Are the $Richest on Earth under-$taxed? See what the $Billionaires said about it:

Borg Refinery said:
I've given you plenty of objective reasons why it (the US system of medicine) is bad and actually has the potential to stymie people and prevent healthcare being rendered,

You don't factor any of this in.
Click to expand...
You presume I disagree about the manifold deficiencies of the U.S. healthcare system? Sir: I am a VICTIM of the U.S. healthcare system.
It is a glaring error for you to misinterpret my not having vehemently agreed, as proof that I vehemently disagree.
Borg Refinery said:
You don't factor any of this in.
Click to expand...
Actually I do. But as you already made it clear, and as I left it unchallenged, I thought we could mutually consider it uncontested between us, akin to agreement. No?
 
You seem to be flatly asserting with your question to me - implicitly in that question, that Facebook and rich individuals aren't ripping off the USA. If I've got that wrong then feel free to correct.

On it's face that would be quite a claim, even most Republicans and Democrats can at the very, very least agree on that [that Facebook and Bezos are ripping off the USA], you must surely be in a minority with your belief that they aren't.

It really can't be right that the richest country in the world - yes in the entire world - can let people live in abject poverty in states such as Louisiana with the highest poverty rates in the nation with almost no help, nothing, while top corporations that are worth more than entire countries' GDPs can get away with the most awful abuses of all kinds, from labour laws through to tax avoidance. I just think that's principally unfair and wrong.

Did you know Facebook paid 0% UK tax in 2013? They generate over $500 million in this region alone from what I'm reading on Business Insider. All of our countries just enable these awful practices to continue unchecked and t hen we elect 'low tax' govts to exacerbate the situation.
 
Borg Refinery said:
If I've got that wrong then feel free to correct.
Click to expand...
Your earlier posts make it clear that you don't understand the difference between assets and income. Wealth is not subject to tax. And shouldn't be - after all, it was already taxed when it was earned.

When you read that someone's wealth increased by X million (or billion) dollars that is generally not income - it's an increase in the book value of assets that they currently own. To repeat my earlier example - you bought a house for $100,000 some years ago. Its current market value is $500,000. While your net worth has increased by $400,000 that's not income and won't be until you sell it.
 
Shiftless2 said:
Wealth is not subject to tax.
Click to expand...
Your clarification is quite clear, and nearly correct Shiftless. Wealth is not generally subject to income tax.
Virginia is a personal property tax state where owners of vehicles and leased vehicles are subject to an annual tax based on the value of the vehicle on ...
https://www.loudoun.gov/1616/Vehicle-Personal-Property-Tax

Jurisdiction can determine whether wealth is taxed or not.
So called "militiamen" share slogans such as:

Either the law applies to all, or the law doesn't apply at all.

You can't own real estate in the United States. You only rent it from the government.

If your grandmother bequeaths to you her home, and a beautiful antique clock, the clock is yours. No one can legally take it from you. The home is real estate, subject to real estate tax. Fail to pay the tax, risk forfeiture of that real estate. Not so with the antique clock.
 
Property taxes are distinct from income taxes. But it only applies to real property. Not stocks, bonds, and the like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top