I'm puzzled by how you skipped over the fact he has afforded opportunity for hundreds of thousands of people. You seem to have a severe case of (money) envy. I don't necessarily like the guy but don't act like he's Al Capone. The corporation he created has paid more in taxes of all sorts than you and I can possibly pay in 100 lifetimes. But the "hate", I'll leave to you to stew on
Strictly speaking, Bezos as an individual is NOT the same as Bezos, corporate scion with Amazon to his name. I addressed the inequality thing as relates to sales tax. In other words...GTFOH with demands as to how and when I choose to respond to your incorrect or insane ramblings. MOST rational users are quite capable of parsing a thread. Unfortunately, I cannot do a special version of the post for you with a digital Big Chief tablet and crayon. Sorry your education fails you...
Why are you making this a complaint about his wealth when I'm talking about the federal income taxes he's paid? I've used him as an example of a tax code that needs to be updated. Please feel free to reread what I've posted. Al Capone? Please point to any significant criticism I've levied at Jeff Bezos. I will say that Jeff Bezos is not Amazon (the corporation) and Amazon (the corporation) is not Jeff Bezos. The success of Amazon was due to his role in Amazon (the corporation). His personal income tax should be treated separately. I pointed out Amazon (the corporation) role on influencing the tax code only as potential insight into Jeff Bezos beliefs. Little known fact, Jeff Bezos originally considered incorporating Amazon on an Indian Reservation to avoid all Federal taxes.
You and I agree on Amazon does not equal Jeff Bezos but I didn't make that comparison, @Horn2RunAgain did. Wouldn't your comment be best directed at them? This is the second time in a week you and I agree yet you apply another's statement to me. Care to throw more insults since that seems to be more comfortable for the person accusing others of ad hominem attacks just yesterday. While my education may fail me the the noun hypocrite is top of mind at the moment.
YOU are the one claiming Bezos, the private citizen, does not pay his 'fair share.' Yet you fail to separate Bezos the citizen from profits made by a Bezos-owned company. You completely ignored my earlier post that one can have three-comma worth on paper yet still have no substantial taxable income when it comes time for the annual filing. Stock options are not income until such time as they are exercised. There are also taxes paid during the year that reduce what might be owed at the time of filing. Someone who has a simple retirement plan with low seven figures is technically a millionaire but they didn't make a million in the given tax year. They may very well only have a taxable of less than $50K. This very simple point is lost on the sheep who only listen to the MSM babbling about 'rich people bad' all day long. Unless he has committed fraud under the Tax Code at either the State or federal level, then he paid his fair share. Period. Calling you out on your BS is NOT an ad hominem attack. Especially when I call you out on it by using your own words to have shown they were flawed...
Okay SH, how much of the federal government’ income tax receipts comes from the top 1% versus the amount paid by the bottom 50%?
Correct. Incorrect, no matter how much you try to attribute that position to me. I read it and would agree. I'm well aware of how stocks are accounted for. Could it be that's part of the change I'm advocating for? The way we account for stock ownership allows for the skewed income tax accounting for the fortunate 53% that own stock. It's a wealthy persons game and the more money you have the more you can take advantage of the favorable accounting of stock transactions. I've been the beneficiary of these rules. Heck, the old ESPP accounting rules were glorious in the late 90's. That still doesn't mean they aren't skewed to allowing those with the means to invest in stocks to get windfall wealth while limiting their tax exposure. Not trying to be captain obvious but you're not educating me, even with the name calling. If it makes you feel better then go for it. What argument are you attacking? I've said multiple times that he is following the laws but rather the tax code is what needs to be changed. You're debating shadows at this point. Great, use my words. Quoting a post then making up my arguments are not "using your own words" but rather building strawman arguments. Lawyers should know better.
Alot...now lets talk in relative terms. How much as a % of their income/wealth are they paying in taxes compared to the those lower on the rung than them?
ESOP rules don't mean people escape taxes...but those taxes don't come due until the stock is sold. I've got literally thousands of shares of what is now XOM that are split-adjusted to $2 or so per share. Because of how the trust is structured, I was not saddled with the tax when dad passed but I WILL get slammed whenever they are liquidated. In the meantime, the ONLY thing coming from them is the ~$3.48 per share. And yeah, taxes come due on that each year. Same thing happens for the 'really, really rich' people. There are no tax benefits of note for those who buy and hold. And with DRP programs, when those shares ARE sold (yeah, I have about ten or twelve stocks that I throw an amount at periodic intervals in addition to the reinvestments), figuring basis will be a royal pain.
Since SH didn’t answer, the top 1% earners pay roughly 37-40 % of federal government tax revenues back a couple of years ago. Just guessing from a bad memory.
I’m glad you asked. The top 1% earn 20.1 percent of taxable income but pay 40% of the taxes. Looks like they need a tax cut.
^And the next interesting question - what are the tax receipts from the bottom 25% of earners? I suspect that will show that the top earners are paying the lion's share of the federal income tax receipts.
SH has been given the facts. High earners pay a significantly higher percentage of their income in taxes relative to lower income earners who do not pay "their fair share". How long do you think it will be before he once again spews his nonsense that is not only false, but is the exact opposite of what is actually taking place within our progressive tax system?
Notice he included “wealth” in his tax analysis. Ultimately it’s where the liberal socialists will have to go. Taxing your wealth in addition to your income.
There is so much evidence of why Liberalism must be destroyed as a political philosophy. Gavin Newsom invites world's homeless to California And the VP has decided to help Newsom out against his recall, AS IF SHE HAS NOTHING ELSE TO DO. This is the Liberal way, make speeches, make all the wrong choices and either ignore the problems they cause or blame them on someone else. Harris vows to campaign for Newsom amid recall battle
EXACTLY! They want to tax it every single year and THEN take yet another whack at it when the estate passes in the family. It would NOT be a one-time hair cut on gross worth...
Someone needs to do a study on the Liberal's lack of common sense and logic, their dismissal of human nature, and their ability to ignore history. It is sad, but fascinating that people can be so wrong yet remain fervent about their ignorant positions. What is the cause? Chemical?
^THIS That is indicative of their reliance on "Science" so much. They are completely out of their depth if they don't have a report that says "What goes up must come down" and it has to be peer reviewed by a bunch of sheep.
I don't know. A certain amount is brainwashing. The media tells them so many "facts" that are not true but if you keep hearing it every day you'll believe it. Most of them also possess a poor sense of self-awareness.
Another Liberal hero because he attacked Trump... now we know he's a sexual harrasser... where's Kamala and Diane Feinstein to destroy him? Leader of Cuomo impeachment probe warns of 'severe repercussions' after aide's comment And here are the comments of Cuomo's ruthless sick attorney concerning the inappropriate comments made by Cuomo's Communication's Director who is trying to muck up the investigation: "Cuomo’s acting counsel Beth Garvey defended Azzopardi’s words as being protected by freedom of speech. "There is a clear difference between actionable retaliation and protected speech and it is clear that the Chairman doesn’t understand the difference," Garvey said." Liberals must be defeated. It's so obvious. I could do this all day long and our Liberal friends will continue to live a life of mental delusion.
Key point! It's useless to try to reason with them - their minds are already made up, and facts don't matter.
