Bloomberg reported yesterday that if Sen. Sanders implemented his highly progressive tax plan, billionaires could face an effective tax rate of up to 97.5%. This will be met with complete apoplexy amongst the ruling-class, but, apart from the fact that it is entirely correct that governments use punitive tax regimes to discourage socially destructive behaviour such as ruthless exploitation and wealth hoarding, let’s put it in perspective.

If Jeff Bezos was hit by a 97.5% wealth tax, he would still be a billionaire. His fortune currently stands at roughly $108,200,000,000. After a Sanders wealth tax, he would still sit atop a hoard of almost $3.75bn. The tax from he alone would enable the federal government to wipe the debt of a million students (c. $50bn), to train half a million new grad nurses (c. $25bn), to pay the entire education budget of the five lowest spending states for a year (Utah + Idaho + Arizona + Oklahoma + Mississippi = c. $24bn) - and still, still have enough spare change to double federal spending on energy efficiency and renewable energy ($4bn).

And that’s just one big fish.

Put in that sort of context there is simply no moral justification for any individual to have the private enjoyment of the sort of wealth that could seriously adjust the social outcomes of a entire nation’s working-class.

Pitchforks are an extremely moderate and conservative reaction.

Remember when Stephen Hawking was more worried about inequality under capitalism than artificial intelligence in a Reddit AMA and people started telling him to read an economics 101 book? Wild. Anyways rip Steve

“If machines produce everything we need, the outcome will depend on how things are distributed. Everyone can enjoy a life of luxurious leisure if the machine-produced wealth is shared, or most people can end up miserably poor if the machine-owners successfully lobby against wealth redistribution. So far, the trend seems to be toward the second option, with technology driving ever-increasing inequality. “  

“The data reads like a pitch for a dystopian blockbuster: One out of every 11,600 San Franciscans is a billionaire, while one out of five Californians lives below the poverty level. In Los Angeles, housing costs have increased so much that the typical renter cannot afford the average rent, exacerbating the gap between the rich and the poor. Two-thirds of California voters supported Senate Bill 50, which would have increased building heights around transit and may have started to change that narrative by spurring more housing. But the bill was shelved by one of Southern California’s own. “This isn’t the right fix at this time to do that,” said Sen. Anthony Portantino, who held up the bill as the chairman of the appropriations committee.”

—

California’s housing bills failed—and so did California’s lawmakers 

Portantino is a garbage human who needs to be primaried from the Left as soon as possible, and he needs to know that voters are replacing him because of this.

There is a lot of wealth created off the backs of the less fortunate. When asked to pay back through taxation to help the less fortunate, the wealthy forget who made their wealth and say hell no.

The ultra-millionaire tax is fair. The surplus value stolen from workers needs to be returned to the economy, not off-shored and hidden in shelters.

this is such a fucking power move

The act is called the “Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies” act. (So technically: the Stop BEZOS Act.) The basic concept is simple: “if an Amazon worker received $2,000 in food stamps, Amazon would be taxed $2,000 to cover that cost.”

It covers both regular employees and staffing-agency contractors; it doesn’t cover fully independent contractors, defined by the ABC Test. (So: if they hire a plumber to fix the pipes, or a roofing company, they don’t have to pay taxes for those people if they’re getting food stamps.) It only applies to “large employers” - those that employ 500+ people. 

It also makes it illegal for employers to ask whether someone is receiving federal benefits–so they just have to make their wages high enough to make employees ineligible, rather than seeking out people who either don’t realize they qualify, are too proud to apply, or are disqualified for some reason other than income.

Disneyland employees’ average hourly wages have decreased in real terms every year for more than 15 years, while the company has taken in record municipal subsidies from the city of Anaheim and soared in profitability, returning high dividends to its shareholders.

The transfer of wealth from employees to shareholders and the squeeze on employees’ pocketbooks has left many employees homeless and many more in debt and struggling.

A ballot initiative in the City of Anaheim would force companies that received municipal subsidies to pay a $15 minimum wage with an annual raise of $1/hour until wages reach $18/hour, with inflation-adjusted raises every year thereafter.

Disney is fighting the proposal tooth-and-nail. Bernie Sanders headlined a rally in Anaheim in support of the measure yesterday, saying “I want to hear the moral defense of a company that makes $9 billion in profits, $400 million for their CEOs and have a 30-year worker going hungry.” He was joined by veteran Disney employees who shamed the company with statement like “Disney prides itself on making dreams come true.. Disney, where is my dream?”

https://boingboing.net/2018/06/03/down-and-out-in-the-magic-king-3.html