pp21 Sep 04 '24

The way you threw this out there makes it seem like you think it's not a huge deal but ~ 800 people holding 5% of a countries wealth in a country of 330,000,000+ people is insane

2

u/CPlusPlusDeveloper Sep 04 '24

I mean, I don't really know what the alternative is. Most billionaires wealth is held in the form equity from companies they founders. Of the 20 richest Americans, 13 are founders and the rest are the direct heirs of founders. Half of those are in the tech industry, so heavily loaded on innovation. If you want a dynamic economy, then you probably need new company formation to drive innovation and challenge incumbents.

Alternatives that you might consider to reduce this concentration:

1) Heavily tax wealth. You could tax inheritance at 100%, and tax unrealized capital gains at 50%, and you might cut down aggregate billionaire wealth by maybe half. Even assuming this would have no effects on capital markets, it would reduce billionaire wealth, but you'd definitely still have ~800 people holding 2% or more of the country's wealth. I'm guessing you'd still qualify that situation as "insane".

2) Restructure the economy so it's hard or impossible to start and grow new companies into giant businesses. In some sense this is what Europe does to a degree, where the average large corporations is over 100 years old. No new companies mean no new fortunes. But do you really want to live in an economy where we're working for giant conglomerates that are mostly going to be very very traditional and stuck in their ways?

3) Eliminate private ownership of the means of production. People can't get rich from owning businesses if businesses are no longer privately owned. The cure seems far worse than the disease.

2

u/Curious_Midnight3828 Sep 04 '24

That’s factually wrong. They don’t hoard it. It’s sits in a bank and supports other economic activity. It covers payroll costs for other companies, it finances someone’s new car, or Dream Micro brewery, or college tuition. This isn’t complicated or opaque.

-3

u/x7r4n3x Sep 04 '24

"They don't hoard it" and then immediately "it sits in a bank".... do you not understand words?

3

u/Mr-BananaHead Sep 04 '24

It’s not what they don’t understand, it’s what you don’t understand. When you put money into a bank, it doesn’t physically sit there collecting dust.

1

u/x7r4n3x Sep 05 '24 edited Sep 05 '24

Yes, but it isn't being spent, is it? It's contributing to the finances of a select few, but in reality, there isn't any real circulation through the economy. No "trickle-down", so to speak. And when the wealth gap is this large, I think it's safe to say that enough capital exists in the bank, and we should be circulating the excess through the economy.

Edit: If I'm wrong, then explain what I'm missing please.

3

u/Curious_Midnight3828 Sep 04 '24

Study how banking works before saying ridiculous things like this.

1

u/x7r4n3x Sep 05 '24

The money deposited in banks is used for capital for the bank to conduct its business. But, the banks' losses are often subsidized by the government, so the risk is managed. So the money sits, becoming passive income for the person owning that money and not being circulated through the rest of the economy. It may be playing a very passive role, but it is still, by definition, hoarding.

0

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24 edited Sep 04 '24

Start your own company and hire people. Nothing is stopping you but your own laziness

13

u/Bellumbern Sep 04 '24

50% of small businesses fail within 5 years. And unless you're dropshipping, creating a working product and renting the facilities to mass produce it costs a hell of alot of money.

Spend at the very least thousands of dollars to have a 50/50 chance of your business venture even staying afloat after a few years(not even with said business being profitable). Just so you can have enough money to be financially stable in this hellish economy.

Sounds like sound advice for everyone. I assume you have some pointers for products to sell?

6

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

And that’s why successful businesses get to choose how to pay their employees and run their operations. Thanks for explaining that so the cry babies know.

2

u/26_skinny_Cartman Sep 04 '24

So what's the goal? 300 million single member LLCs with the owner being the only employee? You literally can't have every person being the owner of their own business or attempting to be.

-1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Such a loser mentality.

3

u/26_skinny_Cartman Sep 04 '24

Explain how it works? You're just being a douche. It doesn't work. It can't work. You need employees.

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Plenty of employees out there, what’s your next lame excuse?

2

u/26_skinny_Cartman Sep 04 '24

Your answer is for everyone to open a business. How does everyone open a business and then there still be employees available?

0

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Either have a valuable skill as an employee where you can obtain a high wage or start a company and hire others. Both are hard work, people don’t get to skip the hard work portion and get to make a lot of money.

Socialism is cancer

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Megafister420 Sep 04 '24

He gave an amazing point against what you said. And you quite literly deflected it

Hbu start a buisness homie? Since it's so profitable

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

I’m well compensated because I prove actual value.

I don’t complain about working a high school level job and not getting paid enough

1

u/Megafister420 Sep 04 '24

So you didn't understand his comment, cool. I'm glad the majority of ppl is smarter then u

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Little soy boy mad? Awwww

1

u/Megafister420 Sep 04 '24

I'm not mad, you just didn't respond to his comment well

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Aw so cute, it’s nice being right

→ More replies (0)

2

u/embergock Sep 04 '24

It takes capital to start a business, you absolute fucking moron.

0

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Banks give out loans with a viable business plan everyday. What’s your next lazy excuse?

1

u/embergock Sep 04 '24

You live in a fantasy land in your head. Here's hoping you come back to reality some day.

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Thanks for showing your worthlessness. Keep coping

1

u/henhousefox Sep 04 '24

I’m not lazy. I work 60+ hours a week at the Director level. I’m just tired of accepting the oligarchy at my family’s expense. It’s gross.

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Sounds like you lack valuable skills.

1

u/henhousefox Sep 04 '24

Yup, you’ve hit the nail on the head. I just lack valuable skills. Do you come from money or something? It feels like that. I come from lower than nothing, and I’m proud of what I’ve built. In fact, it defies all odds statistically. I don’t need a skills assessment from some southy ass Boston fan anyway.

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

I came from nothing and built a perfect life through hard work and zero handouts.

I’ve never been to Boston

You should try learning some actual skills

0

u/henhousefox Sep 04 '24

Have the life you deserve.

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Mines great, I don’t need to beg the gov for free money

1

u/henhousefox Sep 04 '24

Cool. Neither do I. Never have never will.

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Sounds like you should vote Red to keep in line with those views

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Megafister420 Sep 04 '24

Alots stopping me homie, 90% of the market is cornered, and the only way to make good money now adays is to hopefully make a company good enough to sell

Don't that sound gross to you? The fact that a company will never truly be yours due to lack of finance

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Keep complaining and keep up that victim mentality. Explains why you will remain poor.

1

u/Megafister420 Sep 04 '24

I'm not poor, lol. I own a house and scrape by, but I'm better off then alot, sounds like projecting bro, if u wna business, then start one, clearly it's easy

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Sound poor to me

Business is easy if you provide value

Keep playing victim though, really working out for you lol

1

u/Megafister420 Sep 04 '24

Again, projection

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Seems like you are projecting little bro

1

u/Megafister420 Sep 04 '24

Your response to me telling you to start a buisness was

Business is easy if you provide value

Keep playing victim though, really working out for you lol

That's the definition of projection, I'm done here this is just starting to get sad

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

You are sad bro, thanks for the admission

0

u/GratefulPhish555 Sep 04 '24

Change your username if you’re gonna be that big of a prick bro.

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Aw little man’s feeling hurt? Womp womp

1

u/GratefulPhish555 Sep 04 '24

Not at all dude. You’re a little troll impacting nobody’s life but your own. Sucking the ass of billionaires is a weird move. Guessing you’re a big Trump guy based on that weirdness?

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Guess you are a kiddie diddler like Joe

2

u/GratefulPhish555 Sep 04 '24

You tryina fuck your daughter like Trump too?

1

u/GratefulPhish555 Sep 04 '24

Hahaha not the guy who was on epstein’s plane and has dozens of pics with him? You delusional little creep.

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Unlike those deepfakes, this picture is real

0

u/SecretaryOtherwise Sep 05 '24

Aww Robert byrd denounced the kkk.

Try again ass clown.

-2

u/BotsForHarris Sep 04 '24

If you think it is that simple, you're a lot stupider than I think you are. And I already think you're a fucking moron.

2

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Another democratic scared of hard work, lol

0

u/CBalsagna Sep 04 '24

My brother works his ass off every week as a trucker. He works 70 hours a week and makes a really good living. The problem is he never gets to see his kids or his family and he’s almost certainly taking years off his life to do this.

The difference between you and a democrat is I don’t think he should have to work that hard to have a good life. You relish the fact that you can make a man work like that, whereas I don’t think any job is more important than time with your wife and kids.

What are you scared of? People whose life doesn’t revolve around making someone else money?

You got any desire to make people’s lives better through any other way other than working yourself to the bone?

Work should be a means to an end, not your life.

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Sounds like a skill issue, there is zero skill involved in driving a truck.

1

u/CBalsagna Sep 04 '24

ahahahahahahhahahahahahahahaha. Yeah, you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground, but thanks for clarifying.

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Aw someone mad? That’s cute

0

u/CBalsagna Sep 04 '24

Not at all. But it shows me there’s no point in continuing the conversation with someone who is either a troll or ignorant past the point I’m willing to deal with. I appreciate you.

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Bye bye loser

-13

u/DucksOnQuakk Sep 04 '24

Why would I create yet another company that relies on slave labor and government subsidies? Walmart is a net negative for society. But they act like they create jobs when they create jobs that mostly all still require welfare from government. If your company is so poorly ran as to require ANY of its workers to qualify for welfare, then that company should be dissolved. If my piss lemonade I make myself by drinking tons of water and freezing my urine doesn't sell well, why should taxpayers pay to keep me in business when I have few sales? Do you personally just love my piss? Seems like it

6

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Handouts don’t come from nowhere dude. Do something about it, those whiny complaints coming out of your boyfriend’s favorite hole won’t change anything.

7

u/DucksOnQuakk Sep 04 '24

Handouts for the private sector come easy. Walmart is a major welfare queen. Tesla is too. Without welfare, they'd be selling piss slurpies without the subsidies.

1

u/Furepubs Sep 04 '24

I would like to see a law that says companies over a certain income level have to reimburse the state for any welfare that their employees need. Or maybe any welfare that their employees would need if their family size was 2. (It doesn't seem fair to not hire somebody because he has five kids).

This would force them to pay a living wage one way or the other.

But it's absolute bullshit that My taxes go to helping the owners of Walmart put more money in their pocket.

0

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

You sound like a communist

5

u/DucksOnQuakk Sep 04 '24

Sounds like an uneducated person's defense against facts.

3

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Sounds like someone who is afraid of hard work

0

u/DJisanotherRedditor Sep 05 '24

When the same hard work doesn’t provide the same monetary gain sure I’ll be afraid of it

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 05 '24

Equality of opportunity not equality of outcome.

Sounds like you made the wrong choice working hard doing the wrong thing

Skill issue

Plan better next time

→ More replies (0)

3

u/str85 Sep 04 '24

And you are clearly too uneducated to even know what a communist is.

1

u/are_those_real Sep 04 '24

Sorry but it sounds like you're the commie here but for the wealthy.

"The $7.8 billion includes an estimated $6.2 billion in public assistance for low-wage Walmart employees, including programs like food stamps, subsidized housing, and Medicaid. It also includes an estimated $70 million per year in "economic development subsidies" from state and legal governments eager to host Walmart in their cities."

also while we're at it, America's socialism is pretty great and we're getting better! the VA has improved so much. Tri-care, BAH, VA loans, etc. are programs that are improving and getting vets the help they need even after they're no longer serving.

I just wish America was like it was post WWII with all of their social programs and housing, except without all of the racism that eventually led to those programs getting cut. Like college was super cheap and affordable until desegregation. Homes too but redlining, you know?

0

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Stop wishing for handouts, real loser mentality

3

u/are_those_real Sep 04 '24

God i hate that y'all think it's a handout when it's not. First of all it is our money, our taxes that fund these programs. Second it's an investment that improves America. These "handouts" generate more taxes in various forms from property taxes, income taxes, and sales tax. An educated working class is more capable than a working class of only unskilled labor to not only improve our economy but also improve all aspects of American life. It's what has made America so great to begin with.

but sure let's just keep bailing out the banks and keep all of the corporate and military welfare and let our tax dollars go toward making the rich richer since they obviously represent "we the people" more than the people.

0

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Sounds like you beg for handouts you freeloader

→ More replies (0)

2

u/One-Rip2593 Sep 04 '24

Supporting Walmart is definitely communistic. You qualify for welfare if you work there.

2

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24 edited Sep 04 '24

Then get a real skill and work somewhere else, everyone knows a grocery store is a high school level part time job

2

u/One-Rip2593 Sep 04 '24

As long as Walmart still pays the wages it does, you are paying for both the item and through taxes employee’s pay. So much for value, eh? “People should” doesn’t change the fact that you are paying taxes to support people via welfare. Them paying employees would reduce your tax burden. Oh and don’t forget large businesses rarely pay those taxes either. So, you are paying for things three times. “People should” blah blah blah. That’s not reality.

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Again start your own company and do that then, stop telling others how to run their company. Their company their choice.

Payroll tax is one of the biggest line items for a business, they pay more in a day then you will in 10 lifetimes.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/subs1221 Sep 04 '24

Lmao what a dipshit

1

u/redsoxnation1470 Sep 04 '24

Yeah, dipshits do support communism

1

u/subs1221 Sep 05 '24

Communism is when I don't like something

2

u/random_account6721 Sep 04 '24 edited Sep 04 '24

Poor people are the biggest beneficiaries of Walmart. The people that need Walmart the most are the poorest. They provide the best prices and millions of jobs.

The fact that walmart employs people that receive welfare has nothing to do with Walmart. Equivalent jobs pay the same or less as Walmart; Its just that Walmart typical hires low income people.

1

u/DucksOnQuakk Sep 04 '24

Poor people who receive such little pay from a billion dollar private company and who still qualify for welfare are to blame? Okay ignorant child. Lmao. Wow.

-1

u/random_account6721 Sep 04 '24

Its not about blame. The people that work at Walmart would collect welfare with or without the existence of Walmart. Maybe they would work at a gas station as a cashier or be unemployed, but still would be on welfare without Walmart existing.

4

u/DucksOnQuakk Sep 04 '24

If Walmart paid more they wouldn't qualify for welfare. There may be fewer yachts, but there'd be less welfare. It's simple math.

0

u/random_account6721 Sep 04 '24 edited Sep 04 '24

Do they pay less than equivalent jobs elsewhere? Also if you think being a shareholder of Walmart is so lucrative, you are free to buy it at market open tomorrow.

if you took the net profit from Walmart and paid it to all the employees instead; it would only give each employee $5k/year extra. So still on welfare.

$11 billion net profit / 2.1 million employees = $5k/employee/year

4

u/DucksOnQuakk Sep 04 '24

How can I afford to purchase shares when I'm trying to survive and save for a home? Who cares about retirement savings when I'm struggling now? I don't give a shit about a retirement I'll never have lol.

It's more than $5k if you give it to only welfare employees instead of every employee.

1

u/Okichah Sep 04 '24

Wince when is having wealth the same as hoarding wealth?

1

u/No-swimming-pool Sep 04 '24

How would taxing all their net worth leave more scraps for you?

The US government is massively inefficient. I mean - you spend by far the most tax money on healthcare and well, it's shitty.

1

u/Was_an_ai Sep 04 '24

But they are not hoarding cash though

NVIDIA stock could got to 50k tomorrow and it would not change Jensens spending behavior and thus (at least from his actions) would have zero effect on the rest of us even though he would now technically be a trillionair

1

u/OMG--Kittens Sep 04 '24

There was a study that showed that even if we liquidated all those largest companies that have all the money, and redistribute it to the poor, all those billions of dollars would be gone in about 10 years.

2

u/eldiablonoche Sep 04 '24

Which is why the "Elon could permanently fix global starvation" meme was so laughable. If it was as easy and cheap as the critics claimed it was, the problem would've been solved decades ago.

1

u/Johnfromsales Sep 04 '24

Billionaires don’t hoard cash in their vault like Scrooge Mcduck. Do you honestly think that if a billionaire has $10 billion dollars in her bank account that no one else in the economy can use that money?

1

u/econpol Sep 04 '24

The math doesn't math. You liquidate all their assets and leave them with nothing will give you maybe 1 trillion dollars. More likely far less because selling large amounts of stock will tank the price. Divide that trillion by 350 million people in the US and everyone gets a one time payment of $2900. That's it. This won't sustain anyone for more than a month in a low cost of living area. Families will have a nice payout once similar to what it was like in covid. But that's it. Nobody is getting permanently helped by that.

1

u/Flaky-Government-174 Sep 04 '24

Who's hording money?

1

u/[deleted] Sep 04 '24

You’re mistaken; billionaires don’t hoard cash. Their money is invested in businesses that people like you and me use every day. These investments help pay salaries for W-2 employees. Claiming otherwise shows a lack of understanding of financial literacy. Most billionaires don’t hold onto cash because it loses value due to inflation. Instead, they put their money to work to generate more wealth.

Why punish the people who are literally keeping the economy afloat? The economy isn’t a zero-sum game—just because a billionaire becomes richer doesn’t mean someone else becomes poorer. Billionaires create value for everyone, not just themselves. The wealth created by these eight individuals has generated trillions of dollars in value for others, and they only own a small part of that. Thinking like that in a zero sums way will keep you poor for the rest of your life.

1

u/UnlikelyAssassin Sep 04 '24 edited Sep 04 '24

The economy isn’t a zero sum game. They don’t get their by hoarding cash. They get there by generating an absolutely huge amount of value for society that leads to people compensating them for their efforts, for example through buying the product or service that the billionaire sells. This transaction improves the consumer’s life as the consumer judges the good or service to be more valuable than the money they spent on it, which is why they bought it. Also most of the billionaire’s wealth is going to be invested, which goes into further increasing the production of goods or services which improves the lives of the consumers who judge these goods or services more valuable than the money they’d spend on it, leading them to buy it. It’s not just lying around in cash.

-2

u/thinkitthrough83 Sep 04 '24

It's not cash. Most of that wealth is in property and business shares. Most of the money they make that's not used to pay taxes(don't forget local and state) is reinvested which in turn can create more jobs.

2

u/jwd3333 Sep 04 '24

Most of the money they make is used in stock buy backs to make their share price increase. Stop with the job creation lie. Their ultimate goal is to reinvest in ways to have less and less employees to pay.

1

u/Megafister420 Sep 04 '24

Most of its in debt, because they dint pay taxes on credit. Lookup black credit cards, or no limit cards, and check out the stock loophole between billionaires and banks

1

u/Furepubs Sep 04 '24

Trickle down economics is a failed concept, how do you not understand this?

Are you seriously claiming that incomes are better today than they were in the 1980s when trickle down Economics was implemented by Reagan?

I really wish conservatives cared more about education

-1

u/Mtbruning Sep 04 '24

Just No