• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    179
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    7 months ago

    Because this isn’t a strong economy…

    The rich are making money, but they’re just hoarding it

    So amount of money in circulation keeps decreasing, and prices keep increasing because in capitalism if a company isnt increasing profit margins, the stock price isn’t going up. And they finally figured out calling corporate greed “inflation” means around 2/3s of the country will accept it

    Either we drastically raise taxes soon, or shits about to get really really bad.

    Very few people will just sit back and calmly starve to death

        • agitatedpotato@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Totally unrelated, but I’ve been teaching my friends to shoot and how to handle weapons. Also how to homestead your backyard. I pray those remain hobbies but I think im gonna live too long for that to remain true.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      The 2/3 of the country can generally be fooled to believe anything.

      However, just raising taxes in this case may have some similarity to extinguishing fire with a burnable substance.

      You have to raise some taxes (say, on realty ownership, and some other possessions, and in general discourage possession of wealth without circulation) and lower some other taxes (say, anything taxing a transaction, I’m really not familiar with the way taxes work in USA, but in Russia plenty of taxes in hard numbers simply discourage economic activity). The goal should be increasing the actual inflation (not a good or bad thing per se). That’s if you are right about the cause, which I’m in doubt about TBF.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        In the US income taxes are different at different income levels and corporate taxes are separate entirely. We can absolutely raise taxes without raising them on lower income people.

        And yes several studies over the last couple decades have shown that US money is going up and not coming back down.

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          Differentiating income levels is another thing.

          I’m talking about encouraging people to put in use as much as possible of what they own, which means that making interaction cheaper via lowering some taxes is important to do not only for the “lower income level” people, actually it’s most important for the “rich”. That’s the candy part of encouraging economic activity, and the boot part would be taxing properties (should be done carefully, or, say, large realty companies are going to be less affected than individual owners with only their apartment\house, which would be a complete failure).

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            7 months ago

            That’s trickle down. You just described what we’ve been trying for the last 60 years. And in that time the only thing that’s happened is the wealthy take their tax breaks and hold on to it. They don’t create more jobs. They don’t pay their workers more. They store it in things like super yachts.

            Lowering taxes does not create more economic activity unless they were burdensome to start with. Which is not a problem American rich people and Corporations have.

            • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              Either you are answering something else and clicked my post by error, or you haven’t paid attention to a single word except for the “lowering taxes” parts.

              • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                I’m talking about encouraging people to put in use as much as possible of what they own, which means that making interaction cheaper via lowering some taxes is important to do not only for the “lower income level” people, actually it’s most important for the “rich”. That’s the candy part of encouraging economic activity, and the boot part would be taxing properties (should be done carefully, or, say, large realty companies are going to be less affected than individual owners with only their apartment\house, which would be a complete failure).

                This? This is the entirety of the comment, and it is the theory behind the massive tax breaks American politicians keep giving the wealthy. If you mean something else please let me know.

                • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  If you mean something else please let me know.

                  Yes, I meant what I wrote.

                  That you have to encourage circulation and discourage “hoarding”, which means that the former should be much more beneficial than the latter. For “the rich” as well.

                  “Tax breaks” are selective bullshit which shouldn’t ever happen.

                  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    Well then you’re just plain wrong. Because we’ve been lowering taxes on the wealthy for 60 years and they still aren’t circulating the money. We even tried giving them money. Just more yachts and stocks.

    • ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      The amount of money in circulation isn’t decreasing though. Wages have increased more than inflation, almost every month in the last year. Especially for median wage/salaries.

      When they say strong economy they are talking about spending, jobs etc.

      The answer is in the first few sentences:

      Housing crisis

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        The recent increase in wages isn’t even a patch on the vacuum the wealthy are using. If that was even remotely true then we wouldn’t be seeing this article.

        • SCB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          If that was even remotely true then we wouldn’t be seeing this articlle

          Did you read the article? Because it explains why