We can literally solve this by extending property tax to cover stock holdings

the 1% are the 1% because they are smart af, they will always find loopholes or literally FINANCE a loophole (just comprehend how rich and powerful they are) and the middle-class with their, what do you call it, 401k? will be the one suffering for it (as always)

theres no solution other than climbing your way into the 1% or preparing your offspring to go where you could not

only blue pilled libshits care about this

land is a common resources therefor its economic rent should be utilized by all the people. Collecting land rent in replacement of all other forms of taxation would allow capital to form unimpinged/untaxed, fix the problem of urban sprawl and make land/housing cheap for everyone.

Attached: landright.jpg (327x154, 12K)

there is literally no loophole for property tax

thats why you replace common property tax with land value taxation as it is impossible to pass on to tenants

Attached: hgtrue.jpg_large.jpg (2048x2048, 809K)

>people in rural America are eating cat food to stay alive.

And how is that anyone else's fault? Which part of the concept of "private property" don't you understand? Some people have more because they are smarter and more hard-working than others. They earned their wealth. Taxing them just because you can in no way resembles a fair system.

we can solve this by robbing rich people and demolishing banks

are you still gonna say that when they own 99% of the wealth? fucking cuck

Just googled requirements to be in global top 1%. You need to make $32,000 a year.

ITS FUCKING NOTHING

Attached: 1497310336669.jpg (768x652, 232K)

>own an international network of knowledge and connections
>hurr they the smartest
People live short lives, and most people can't accumulate knowledge fast enough to truly make it in today's complex world, especially if you're middle class and been lied to all your life. The most powerful people get trained to run the world, they aren't really particularly special, just like their parents before them, and theirs before them.
The competition for the rich simply starts at a higher level from childhood, which is one of the reasons democracy is a lie.

>Some people have more because they are smarter and more hard-working than others.

Attached: rigtwinglpidiots.jpg (754x382, 41K)

Why? Stock doesn't mean shit. It's not meaningful until you sell. You could be down 90% on a stock. Why should you be taxed on that? I already get fucking raped on my inheritance of $150k. I owe 30% to the government as soon as I liquidate. Fuck that.

>global 1%
So you mean every middle class westerner?

>it is impossible to pass on to tenants
Can you explain how? I don't necessarily want to dive into the topic.

>rent is the only way to make money

>We can literally solve this by extending property tax to cover stock holdings

The rishest 1% of people on Earth is everybody who makes more than about $10,000 US a year. They tend not to own much in the way of stock holdings.

But yeah, go ahead and propose taxing the working poor to redistribute their "wealth." Please do that. Can't wait to see how that goes over.

This level of wealth concentration is not in your best interests as an individual, as a society. Tough this article is very disingenuous in how it determines what that "global wealth" is, and how it is "owned".

>property tax should be unconstitutional

No it shouldn't. Not everything that you don,t like should be unconstitutional -- we'd wind up with a Constitution as long and baffling as the tax code.

You don't like something? Work to make it illegal, that's sufficient.

>hey, i offer you this tangible thing for a price
>ok

>hei i offer you this mess of corruption and embezzlement for a price
>lol no
what's so hard to understand

>Meanwhile people in rural America are eating cat food to stay alive.

And are among the 1% in OP's post. You want to redistribute their wealth? I guess put a tax on cat food.

>they earned it
Please don’t come back here again, you know full well that the kikes and their nepotism mean they don’t actually earn anything

i'm pretty focking sure that said cat food is more nutritious than average Ivan's monthly food supply

STAY AWAY FROM MY SHITCOINS NORMIE

Kek, all the billionaires are mostly in stock user. They have no income.

>this level of wealth concentration

Yeah, our working poor have too much money compared to the rest of the world.

Tax the shit out of those greedy bastards. Life will only be fair when everybody is equally poor.

its really quite complicated and if you want to know why you'll have to do some reading

basically if the rents are raised higher than the tax no one would rent from the landlord and because the LVT would make it financially burdensome to hold onto no productive land undeveloped land becomes vary cheap.

So instead of people competing for land the land actually competes for people. Why would i pay a silly rent would i could just buy/build on some cheap as shit land?

Business connections and preferential treatment are part and parcel of making money. You would know if you were a business owner.

This
What is it about the leftist that make him believe he has a claim to what is rightfully yours.
10 Commandments: "Thou shall not covet" (neighbors servants, animals, or anything else)
7 Deadly sins: Envy - It can be described as a sad or resentful covetousness towards the traits or possessions of someone else. It arises from vainglory, and severs a man from his neighbor.

>Some people have more because they are smarter and more hard-working than others.
You've never heard of inheritance, means you are definitely a poorfag, and a retard.

You missed the point. Yeah, the rich have stocks. Most of "the top 1% in the world" do not, they are working poor and middle class folks in first world countries.

Why is this a bad thing? Envy isn't a good reason.

>rentier class
>not full of corrupt individuals

Questionable, upside-down Malta.

>10 Commandments: "Thou shall not covet" (neighbors servants, animals, or anything else)

"Thou shalt not steal" is also a good one.

>I was only 19 years old.
>I loved Žižek so much, I had all the books and films.
>I pray to Žižek every night, thanking him for the knowledge he's given me. “Žižek is love” I say, “Žižek is life."
>My dad is Jordan Peterson. He hears me and calls me a cultural marxist. I knew he was just jealous of my devotion to Žižek.
>I called him a pseudo-intellectual.
>He hits me and sends me to sleep.
>I'm crying now and my face hurts.
>I lay in bed, really cold. I feel something warm...
>It's Žižek! I was so happy.
>He whispers in my ear an obscene joke.
>As I laugh he grabs me with his slavic hands, and puts me on his lap. I'm ready.
>I am all ears for Žižek.
>He penetrates my mind and expands my view on the current predicament.
>It hurts so much, but I do it for Žižek. I can feel my illusions shattering and eyes watering.
>I want to learn from Žižek.
>He sniffs a mighty sniff as he fills my young mind with his wisdom.
>My dad walks in.
>Žižek looks him straight in the eye and says,
>"We are approaching a catastrophe."
>Žižek crushes him in a debate and leaves through my window.
>Žižek is love. Žižek is life.

Attached: Zizek.jpg (640x427, 51K)

then this tax won't effect them

Property taxes are the fairest kind of tax, as they tax wealth instead of income. Income taxes ignore the super-rich and target the upper middle class primarily - the ones who can't hide their gains in tax free shelters. Taxing wealth is an excellent idea - but the elites will not be happy with you, so anyone who proposes it will probably have a "heart attack."

How does no and hippity hoppity get the fuck off my property sound?

Hey faggot, capitalism works

Attached: World-Poverty-Since-1820.png (3000x2139, 316K)

say whatever you want, their kikery is nothing compared to gubmint

Sounds like someone who drank the rothbard cool aid and forgot his roots

Attached: locked.jpg (500x651, 151K)

and like this

Attached: ancaplol.jpg (647x820, 46K)

>confusing inflation with progress

Attached: 1518019428070.png (645x729, 91K)

What someone does with their money is their thing. Why am I not allowed to give my money to my kids after I pass away? Retards like you vilify any form of wealth and property purely because you weren't handed it for nothing.

>I just bought this land with my hard earned money! Yayy in own this now!
"You sure do goyim, but if you don't continue to pay us money we will come to your house with guns and take it from you"

It's fucking stupid. If you truly owned the land you would be able to kill every commie that steps foot on it

These retarded picture(s) need to die. Go read some more dumb ass.

>not noticing poverty trending down

What gives you the right to restrict my freedom of movement? Why can't I exist on or through and piece of land that I see fit?

Yeah, nah I just like to actually own my stuff. Governments should regulate society, not property.

>poverty defined as under $2

So you're retarded, because you can't even understand what I wrote. Read again, couple of times, and then come back, retard.

Are you by chance of Latino descent?

Yes it absolutely is. My life has continued to get better as they continue to get more money.

If you own land outside of an incorporated area this is the case. No community, no public services, no witnesses.

>another idiot that doesn't know about capital gains tax

I understand what you wrote, I just can't get over how idiotic your worldview is.

>property tax should be unconstitutional, because you never truly 'own' your land, even once paid off to the broker/seller you purchased it from. The government can still seize your lands because you didn't pay into their free gibs for niggers fund.
This guy has a few Constitutional Amendments I think are good ideas and one specifically limits property-tax see section 2 of the first proposed amendment: edward.fish/index.php/2016/06/18/constitutional-amendment-booklet/
(Direct PDF: edward.fish/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Amendment-Booklet.pdf )

Serious question. I am an American citizen just as you are, and we have freedom of movement in this country. Why do you want to restrict this freedom?

I love how liberals always seem to know what my best interests are

We shouldnt try to make the rich poor or to take their wealth, but we should make them take responsibility, if you are the riches faggot in some town you should have the according amount of power over it, but everybody should know that its you who holds the power and not some strawman politican. IF you fuck up really hard people might lynch you of course, so take that as an incentive not to do that

You get to keep what you produce and nothing else

did you make that land? The state owns your land even after you pay it off even now.

Everything about capitalism is based on expansion, competition, and the emergent behavior from human greed, once there is no where to expand, negative impacts from competition begin to happen.

Those with the best starting conditions can usually prevail against those with even better ideas and work ethic. These people "win" and snuff out competition either through economy of scale or government coercion.

Pioneers looking to expand in innovative ways will open up new markets. This is the only way for the capitalist machine to keep on working and for Humanity to keep on advancing using the emergent behavior that extends from human greed. If we try and prevent human greed, it fails in corruption and stagnation.

The collection of massive wealth in the hands of the few who still have capitalistic drive will continue to look for new ways to grow and compete, meaning that things like space resources, subterranean colonization, sea colonization, etc... all become viable as a way to grow their empires which are based on expansion, competition, and the emergent behavior of human greed.

The reason this is becoming such a visible issue now, is there have been no massive devices that cause huge wealth loss in awhile. War, disease, famine, population loss, civil unrest, massive legal mob theft, etc... will eventually balance the score one way or the other unless carefully constructed mechanism are engineered to prevent this.

>"Thou shalt not steal" is also a good one.
"Thou shalt not kill" (murder) also applies to socialists.

This is the Crux of libertarian philosophy. The right to personal property is by necessity the right to restrict the freedom of others. Libertarians can't answer this question because their own values betray them.

People are free to own property and they are free to incorporate themselves in communities with mutual benefit and taxation. There are no federal property or wealth taxes; you can indeed go buy unincorporated land with the expectation to be left alone. Any other arrangement is by definition a restriction on freedom and anyone who complains about property taxes on a libertarian basis is either uninformed or hates freedom.

Gas the kikes

and still no gf.

Attached: Capture.png (1117x500, 35K)

>This level of wealth concentration is not in your best interests as an individual, as a society
as an individual or as a society?
it's not the same
why is not in my best interests?
How do you or the gov evaluate my interests?
e.g. how did the UK evaluate Alfie's interests?
e.g. how did the UK evaluate Alfie's parent's interests?
If the government evaluates that 80% tax rate is better for my interest, what can I do?
How many people are the world's 1%?
Besides families like the Rothschild, are other people entering and leaving the 1%?

>welcome to the United Megastates of America

Unless that property tax specifically poured all that money into future success-essential infrastructure & budgets there is no way this would end well. If we did that then maybe it wouldn't be such a bad idea.

Psychologically this would greatly improve the thinking of politicians during their budget talks. They don't have a pressing urgency to slay the opposition for the $ they needed for roads, the roads have already been paved by taxes on corporate stocks who profit enormously from either doing business in or exploiting the nation as is. Instead they can put that money into more fantastic projects or ideas that aren't necessarily going to bankrupt the nation as far as failures go.

The money simply won't be so elusive & we the people can see our money be put into visiting Mars, for example. Because if you let that money be brokered into the hands of the people who are going to Mars as opposed to our money going to Mars, then who is really going to Mars here?

It simply wouldn't be different & after a few voting cycles the commissions inevitably installed over the next few years would redistribute that taxed wealth back into the hands of the moguls we taxed.

Libertarians have a slave morality, they love to serve. They want to lick the boots of their wealthy masters. But, when a small population of Jews, Satanists and Peadophiles control the wealth of the world, it's not a good thing. They use it to gain control, not only over you n the sense of "you work for them", but also to exert control over the institutions of government, which humans naturally form. Well, I have hope that it will hurt them in the end. I don't want their wealth, people who screech that "oh, you just want a hand out!". Not at all, I don't want their ill-gotten gains, it would disgrace me. I just don't like the power they exert over us and will continue exert over us as their wealth increases.

>richest one percent
They should just be honest and write it as "the Rothschild family" instead.
Implying that the rest of the top1% are part of that group which will own 2/3 of global wealth is there just to deceive us poorfags in the bottom99%.

>make over 30k a year
>be considered in the 1%

woooooow

It's inflation adjusted you spastic

youtube.com/watch?v=PbQY4CKqziY

youtube.com/watch?v=oKHi-Dg_7QM

Attached: 1517124546338.jpg (809x960, 128K)

>I just can't get over how idiotic your worldview is.
You mean yours. Your only argument is namecalling, faggot.
I know it's Jow Forums, but you are so retarded, you don't even comprehend simple sentence, go back to my original reply to your post and read it out loud, and ther read your reply to it, which is completely retarded and off topic.

The amount of wealth you own is irrelevant - the important factor is your purchasing power. By this metric, for example, most of the middle class Americans who barely make ends meet would suffer taxation for being "rich". There are also other complications involved, such as different laws/spending cultures, which render these sort of non-intra country statistics virtually pointless.