Tucker takes on professor who's an admitted socialist calls for making the rich pay more than their 'fair share' in honor of Tax Day. Does this include Bernie Sanders?
I am against this but we must be fair in how we critic. The United States has had extremely high tax rates for the wealthy in the past and we did not have many leave back then. Most will stay because as of right now, they are still able to make their millions here, even with high taxes. Keep in mind that she is not saying to tax all of the wealth at 80%. She is saying to tax wealth over X amount. I don't remember if she said that number though.
“I have never understood why it is "greed" to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.” - Thomas Sowell
@@sptrader6316 ... Theft can be related to greed because when the government steals your money the greedy politicians find ways to put the majority stolen into their pockets indirectly as they give out pennies to the actual causes they claim to fund. One has to wonder how a career politician gains wealth enough to purchase multi million dollar properties and do it legally with the salaries they are paid along with how much they spend on their "election campaigns". For the longest time I never understood why someone would spend millions of $$$ to get into an elected position that only pays $100,000 and then I started to learn how they really get their money after they are in office. Insider trading, kickbacks to their friends businesses, setting up "charity foundations" that only need to have a 25% liquid asset base and only has to pay out 10% of what they bring in towards actual charity vs 90% towards "administrative costs", huge "speaking fees" at elitist events and a ton more we are not even aware of yet.
Because "George W Bush lied us to TWO wars he didn't pay for!(& if your stupid enough to believe THAT you're stupid enough to believe what Dr. Sowell was pondering!)
@@jrooksable ... It depends on the theft. I would say a good portion of the theft is envy and coveting another's possessions. When it comes to the government it is greed.
Canada tips. Other countries don't use tipping because you pay a 20% VAT and 45% income tax rate. Those jobs don't pay a livable wage in other countries either.
Which is why certain high ranking officials are pushing for legislation in other countries. where we don't have to bow to the economically elite, where we can live in a fair society. Sadly, profits will always be over people. bowing down to them doesn't make us patriotic, we all know they should contribute their fair share. bowing down makes us look weak and allows them to gain even more control over the world around us.
Keep in mind: this is a professor talking. This is someone who received an education and provides one to others. How did she make it this far while being this utterly blind to reality?
Yep, and her teaching is a big reason we have an entire generation of entitled people who think they shouldn't have to work, who live with their parents at 35 yo, etc.
James Hughes I wouldn’t waste your time concerning yourself with a socialist. They’re hypocrites so your never gonna get anywhere in a debate with them.
@@brentrollens8090 why not they Are regular teachers, 🤔 no wait they aren't! They Never have to pay out of pocket for supplies for their student's or clothes, or books, or food, or have to care if their students pass. So no they already make a ton more and do less work so no they shouldn't get payed more but less.
That makes no sense. If I donate $100 to charity and write it off on taxes, I save about $15 on the taxes. So I'm still down $85. Donating to charity costs money, period. You only get a percentage back, from deducting the donation from your taxable income.
Charitable contributions are only itemized deductions for individuals so the benefit isn't huge. If you're a joint filer you would need to make over $24,000 of charitable contributions to have any tax benefit of making contributions
Whenever I hear the words professor, liberal, and California in the same sentence, I know logic, rationale, and comprehension isn't part of the equation.
I, too, am in favor of prejudice. It clearly helped our ancestors survive and reproduce, else we wouldn't have that tendency. And what's good for tribal people in the African savanna must be great for us.
Its proven that over the majority of homeless or financially struggling people are in that state due to domestic violence or loss of jobs, so it isn't necessarily that these people are lazy, it that they don't have the same financial opportunities as others who actually can spend 200K on college. So if people actually live on a socialist level, they will already have housing, food, healthcare, etc. But I also don't think its exactly fair to take away 80% of the top 1%'s money to suffice for the rest of the country but everyone will have more than enough money to spare even if they give up 80% to taxes as they will already have housing, food, healthcare, etc.
the funniest thing in a socialist system is when those "people" first demand "free education" and then instead of saying a tank you they demand a "high income", because they "have a degree". This is the commonest refrain in the post-USSR.
SCHOOLS TEACHING PROFESSORS IN CALIFORNIA ARE DOING A POOR JOB IN ECONOMICS 101 AND CREATING GRADUATED MORONS LIKE THIS PROFESSOR WITH MASTER IN BULL S-----T!!!!!!!!!
She “donates” some of her money here and there…BUT, she doesn’t want to give it to the government….Yet she want everyone in the “one percent” to give it to the government…..
Like the hollywood 1% elite who benefit from those tax cuts telling people the other 1% are the problem, yet gates, buffet, benzos, bloomberg etc... are all democrats. LOL how can there be people still believing this con game.
Yes because her donating money isn't going to change anything and will impact her life a lot more than the top 1% getting taxed more. This is why we're talking about policy on the group of people that have the most money and impact hundreds of thousands of them or even millions of them getting taxed a bit more to greatly benefit 100's of millions of people.
@@idontlikeyouyo you wrong because the top rich are investors not spenders that created the conditions for the poor to get jobs. Bakunine, an important USSR member, said to a socialist Russian milionaire that wanted to give his money to the poor "don't do that because you are simply creating another poor. What needs to be done is changing the all system": and in USSR they did it and look how it ended up. I am saying that taxes in USA need to increase for the richest 1 % but not at that level because you will remove money from the economy since the state will loose that money by increasing the bureaucracy to control all the new functions it will have to do to replace the private sector. That's the difference between Europe and USA. The economy in Europe is a stagnant economy compaired to USA economy since the states have such high level of taxes there is no money availabe for the economy and people don't bother to work because more work doesn't mean more income.
She is a college professor - she should give away her top 1% GPA students grades to the D students. It's all about taking from the rich and giving to the poor. Do it with her students grades. Would she agree with that?
This comparison is great. Just as good grades are a product of hard work and intelligence, so is succeeding in a capitalist society. Therefore , why shouldn’t she give some of her tops students grades to her poorly performing students?
Luryk Nadel don’t worry, it won’t ever happen, because the top 1% choose the laws by having control over the politicians. A law like that would never pass. Higher taxes on the middle class and the poor however - easy
Didn't the US have a top marginal tax rate of 91% in 1960? That's equivalent to a tax on all wealth above 3 million dollars today when corrected for inflation. Interestingly enough, we were going through a very prosperous time back then and the top 1% didn't all leave the country because they paid too much in taxes.
@@robert9561 to be fair back then it was still the Cold War and Vietnam War ongoing back then, add that to globalisation not being as far spread as it is today. Means options were very limited back then. Now the top !% can pick and choose their country they want to live in like ordering from a menu.
@@robi6317, Consider the math. She comes from a wealthy family who most likely won't be affected by an 80% tax. But once taxed at 80%, those 1%ers will no longer be 1%ers. And her family will find themselves at the top of the food chain.
Yeah poor Bernie, apologizing for being an old white male. I'm sure he has plenty of refugees and illegal immigrants living in his 3 homes. A wise person once said... The problem with Capitalism is Capitalists. The problem with Socialism is Socialism, eventually you run out of other people's money...
@@dakid8568 Get over it, you lost, so pop the dummy back into your mouth, pick up teddy and run all the way home to your mommy! (also get some therapy before Tuesday, 3rd November 2020)
MissinInAction that's great and its good knowing that you are willing to help those who need it (however you donate your money idk). But it is difficult to understand how someone's hard earned money is taxed at a high rate as she is saying because a considerable amount of the population is simply leeching the system
@@isaiahdillard4598 i think you're confusing top 1 percent of 330 million people with top 1 percent of 330 million people economically, if not then I'd like to refer you to your Gini index.
@@davinciandres6131 Abortions have gone way down since Roe v Wade. Reverse consequences are very common. There are twice as many guns now as the 1990s, but half the gun crime. Reclaiming swampland leads to flooding. Outlawing clove cigarrettes started a clove craze in my highe school. Etc.
I agree with her. The top tab bracket was taxed at 91% under the Republican Eisenhower administration. It was the period of highest growth and prosperity for all classes
She’s so dumb she says “not your viewers tucker”. So no rich people watch tv now? Tucker is the most watched news program on TV by far. Also tucker is on the top 1% of earners so she is talking about taxing him.
That level of success has to do with luck, not work. The 1% did not "work" to achieve their success, they were given their success by factors out of their control.
@@JackPetersonEnergy um… let’s just go with that for now, you don’t believe that someoen who wins a lottery should be able to get the money he was promised? If someone wins $400,000, your saying they should go home with 80,000 that’s a bit unfair
Kathleen Vance I don’t care if someone has 10 dollars or ten trillion dollars. What they do with they’re money is on them. My God loves a cheerful giver. Not Scrooge held at gun point
Tre' Roney I do not understand your parallel here. Cheerful giver?😉when you earn your own money, you don’t want someone else choosing how you spend it.
Kathleen Vance that’s my point. Let’s say for example I’m a millionaire. If I CHOOSE to donate my money to a charity then that’s fine. If not that’s fine too. When the government FORCES that money from me then it’s not done from the goodness of my heart. Point being giving money should be a consensual thing
Tre' Roney The government thinks our purpose is to give them our money and they should get paid to spend it for us😂and the money we have given them has been misspent.
Raky I see that you’re assuming the gov isn’t trying to convince you to allow them to tax people even more. You have the right to not work for/ buy from corporations. If you feel like their stealing from you then stop supporting them haha. Work hard, keep your money, don’t let a man with a gun take it from you (the gov)
Yeah, Domino. That's the problem. Smh. Im a Trump supporter... But those rich people literally don't pay for anything. Everything and everything is given to them. Things like Prizes, guitars, food, gifts of all sorts that they have no use for and stash in one of their 20 junk bedrooms. They get expensive stuff handed to them. They should pay more for having the opportunity to make that much. They can't make it ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD. We have leverage. And its capitalism. America sees the profit. Rich people (top 1%) literally pay for nothing.
@@jaylibrande1325 everyone supports someone else being taxed more. I think the gov wants this so that you’ll support them taking more money (to then use amongst themselves). Once you vote to tax the guy above you- they’re gonna go to the guy below you and tell him to make you pay more in taxes. Because you make way too much and it’s not fair to the other guy.
my ex, a body positivity artist with the proportions of a model, 3 months in i got out faster than Usain Bolt, mental stability is worth more waaaay than a pretty face
Tucker is shocked when he realized he is amongst the 10% richest folks in the states and when he heard her say "tax the 1%" which nearly made him question his existence. 😂
If you are making 90% of this country's income than you should be paying 90% of it's taxes. You really don't get what it's like to be that rich do you? They would make that 80% amount in two weeks. Capital gains, investment income, stock dividends.... They pay their lawyers and accountants more than the country would want for taxes to avoid paying any taxes as it is. You are protecting them as they steal you blind. This country is paying for the military that is protecting their assets and holdings around the world.That is expensive. You are contributing, They are not. Of course our Dear Leader doesn't pay either. Just not a fan of taxes or Vietnam, I guess.
stephen kroll Bezos doesn’t pay tax. His company doesn’t either. His company also doesn’t pay his employees, so they need federal aid. Whose taxes are paying for Jeff’s employees?
@stephen kroll "And once they do achieve that job status and start earning above the $475,000 tax bracket, now their kicked down to a much lesser income, because you want them to." That's literally 100% NOT how that works. You never lose more money by going up to a tax bracket.
@@amazingbait26 That is true but it kills the motivation to go above that bracket. Why earn more than $475k if every dollar I earn from that point forward will lose 80 cents?
Christopher Cope That’s a dumbass way of thinking. So if you think something isn’t where it should be you just let it be? Next time you think something can be improved upon, and it’s not yours, just give up.
@@joeasuncion2891 I never said that "if something isnt where it should be I let it go." I never even implied that. Just because I dont believe that the solution to the country's problems is for a group of people to pay 70% or more in taxes doesn't mean that I want to ignore the problem. I can't put myself in more debt than I can afford to pay and then hold a gun to my bosses head and demand he pay me more money so I can keep spending and pay my bills. If I can't afford my bills I have to cut back. Just because we disagree doesn't mean you need to start calling names and putting words in my mouth. If you don't understand my points and reasoning, ask questions.
Hmmm, let's see...these folks (billionaires) are in favor of higher taxes for the the wealthiest Americans: Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Michael Bloomberg, Ray Dalio, Pierre Omidyar, George Soros, Eli Broad, Marc Benioff, Mark Cuban, Leon G. Cooperman...are they rich enough for you??!!! They may not advocate an 80% tax on themselves, but certainly way more than they are currently being taxed (70% in some cases)!!!
Tommy Eleven Incognito Hahaha rich people do not create jobs. Jobs are created when the lower/middle class has the capital to go out into the economy and buy good and services. If the lower/middle class has no money to spend you get stagflation which is exactly what we have right now!!
My eyes are watering listening to this professors delirious reasoning , this woman is a real tool, no wonder todays youth are so misguided in life, what a total joke she is
When she says top 1%, she very clearly means people earning over a certain amount. She's not suggesting a tax bracket that literally ranks people based on income and taxes based on that. And to suggest such is either dishonest or idiotic.
Professor should be the first to pay 80% tax rate….. what a clown, and she is teaching and molding students…. She is a horror show….. rules for thee not for me
@@xN811x why does that matter? She should live within her means and give the rest to the Gov. She is wealthier than most people, just cause she's not in the 1% doesnt mean she cant contribute to the system she espouses.
@@alansnyder9 The system is inherently broken. There will be no change if random individuals donate their money to the government. We need to get to the 1% - that's where the big capital is. Another problem is that most of wealth is inherited. Power and influence stays in the same family.
@@xN811x So why not donate her money to a good charity? You can research those and find out where your dollar goes and how much of it goes to the poor. She could, if she properly researches, get .95 cents on every dollar to the poor, which is WAY better than any government program would do.
because she is not part of the group she is talking about. he's an idiot that wanted to spend the whole time accusing her of not donating enough, then finally at the end he realized she was saying only the 1% which she is not a part of.
@@twayne4608 Millionaires will still be millionaires and billionaires will still be billionaires. Don’t worry they will still be richer than entire cities and even countries and they will still hurt the economy by keeping trillions stored away in bank accounts. The American Dream will not die due to this, in fact, the billions used in public programs can enable people to rise and therefore revive the American Dream, which has died in the last couple of years as most wealth is inherited rather than earned. That’s why countries with strong social welfare, such as the Nordic countries, rank higher than the US in terms of free market economy index. If people aren't willing to provide a fair share and therefore hurt society as a whole, then that's something we could consider a punishment.
@@jakeguitar4455 Which part of what I said is new to you and therefore includes a message you don’t understand? Your reaction is rather troublesome since everything I said has an entrance level on par with economics 101 or common sense... displaying that you don’t understand would mean... oh well, nevermind.
dbdevour that's not necessarily true Rich parents and she probably didn't have to work while in college. Lucky enough to study all day Or example if she had a brother. Being a male he'd probably work much more while In college vs get a female where parents give her everything
James Honores the French found that out the hard way a few years back didn't they. www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/31/france-drops-75percent-supertax money.cnn.com/2016/04/01/news/millionaires-fleeing-france/index.html
@Grady Whitman What a goofball you are. Nevermind the fact that this stuff isn't taught in a public High School, here is how it works. A millionaire's child sets up a charity. The parent donates to that charity. IRS requires that the charity only spends 5% of its donations. The rest can be spent on salaries and "expenses." Which is a way of laundering the money to the child. If you donate stocks and bonds rather than money the capital gains tax is eliminated. No income tax is due on the money used to set up a charity. Go BaCk To ScHoOl. You're welcome for the insight, boomer.
Taxing the rich that own the companies that employ the American citizens will have to cut the pay for their employees or let them go! I say lower the salaries of politicians !
@@MCPretzelM999 80% for the top 1%? So that means if you make 475k + you should pay 80% of it in taxes. Alright, so that means you have a hard working individual. Who saves up money and decides to take a major risk to start his/her own company. This company becomes successful after many years of hardwork and is now profiting 475k while employing and taking care of over 150 individuals. But now your law has passed and because of the 80% of taxes being paid this hard working individual who took major risks and made many sacrifices to grow his/her business is now making 95k and is of equal pay as many of the employees who did not take any risks and did not grow a business from the ground up dedicating years of their life too it. Well sorry but businesses fail all the time. Why would I in this world EVER take the risks to start a business. I wouldn't meaning all of those jobs that would have been making people happy and earning steady income have now faded away because business owners do not see the incentive of so much risk for so little reward. Anyone who thinks taxing the rich at such an outrageous amount has clearly not though things through and just likes to complain about people who became rich because they earned it.
@@jonathannaranjo1856 Yeah, you don't fund a business just by your own income. There are many other ways. As Carlson noted, you don't make billions just by income, you make it by capital gains and hedge funds. Did you watch the video?
@@jonathannaranjo1856 By the way, she didn't "complain" about people who became "rich because they earned it." That's so far removed from the discussion. I think this is more a personal problem for you than a political problem for Americans.
@@MCPretzelM999 then what rich people is she complaining about? the people who won the lottery? how does one obtain such a large quantity of money if they did not work hard to earn it? whether that being investing wisely or putting all your chips on the right pony?
if someone earnt 100 million last year and was taxed 80% do you think the average american would feel sorry for that guy? oh no you poor thing! you only have 20 million to play with!
She's talking about people, on salary, who "earnt" $470k per year. That's not "rich" these days. That's barely wealthy. The question is, why isn't her primary talking point corporations who are paying, effectively, ZERO tax? Why is she targeting individuals who actually spend money to live and DO fuel the economy?
Wow if someone taxed me 80% I would leave my money in a country with lower taxes or just leave the country. Why would I work for 20% of a pay check. Fyi the federal government is supposed to take care of the country. The States and local counties are supposed to take care of the people.
@@teenagehustler900 Good point. People are ganging up against the professor without acknowledging that she made the point that she favored taxing everything above $470,000. It's kind of a good point she made there, but everyone here is ignoring that.
@@rigelbellatrix8410 What point is that? Conveniently a bit more than she likely makes. Who is she to set the standard? And who is she to say that the wealthy don't pay their share?
Ask her to disclose her tax returns Tucker, then let's see how much she actually donates. And if she doesn't know how to pay an extra 40% on her income, what remedial math classes did she fail? Please, "if I knew how."
Listen up you idiots...the top 1% make orders of magnitude more than college professors. In fact, many electricians make more than college professors, would you call them rich? You morons must hink college professors are millionaires...those who are, did not get that way from their salaries!!!
Nick Zedd the top 1% such as owners of huge corporations create the most jobs for america. That itself gets the middle and lower class. Only people that hurts is the “unwilling”
@Nick Zedd, so refusing to allow your money to be stolen is theft? So if I see a robber going into someone’s house and stealing their stuff and if I stop the robber and prevent the theft then I am stealing by stopping the robbery? Your logic is completely invalid and based on pure incompetency.
@@NickZedd1 You want to heavily overtax the 1%. They will leave and go elsewhere taking their job creation and money with them, all of this leaving the economy. Hello Great Depression 2.0
@Shlomo Bergenstein My friend I am born into the 0.1%, my dad was not. He was lower middle class software developer in India. It is a very big misconception that the 1% people consists a majority of people who inherited their wealth
I dont care how much money a person makes ... if someone took 80% of my money I would be pissed ... I wonder if she actually records herself and listens to what she is actually saying.
@stephen kroll you don't understand how progressive taxation works. 80% of your income isn't taxed and taken from you - 80% of your earnings over 470K would be taxed at 80%. Therefore, the previous 469,999 would be taxed at regular rates. So there is definitely incentive to work still.
@stephen kroll then why did you say 'I wouldn't even bother earning an income if it was taxed at 80%''? That seems to imply you thought the entire income would be taxed at 80%. And furthermore, if you did know how it works, then why would you not bother working and earning an income, when you'd still be taking home hundreds of thousands of dollars anyway?
@stephen kroll I'm not entirely sure what point you're making with that whole work/life balance spiel, but yes this is true - many people within this bracket have the means and motive to dodge tax via accountants, lawyers, offshore accounts. However, that doesn't make a tax rise futile, even one to 80% (which IMO is too high by the Laffer Curve and should be 70% max). Raising a tax to this level has minimal costs on the part of the government, and the reality is that not everyone will avoid it - i.e. there will be a rise in tax revenue - more so than if the raise wasn't made in the first place. Some taxpayers may be charitable, and some may not be millionaires - perhaps earning 500K a year, and so the costs and effort of dodging the tax are simply not worth it, and outweigh the benefit. Furthermore, I hardly see a downside to increased demand by the rich for lawyers and accountants as a result of raised taxes.
Rainer. We have all seen what you posted forever. Wait Rainer, I am on your side. You are 100% right. Socialism has never worked but, Even though you are 100% correct Rainer. The Greddy Democrat's and other people who were not raised to work for a living will Bow and Kneel before Christ after they die. They will not enter into the Kingdom of God. Amen.
roasteddchickenn Absolutely correct. None of this makes sense it is not even logical. If they don’t have extra money to do you think builds the buildings who do they think gives money to these colleges who do they think does all of these things if these people don’t have money or not giving incentives these things will not exist what a moron
They still would be because they only get taxed on all money earned about the amount thats puts them into the top 1%. Example, $220,000 puts you in the 1% say, you earn $220,000. $20,000 gets taxed at 80%, meaning you would only pay $8,000 more a year than a 40% tax rate. You can earn enough to be very well off but from that point forward a lot of you ADDITIONAL income beyond that points because taxed at a higher rate
Does this lady realize that rich people create jobs for other people with their money? Slashing their income so drastically would certainly affect the job market in a negative way.
Some of these folks employ between a few dozen to a few thousand individuals. Slam them all at the same time, and we’re talking about hundreds of thousands of jobs lost, maybe millions. Not only that, but they won’t invest their wealth into new ventures, and that would preclude the creation of new jobs. It would cause damage on two major fronts.
Lion’s Den I know right. Some 80% of millionaires are self made millionaires. This means people slamming ‘the 1%’ are attacking all of the millionaires for something only 20% of those people actually have done. It’s so bad it’s laughable. These are people who have worked hard, created one or multiple businesses and contribute in society through taxes and providing jobs and they are slammed for being successful. And it’s so hypocritical. If you asked anyone ‘do you want to be a millionaire’ they’d say yes but we punish those that actually go out and get it?
@@gracemarion499 we don't "need" the rich people. And yes they create jobs but they wouldn't be rich without the poor people either. Rich people are not the only way. That's one way and not necessarily the best.
That's exactly what I say... there's nothing stopping anyone from paying in more money if it will really help people and be the best for the country. It shouldn't matter what anyone else does.
Dougie Drums Who would get off the couch for 20%? Do you know what this professor is proposing. An 80% marginal tax rate for those in the uppermost tax bracket, which in the US is almost 500,000$. This means that all the money beneath that are taxed in the relevant brackets and wealth accumulated over 500,000$ will be taxed at 80%. Nobody’s “getting off the couch” for this sort of salary. This sort of money is accumulated, not earned, from bonds, investments, stocks, etc.
Anton Zuykov No, she's proposing a marginal tax of 80% on anything above $470,000. In other words, if you made $500,000 in a year, only $30,000 would be taxed at 80%. This rate was much higher during multiple other presidencies.
This just "Literally" said to EVERY youth in America- "DO NOT BE SUCCESSFUL" or you will pay!! What exactly is the point of becoming the next Bill Gates, If " *YOU* "have to give everything " *YOU* " worked so hard for, to the Government?
{Verdical_ Arts} I mean that’s not what’s being said at all. And if we did follow what she said then maybe we’d not have so many billionaire lobbyists running our country🤷♂️
You do realise that the US used to have some of the highest tax rates in the world. You remember when the US used to be the leading country on the planet.
As Tucker said, anyone can write an anonymous check to the US Treasury. They will happily cash your check. If she pays 30% federal tax, I doubt she donates another 50% to charity to get to 80% combined tax and charity.
So this lady just said she gives to nonprofits because they provide more, “like the government should”.But she wants other people to give more to this same government.?
@Liam Harrington that’s litterley so dumb tho. Someone goes and works their butt if to make 401k but then only get 80k. While the person who makes 399k gets to keep almost 250k. Also in my opinion we should just get rid of all these bills that Biden passed that let people pay income to another country to avoid taxes. Instead of raising taxes just hold them account. I’m sure they would all be ok with just paying their 40%. Also Jeff bezoes employes 3% of ALL Americans. He in fact has so much power that if he wanted to he could put us through another Great Depression
Usually, those who cry the loudest about "giving to the poor" are the ones who want to be advising on how we should be giving it to the poor and/or be in charge of the process of our giving it. As a result, the loudest "advisors" always end up becoming millionaires, the poor stay poor and ask for more, and we end up giving the poor even more and get blamed for not giving even more.
Tucker--you are so mean to this brilliant professor who has the cure for our unfair tax system---tax the rich at confiscatory rates, like the French recently tried and were amazed when their wealthy citizens sent their wealth/jobs/selves to tax haven countries. Oh, and of course she exempts herself from her high tax plan [lol].
Uh not really, he talked over her pretty much the entire time. She may not have an intellectual big-picture perspective to be talking about an issue like this, but he should really let her try to make a point at least, and then rebuke it.
The fact that a concept like paying higher taxes through a progressive tax system (in which the wealthy pay over a certain part of their income a higher percentage) is not familiar to you doesn't necessarily mean that it’s not a good idea. Perhaps you should look at other countries (and I don’t mean Venezuela or Cuba) to see that it can actualy benefit the majority of people instead of a small group which I think it does now.
@@chrish.7965 It is not a good idea, not only does it not work and those people will just move their money away its also immoral. 80%......... oh god... Its just not your money, just because you want someones money you cant just vote to get his money. Its not only borderline but a real theft...
To your argument: I am willing to acknowledge that yes there are also liberal new reporters who do cut over their quest as well, especially those who shared differing opinions, but please don't be blind that he actually sat there quietly and let her speak and to prove it I watched this interview twice and mapped out some time stamps for you, here we go: 2:23 2:42 2:53 - 3:02 3:10 3:40 - 3:56 4:10 4:36 - 4:47 4:57 5:33, 5:34, 5:35 5:43 5:53 6:06 6:14 (the best of them all!) Maybe the first 2 minutes he was able to follow along (with his blank, spaced out stare), but seems his attention span is not that long. Not respectful at all. Sorry, please try again!
@@deborahmutombo7224 He does this intentionally...you can see it...hes trying to get something reasonable from her. When someone tells you that "we need to tax the wealthy people, the top 1%" than theres nothing you can really say but just laugh and stare at them.. These people will never realise how economy works and that without this magic 1% they would be wiping their asses without a toilet paper, thats if they can somehow get some food.....
Exactly! But hey you know how we can get her? Let's start paying teachers and college professors a decent wage so that they would make a decent wage and earn more money that way she'll have no excuse HAHA! yes! We got her!
Why just the top 1%... shouldn't we tax everyone so that we all have the same take home money... - that's the stupidity of true socialism and she would not be happy with that :-)
+S Comely Hey fuck face, this is where Trump shines, because he wants to TRAP wealthy people in this country. He said he would make it illegal for Apple to go overseas and make their iPods there. After Trump puts up a rock solid barrier around this country, where most people can't get in, and few can leave, the rich will be trapped like rats and have to pay their fair share. Also, I heard that when Trump was a Democrat he would only hire unions to work on his projects. So, expect unions to make a strong comeback when the rich are trapped like rats. It's rotten assholes like you that make Trump and his voters look bad.
The problem is that the IRS doesn't allow anybody in the middle class to write off any part of your charitable contribution, including tithing to your church.
@Alex A CEO is responsible for an entire corporation.. the CEO handles job responsibilities that most people who make minimum wage couldn't even begin to understand most of the time. Leadership, Policy, Communication, Spokesperson, Create Vision, Oversee Fiscal Activity, Budgeting, Reporting, Auditing, Oversee all other Executives, Assure all legal and regulatory documents are filed, and monitor compliance (which means a working knowledge of these laws as well), identify and address problems within the company, build alliances and partnerships with other organizations and companies, oversee day to day operations, work closely with human resources to set forth proper hiring procedures to make sure that people are hired fairly and that people are paid fairly, etc. The CEO has an ENDLESS number of responsibilities, and on top of all the responsibilities a CEO has there's also the legal ramifications that CEOs take by taking upon the job.. if they screw up or do something incorrectly there can be huge consequences for the company, all the thousands if not millions of people below them.. etc.
@Alex they aren't stealing from anyone. Your complaint is with the stock holders and the board members. They make far more money than the CEO. The CEO makes money commiserate with their duties and responsibilities. You are holding the lives of thousands of people in your hands as a CEO and your responsible for the entire company. Now your logic would be sound IF and only IF the CEO took home 100% of the company profits. The CEO doesn't.
