What is your opinion on "tax the evil rich" theory?

[VICTORIA STUDIES]

(Inspired and asked by Neo)

When I hear "any" speech from a Politician, the first thing that comes to mind is "Customer Service". When Politicians talk about the evil rich, they are simply trying to win votes. It's all business. Democrat Politicians vs Republican Politicians is like Pepsi vs Coca Cola, Mcdonalds vs Burger King, Apple vs Google, etc. It's one group of rich multimillionaire Politicians against another group of rich multimillionaire Politicians playing hot potato trying to convince the lower class that the other is the bad guy. They are not "against" the evil rich, otherwise they would be against themselves. There are many rich people who hurt from the "get the evil rich" idea but there are many who benefit from it. There are countless companies and "very" wealthy people and corporations who will benefit upon Obama's re-election and "get the evil rich" theory. Politics is not just politics. It's business and it's always been this way. Even the President doesn't just collect his paycheck for being the commander. He has multiple sources of income. The "You didn't build that" speech was part of Obama's customer service to maintain his traffic flow. Just like "Romney's 47%" speech was his.

The "people" are not direct customers however and this is what confuses the average person who does not have the business knowledge to understand what's really going on. Sponsorship is the keyword. For example, How did Mark Zuckerberg get so rich if he provides free service to the people? Because the people are "not" his customers. The "people" "you and I" are his "products" he is "selling" to his customers! "Facebook" is "not" Mark Zuckerberg's product, it's his leverage. Your "eyes" is Mark Zuckerberg's products. The multimillion dollar companies who sponsor Facebook or advertise on his website are his "customers" that he sells your eyes to. Same with Google, Yahoo, Youtube, and yes.. EVEN celebrities and music artists. This is why you can see one group of multimillionaires trying to convince you that another group of multimillionaires are the bad guys. Like one insurance company critisizing another insurance company when they're both equally guilty of profiting from your mistakes. So many average people blame Democrat Presidents or Republican Presidents for life struggles not "realizing" that they are the potatoes and their life will continue to struggle (Regardless who is president) until they "play" this game instead of being the "ball".

In the real world, you are "customers" to one group and you are "products" to another. When politicians try to win your votes, it's because the more votes he has, the more products! The more products, the more power. It's all about profit and what is lucrative! Otherwise no human being would try this hard to be on top. The business world is tricky but the more you live in it, the more you understand. The more you understand, the less you rely on politicians. It's one giant rouge elephant playing hot potato with another. And "you" are the potatoes. The best way to make your life better is to rely on yourself and whether you are "rich" or "poor" as long as you're not hurting or violating the rights of others, trust that you are a good person and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Trust that it's "ok" to be rich and most of all trust that becoming rich is "not" as hard as it seems. Anyone can do it but they must first "accept" a new ideology they may rather die before accepting.
CoolLuke, the economic crash was ignited in 1971 when Nixon took us off the gold standard. Globalization drives the wealthy to migrate other nations and fiat money inflates the U.S. dollar. Again.. Blaming politicians is "not" a strategy for success. There is a real way.

[college kid]

I think its terrible... I already know im not voting for Mitt Romney. Still, I feel like im in a rock and a hard place when it comes to voting for obama or romney.

[surfagirl]

Wow, very impressive theory, perhaps, one that should be considered . . Here's a "Hoku" for you! =P

[CoolLuke]

We incurred a massive deficit under GW Bush who fought two wars while cutting taxes at the same time. This brought us from a budget surplus to a 7 trillion dollar deficit. His policy of deregulation of the financial industry led to a disastrous economic crash, that further cut into gov, revenue.

The rich control at least 85% of the wealth in this country. So if you are going to pay down the deficit you can either throw it all on the backs of the poor and the middle class who have very little of the nations wealth or you can ask a rich guy to hold off on buying a tenth yacht until the deficit is payed down.

Also the percentage of income taxes the wealthy are paying has declined drastically over the last twenty years. The rich are paying a lower percentage of income tax than your average working person.

[Duke]

Well I am all for taxing the evil rich.... for that matter tax the evil poor and middle class too. I am 100% in favor of taxing evil people until the cows come home. However we have yet to have a single tax code written based on the morality of the citizen.

[CAustin]

If by "tax the evil rich" you're referring to the political strategy of class warfare, then it's an easy and effective one. It's pretty easy to convince the poor that the rich are evil, to convince the rich that the poor are useless, and to convince the middle class of both things if you want to - people are highly receptive to stereotypes about people they don't have much contact with.

But if you're using the phrase derisively to try to dismiss stimulus economics, I'd say explaining its effectiveness is a tall order for you. The concept of applying taxes to parts of the economy where money is stagnant (e.g. the nest eggs of millionaires, the standing capital of extremely stable massive corporations, and the capital gains of trust fund children), and injecting that money into parts of the economy that are dry and bottlenecked (e.g. the pocketbooks of the unemployed) is not only good theory; it's what has broken every economic depression in this nation's recent history.

TL;DR: You might argue that a product has cheesy marketing, and you might be right. But that doesn't mean it doesn't work as advertised, or that it's not worth buying.

[CAustin]

the rich is rich simply because they exploit others... THere is no way to be rich without stealing from others... This is the absolute rule of capitalism LOL...

WHy cant I be rich? SÄ°mply because I dont steal from others...

[Richard P.]

I don't think we can automatically label the "rich" evil or not. Many are not, though some have become rich from unethical business.

It does make sense to tax high earners a higher proportion of their incomes than lower earners: 50% doesn't automatically put a millionaire in dire straits but so someone on a low wage it would.

It doesn't make sense to do this to excess when there are so many tax loopholes for those who can afford good lawyers and accountants to exploit, however. And it can make the tax system too complex.

There is also the argument that allowing the rich to spend or more of their earnings could be better for the economy, and it allows them the opportunity to donate more to good causes. It's all about balance.