Taxing the rich doesn't work

>Taxing the rich doesn't work.

Why do people keep saying this? Has it ever actually been tried? What were the results?

Attached: Andrew Yang.png (798x802, 888K)

Other urls found in this thread:

uhy.com/european-companies-struggling-with-the-worlds-highest-fuel-costs/
europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/work/taxes/income-taxes-abroad/france/index_en.htm
europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/work/taxes/income-taxes-abroad/netherlands/index_en.htm
europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/work/taxes/income-taxes-abroad/germany/index_en.htm
expatandoffshore.com/blog/top-ten-tax-exiles
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Europe.
Works.

Attached: 307.jpg (680x591, 34K)

If I was rich and you tried to take like 2/3 of my income or shit I WOULD FUCKING LEAVE. doesn’t work faggot

>I WOULD FUCKING LEAVE
Pretty much this. Unlike non-rich plebs who are tied to their country, rich people already have residences in multiple countries, and can easily renounce citizenship and go somewhere else anytime if it seems like a confiscatory tax law is about to be passed

It worked for a while but now that they're shitting up the country with migrants, people will probably start to question why they're paying 2/3 of their income to support the shitting up of their country. This won't end well.

>taking money from whites and giving it to niggers has never been tried

>He fell for the run away meme
It works, because there is nowhere to run and if there is then these places are only for the ultra rich who will never allow you to join them (very high fees, for example look up Cayman islands and how to live there.)
Europe is a good example, the richest fled, but those who are rich because of a small or medium business can't.
The EU also works with the IRS and they give all financial information about EU citizens that reside in USA to EU.
Only corporations can do what they want.

USA used to have high tax rate for the rich back when it has its biggest growth. Retards say "bb-but the rich will just leave!!". Where will they go morons? USA is their market. Without the US market to buy their products they wouldn't make money in the first place. The point is to tax individuals instead of corporations, this way they will have to reinvest their money back to corporation instead of buying yachts

Attached: historic-lowest-and-highest-tax-rates.png (684x445, 14K)

You wont if you make income in these countries were you fled.
If these people are just rich because of inheritance then there is nothing to fear.

>Europe is a good example, the richest fled, but those who are rich because of a small or medium business can't.
Way to completely undermine your own point, satan trips. Pretty much every country has progressive taxation, so they already tax the rich so it "works" in that sense. But when people talk about "taxing the rich", they generally mean taxing them enough so that they at least can't get any richer, if not making them outright poorer over time. So all you end up doing is driving the ultra-rich out, and taxing the upper end of the middle class, as usual. Of course I guess for yuropoors the upper end of the middle class is what you call "the rich"

You imply like I am a fan of this system.

the median european is richer than the median american. USA has few ultrarich that are pushing their average up and make it look like its the average american that is richer

Pleb tier logic. The ultra-high tax rates were a direct result of the war, as was the resulting economic boom afterward. Perfect illustration of correlation not being causation, but instead both things being caused by an unrelated third factor. As for the USA being their market, I suppose you've never heard of a multinational corporation with owners/shareholders that aren't US citizens

>Europe.
>works

Attached: Fertility rate europe.png (586x624, 39K)

>the median european is richer than the median american
KEK

Why are you talking about medians when we're specifically talking about the rich, and about how Europe has high levels of taxation that prevent anyone there from becoming ultra-rich? Can you read or not?

>VAT

Because for one thing VAT is a sales tax and it's a cost-like all other business costs-is one that gets passed onto the consumer directly you fucking stupid faggot ingrate retard lmfao

Taxes like VAT are the "mysterious force" that makes gasoline 8 USD per gallon equivalent in Europe or nearly as much in places like Commiefornia despite being part of the same geopolitical entity where it can be found for half as much elsewhere.

uhy.com/european-companies-struggling-with-the-worlds-highest-fuel-costs/

Attached: OH GOD OH GOD I'M FUCKING RETARDED HURR HDURF FUCK DURR.jpg (971x1302, 270K)

Americans, no. "americans", yes.

look the dates dumbass. the high tax rates were the result of the crash which was the result of the lowering of tax rates and deregulation of wall street
thats the point. you have fewer ultra rich but have bigger middle class. In USA people still go bankrupt after a visit to the hospital

Taxing the rich is based. Once you get past 5 million dollars you're only really spending your money on frivolous things that are generally overvalued. All this frivolous spending could be used to improve society like rehab clinics or homeless shelters, but instead it's wasted on shredded Banksy art. The only reason people who are poor support it is because they believe they will some day be rich and their experience of being poor has made them guarded of their possessions as well as imagined possessions.

>low taxes on the rich caused the depression
>still talking about medians as if that's "the point" when that's not what I or anyone else in this thread was talking about before you showed up
Alright, I see I've been arguing with an idiot, which makes me an idiot as well. Gonna correct that now

>medians are irrelevant
go learn some basic economics before embarrassing yourself buddy

>What were the results?
The rich pull a Gerard Depardieu exodus leaving the plebs in their own shit.

based and euro pilled

the migrant shit is a separate issue that doesn't invalidate the fact that taxing the rich works

I didn't say medians were irrelevant, I said they aren't what we're talking about and you should fuck off with your tangential bullshit. This will be my last reply to you, so please really do fuck off

this is the 105iq take
the truth of it is, as other anons point out, taxing "the rich" as a loose defined over 1M+ networth captures the upper middle class while leaving the ultra-rich and their shell corporation games less competition
which leads to monopolies, accumulation of wealth into fewer hands, undermined democracies, and essentially the collapse of society as a cooperative effort lifting everyone involved

>I said they aren't what we're talking about
median wealth is the metric you use to see if taxing the rich works dumbass. thats the whole point. You really are completely ignorant about the subject, try to educate yourself before posting next time

so the 1m is the problem? why not create more brackets? create 1m bracket and 5m bracket and 50m bracket and 200m bracket

This user is 100% correct

Holy shit thanks to this faggot for reminding us how many retards without any understanding of basic economics frequent this board

Read a book. Seriously.

When you tax the rich, they leave. The "rich" can usually live and/or operate literally anywhere they want.

"read a book" is not an argument, mr. based conservative

Attached: pepe.jpg (306x306, 20K)

Btw this isn't even a hypothetical for me, if the US raises its highest tax bracket to an unreasonable level, I personally will literally leave. Haven't planned where I'll move yet because there doesn't seem much prospect of that actually happening on the horizon, but I am rich (though not "ultra-rich", yet) and absolutely can and will do it.

>muh basic economics
Keep the cope.

leave and go where? Europe that has high taxes too? Or India and Africa and other shitholes? The thing is, the rich can leave, but their business can't. USA citizens are one of the biggest buyers of their product so if their profit is made by American buyers it will be lost by leaving. There are countries that have 0% tax rate right now, so by your logic why isn't every single rich person gone there yet since? Do they hate money? 0% is lower than any tax rate in USA

Basically this.

Attached: tumblr_oxdyf2MrRj1wwga3uo1_400.jpg (400x291, 31K)

>we are their biggest market! AMERICA FUCK YEAH
Funny to see how in America, even a progressive leftist cannot get rid of the stereotypical American mindset.

How can you be so sure your country will still be #1 if/when AOC passes a 150% income tax on anyone making over 10k/yr?

user, I hate to break it to you, but you DO NOT HAVE TO BE A CITIZEN OF A COUNTRY IN ORDER TO DO BUSINESS THERE. I can't believe there are still people in this day and age who don't understand something so simple.

sounds like we have yet another great reason to raise taxes on the rich then

Are you stupid, that's even worse, if that country has no treaty with your nation, you pay double tax KEK.

yes but if you do business there you get taxed by the taxes of that country. Ofcourse there are loopholes to this that should be fixed
when did I say its the biggest market dumbass?

Literal cope. No, I don't want that rich man's money to pay for my government's services, he's mean and makes me feel bad, so he should just go away

yeah, we definitely want you to leave, thanks

You literally have no idea how taxes work. At all. Just stop.

You haven't addressed the point yet. What makes you think a businessman will do business with a country that openly wants his head because of ideology?

Europe doesn't tax the rich dumbass. Europe taxes the Middle Class.
Greece taxed the rich and see what happened.

keep coping

Attached: 846846564654.gif (360x346, 170K)

The funny thing about being rich is, I don't have to give a fuck what some salty loser on an imageboard wants. I love this country and want to stay, but if the wrong politicians get elected, I'll do what I have to do. Funny how that works

That does not sound very democratic.

What happened in Greece?
Very simple the so called taxed rich trashed the economy from faking economic data and taking out loans from the ECB that they could not afford.

Pointing out that what you said is factually wrong isn't "cope". You simply don't understand the difference between corporate and individual taxation

>openly wants his head because of ideology?
>taxation means they want to take his head
strawmanning hard. I said before that only personal taxes should go up and corporate taxes should go low. An actual businessman would love this as he would be able to reinvest all his profits without any tax, he would only be taxed if he cashes out to buy frivolous things

Biggest growth in US history was not post-FDR tax raises. Biggest growth in USA was the gilded age of the late 1800s.

because they started from literal 0. any growth from 0 would look the biggest

you sure sound like you care
anyway when taxes do go up you'll almost certainly stay because of inertia, which will prove our point: taxing the rich works.

>What were the results?
The rich people all left and it turns out poor people are lazy, unskilled and unmotivated, so it leads to mass starvation.

What happens is all the factories close down, the economy tanks, the money is offshore and you cant touch it. No one wants to invest in anything, no one wants to put any money anywhere because your next step is to take their assets like Venezuela did to oil companies. Simply kicked them out, said its ours now. What a great idea huh?

Attached: jews-did-venezuela.jpg (750x998, 101K)

A couple examples

europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/work/taxes/income-taxes-abroad/france/index_en.htm

europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/work/taxes/income-taxes-abroad/netherlands/index_en.htm

europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/work/taxes/income-taxes-abroad/germany/index_en.htm

Good luck there with your difference in corporate and individual taxation.

>you'll almost certainly stay because of inertia
Spoken by somebody who has never had any significant amount of money. Really? "Inertia"? This kind of thinking is literally why you are poor.

>he thinks white people are rich

Attached: 54954C77-13F9-4743-94B3-20AEC8139E94.jpg (823x823, 91K)

you'll look into a few countries with lower tax rates and then say fuck it, guaranteed.

This is a goal post move and the USA had always had a large industrial capacity since the beginning of that same century. US "growth" during the post-WW2 years was largely circumstantial and dependent on other factors like the fact that most transactions were still made with untraceable cash, nobody was filling out a W2 to report their income, and the fact that most wealthy American corporations were engaging in sketchy practices like offshore banking to hide wealth from the IRS.

So progressive and liberated.
You know what will happen in real life? They will just buy a luxury yatch under the name of their company.
>"my company needs a yacht because of reasons!"
I'm citizen of what would be considered a "democratic socialist" country and that's what happens in our reality. Oh, and because income tax is so high, this hurts employees as they can ever only hope to be as rich as their boss. Thus you have just increased inequality, so congrats to you and Bernie.

This guy is clearly living high on the hog, he needs to give Oprah reparations.

Attached: starving-appalachian-children.jpg (964x635, 130K)

Yes that's all very nice user, but what "income" am I going to have to be taxed by Europeans when all my profits from US businesses are simply reinvested in the business? No dividends. No realized capital gains because I don't sell anything. Then eventually US taxes go back down and I cash it all out. Ezpz

Gonna need a citation on that.

Taxing the rich doesn't work, what works is taxing people who can't avoid taxes, like the middle and lower class. The rich can move somewhere else as exiles all of the time. Tax the rich go ahead, but don't cry foul when they actually leave and less money is taxed.

Attached: 1560819908066.png (492x479, 353K)

lmao. USA before the 1800 was literal african tier. your only industry was slaves picking cotton

>rich people will just do fraudulent purchases to avoid tax
wow, thanks faggot. how about they get penalized for doing that dumbass

I've already lived for extended periods in 3 different countries, each of which has had its charms, although the US is still my favorite. You have absolutely no idea how trivial it would be for me to go somewhere else.

And of course the rest of the planet was a bombed out wasteland and left the USA with an essential monopoly on production.

>he keeps acting like anyone in america would give a fuck if he left

there are no examples in history of a country increasing taxes on the rich and then the rich doing a mass exodus. because it doesn't happen.

Yea, Trump should tell the CEOs of the big motor companies to fuck off instead of building 10 factories in Michigan. We dont need them, we can eat dirt cake like Haitians.

How will they be punished if they own politicians, courts and the best lawyers?
No sign of your democratic socialism working yet. Keep trying.

You're literally the only one in this thread who's persistently getting on my case about saying I'll leave, and trying to find bizarre reasons why I wouldn't, alternating with telling me that I should because you don't like me. Given that this thread is specifically about whether or not rich people can leave a country to avoid taxes, I think it's fair to say you're getting a little butthurt here buddy

> USA before the 1800 was literal african tier.

USA before 1800 was barely a country. And also please cite your source on USA being "literal African tier" because I'm going to call bullshit. If by Africa tier you mean USA was largely agrarian pre-1800 you are correct but so was the rest of the Western world so this is irrelevent. And like I said, I wasn't really referring to the late 18th century, I was referring to the early 19th century where the industrial revolution was flouring in the USA and what would go on to be traditionally referred to as the gilded age had yet to even begin. The USA objectively did not start from 0 economic capacity. This is just a bullshit cope you pulled out of your ass to move the goal post.

Europe's system only seems "fair" to them because first of all they're fucking effeminate retards and also because America's has been (((mismanaged))) directly on their faggoty dunning-kruger behalves for so long. In Europe you pay income and sales taxes like WW2 never ended to pay for the kids no one's having (the EU territory population only increased by 25% or so over the last 60 years-America's has very nearly doubled, but that's also in large part to a "refugee crisis" that's lasted more or less just as long), the illnesses the gratifyingly health conscious triple digit IQ population isn't contracting and the military it isn't funding (despite a certain important international agreement meant to intimidate possible challengers to western hegemony entering the world stage like China).

Europe's system relies on material economic protectionism where they dump products into the U.S. in particular duty-free and face zero foreign competition in domestic markets because no one's going to turn around and buy an American compact car for 35% more than a European one by fiat default as one example. This truly vulgar arrangement is particularly evident in the healthcare sector where companies like Sanofi and Novo-Nordisk (two European companies who control 72 percent or so of insulin production world wide) charge EU and third world countries unsustainably low prices their company wouldn't even break even on and charge unsustainably high prices to their "allies" in the U.S. to the point where people are literally dying in the street-and through all that we have to hear their little gay command economy surface level success story used as an anecdote for why the completely unrelated system of ccommunism works (it doesn't lmao) by literal dick sucking faggot trannies. FUCK (YOU)

Attached: balance2.jpg (1346x1381, 498K)

>expatandoffshore.com/blog/top-ten-tax-exiles
These are a few example of top UK musicians avoiding taxes by going offshore. Trust me when taxes become too high and you can make better profits somewhere, they will leave. And you would too, if you were making a lot of money and you had the power to move wherever you wanted.

>we shouldn't tax the rich because the rich wouldn't pay the tax anyway
so by your logic increasing the tax to the rich wouldn't matter since they won't pay it anyway right?
thats the point dummy. the industrial revolution was obviously the biggest growth for all countries because they all started from 0 aka agrarian society, my argument was obviously for the industrial period not before that

Attached: aa2242132.jpg (415x470, 39K)

Im going to take the lack of replies to my posts as commies being BTFO and not having any arguments. Im not even a capitalist but youre fucking dumb.
Im also leaving the thread so you cant just go back and reply them because I made this post, this post is you admitting defeat.

Attached: The-Laughing-Boy.png (517x586, 554K)

communism doesn't have taxes. taxes are part of the capitalist system

it would be great if pricks like you left, but sadly i don't think you will, if heaven forbid your taxes increase by 10%. you will rationalize staying because the costs of moving and redoing your whole life in another place most likely is higher than just paying the extra tax. this is ignoring the fact that you are almost certainly larping as a rich person anyway.

>thats the point dummy. the industrial revolution was obviously the biggest growth for all countries because they all started from 0 aka agrarian society

Except the gilded age did not occur during the industrial revolution, which was my point. The industrial revolution had already laid the foundation for America's economic output, so they did not objectively start from 0, moron. The industrial period is often cited by historians as ending around the mid 19th century. Gilded age occurs post civil war and only built on a large scale economic capacity that the United States was already capable of.

You fucking faggot, who's talking about leaving if taxes go up by 10%? Your jealousy and resentment are sickening and pathetic. If you weren't so distracted by your butthurt you'd notice that in my very first post here I said "confiscatory" tax rates, like the 90% top marginal rates the US used to have.

>Except the gilded age did not occur during the industrial revolution
only that it did

90% taxes is a strawman. and back when the US had it, it was during war time, and patriotic rich people were happy to pay it.

It's not a "strawman" you jealous idiot, it's the literal subject we were discussing until you decided to chime in with your snide comments. Jesus, the fucking self-righteousness on some of you leftist losers is just unbelievable.

So you're just lying now. But even if you claim that the industrial revolution was simultaneously existing with the gilded age, it would be (It wasn't), it is objectively apparent that industrial revolution had already been in full swing since the early portion of that century. We are talking almost a half century of industry already existing before what would become the greatest growth in wages in US history. Most of Europe was not experiencing such a degree of wealth in that period despite their previous industrialization. If anything millions of Europeans were literally migrating to North America for economic opportunities.

you sure sound angry

industrial revolution ended in mid 19th century only for UK not for USA. Your gilded era was basically the late industrial period

Corporations in the EU aren't taxed extraordinarily high either in most countries by the way, just their pathetic, state-worshiping dumb fuck people LMAO

Attached: HAHAHAHAHAHA.png (1685x1295, 143K)

he's saying that the ~90% tax rate was during war time; patriotic rich were willing to pay during a world war.

they wouldn't be willing to pay however to absolve stupid faggot liberals of their student loan debts or give you free access to hospitals so you can go to the emergency room every time you stub your toe.

just get a better job if you aren't happy with your quality of life, quit looking at the rich for handouts, it makes you look pathetic.

You sure sound like you've tried every possible argument and got btfo on every single point and "haha ur angry" is all you have left. Talking to self-righteous losers pisses me off sometimes, so sue me.

America doesn't even make sense, how the hell is somewhere like Mississippi on paper richer than most European countries but on the ground is a complete shitole?

>was basically the late industrial period

No, it wasn't. But even if I were to take that into consideration the gilded age was not occurring at a time where we were starting from 0, because the industrial revolution had already been in full swing for basically the entire century. Just admit it, moron, FDR's America was not peak economic growth.

>he's saying that the ~90% tax rate was during war time; patriotic rich were willing to pay during a world war.
The US is perpetually at war. If I were alive during WWII, I may well have been happy to pay 90%. However, I'd be less enthusiastic about funding things like the Korean War or the Vietnam War, and since the top rate remained at 90% until the 1960s and was 70% until the 1980s, this is a terrible argument.

now you're sounding more and more like a LARPing Jow Forums faggot

You are about 0.10-0.15 more optimistic
My euro shithole has lower fertility rate than japan
Because salaries are just enough for the rent...without the food for the entire month

>USA started from 0
>Umm actually your largest wealth explosion in fact occurred later on in a period of economic growth

Do you have any smooth brained wojaks in your image folder to share? I need one that looks like you

even if it wasn't literal 0 it was still during the industrial period, most of that growth was purely technological and had nothing to do the system. Its funny how your entire argument is completely irrelevant with my original point since I was obviously talking about the modern era. I might as well say that prehistoric humans going from hunter gatherer to agricultural society was even bigger growth. Your premise is irrelevant and has nothing to do with the modern era growth

This is false when you begin to take into account the EFFECTIVE tax rate.