Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I’m in the 1 Percent. Please, Raise My Taxes

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 101 posts

Re: I’m in the 1 Percent. Please, Raise My Taxes

#41

Post by gridlockd »

komali2 wrote: post #34
gridlockd wrote: post #24

That's an admirable expression of morals, but everyone with a calculator figure out that the 1% don't have enough money to pay for a welfare state. The plain truth is, if you want a welfare state, the middle class has to pay for it: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/demo... I was really glad to find the Washington Post publish this. Perhaps it will wake up some people to the questionable promise…

Can you clarify why you believe this is a "virtue signal?" You're the second person in this thread to do so. My understanding of "virtue signal" means promoting "virtue" over "action." And yet: > Two decades ago I turned full-time to philanthropy and threw myself into supporting public education, scientific and medical research, and visual and performing arts, believing it was my responsibility to give back some of w…

> My understanding of "virtue signal" means promoting "virtue" over "action."

That's a misunderstanding.

(edit)

"Virtue signalling is the conspicuous expression of moral values"

That's the definition on Wikipedia, which I agree with.

(edit 2)

I don't think of it in terms of "right" and "wrong".

Re: I’m in the 1 Percent. Please, Raise My Taxes

#42

Post by slang800 »

atonse wrote: post #38
slang800 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but why does he need to wait for everyone else to support it? He should set a positive example by dumping his own money into the treasury first. After all, he really does believe in this and it's not just virtue-signaling.

Errr you can’t just hand the government money randomly. You have to owe it to them. It all has to add up in some way and be accounted for.

That's not true. There's a system for sending gifts to the treasury right here: https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html

Re: I’m in the 1 Percent. Please, Raise My Taxes

#43

Post by [deleted] »

atonse wrote: post #38
slang800 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but why does he need to wait for everyone else to support it? He should set a positive example by dumping his own money into the treasury first. After all, he really does believe in this and it's not just virtue-signaling.

Errr you can’t just hand the government money randomly. You have to owe it to them. It all has to add up in some way and be accounted for.

[deleted]

Re: I’m in the 1 Percent. Please, Raise My Taxes

#44

Post by komali2 »

gridlockd wrote: post #41
komali2 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you clarify why you believe this is a "virtue signal?" You're the second person in this thread to do so. My understanding of "virtue signal" means promoting "virtue" over "action." And yet: > Two decades ago I turned full-time to philanthropy and threw myself into supporting public education, scientific and medical research, and visual and performing arts, believing it was my responsibility to give back some of w…

> My understanding of "virtue signal" means promoting "virtue" over "action." That's a misunderstanding. (edit) "Virtue signalling is the conspicuous expression of moral values" That's the definition on Wikipedia, which I agree with. (edit 2) I don't think of it in terms of "right" and "wrong".

So, what does "virtue signal" mean to you, and why should we care that you're describing someone with it? I.e., why is it "bad?"

I'm working off the definition I found on wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling

> In recent years, the term has been more commonly used within groups to criticize those who are seen to value the expression of virtue over action.

Re: I’m in the 1 Percent. Please, Raise My Taxes

#45

Post by tylerhou »

slang800 wrote: post #22
tylerhou wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except raising tax rates on everyone above a certain income is much more effective than one person voluntarily donating.

Sure, but why does he need to wait for everyone else to support it? He should set a positive example by dumping his own money into the treasury first. After all, he really does believe in this and it's not just virtue-signaling.

I don't understand why you assume that he isn't doing both. Pushing for higher tax rates, and donating money to the treasury.

Re: I’m in the 1 Percent. Please, Raise My Taxes

#46

Post by moate »

youareawesome wrote: post #17
CanSpice wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do realize that the top 1% is more than just the wealthiest 100 Americans, right? And you do realize that nobody's saying "reduce everybody else's taxes to zero", right?

Only those with more than 50 million in total assets will be paying a "wealth tax" according to Liz Warren's plan, everyone else won't be paying. I never claimed the top 1% is just the top 100 wealthiest Americans.

Senator Warren's plan would affect about 83,620 people[1].

I'm not saying you're point isn't valid, but your reference to the wealthiest 100 Americans is relatively meaningless to any discussion being had here.

Also, the federal budget is composed of so many things[2], saying that taxing high wealth individuals couldn't affect it is a bit disingenuous. The bottom line is that if you have more money in the pool (either by raising revenue or cutting expenses), you can pay for more new projects. Taxing these people could add millions of dollars to that pool. I'm not trying to say that's good or bad. It's a zero sum game here, either the individuals spend it on the projects of their choice, or the government gets it and spends it the way they want.

1-https://dqydj.com/how-many-millionaires-decamillionaires-ame... 2-https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-bud...

Re: I’m in the 1 Percent. Please, Raise My Taxes

#47

Post by gridlockd »

komali2 wrote: post #37
gridlockd wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Downvoting the truth doesn't change it, sorry!

I think you're getting downvoted for using a term like "virtue signal" to describe someone who devotes themselves full-time to philanthropy, and then diverging into a political flame-bait comment about "democrat scam."

Oh right, I forgot. One must not use opinionated speech and everything must be properly sourced in order to write a "proper" HN comment. My bad!

I have adjusted the wording.

Re: I’m in the 1 Percent. Please, Raise My Taxes

#48

Post by OJFord »

ninkendo wrote: post #26
youareawesome wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only those with more than 50 million in total assets will be paying a "wealth tax" according to Liz Warren's plan, everyone else won't be paying. I never claimed the top 1% is just the top 100 wealthiest Americans.

> I never claimed the top 1% is just the top 100 wealthiest Americans. But in a response to an article about the top 1%, you used the top 100 wealthiest Americans as a counterpoint. If you're not trying to make a connection, why bother with the analogy?

To be fair to the other commenter, they were also talking about taking those 100's entire wealth, not just taxing a bit more.

Re: I’m in the 1 Percent. Please, Raise My Taxes

#49

Post by whb07 »

komali2 wrote: post #23
whb07 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. It might be just a form of virtue signaling knowing full well they won't get their bluff called.

Hm. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling >In recent years, the term has been more commonly used within groups to criticize those who are seen to value the expression of virtue over action. This man appears to be taking action, and advocating action. > Two decades ago I turned full-time to philanthropy and threw myself into supporting public education, scientific and medical research, and visual and perform…

Which man we talking about here? Anyhow, my point is that nothing prevents Citizen X to send more money to the IRS. They talk about it and will "do it only if others do it" but like I said they are only using words rather than actions.

Re: I’m in the 1 Percent. Please, Raise My Taxes

#50

Post by youareawesome »

xvedejas wrote: post #35

But why raise income or wealth taxes when you can raise land value taxes or carbon/pollution taxes instead? My income does not harm anyone else, nor does being wealthy. But my hoarding of land does exclude land from others. My release of carbon / pollution into the atmosphere even more obviously harms other people. I think we're doing a huge disservice taxing the wrong things, when there are things that are useful to…

This is not an income tax, this is a wealth tax. Very different. You're taxed on money you are simply holding.
Post reply on HN