This BASED FUCKING CRIPPLE is taxing all income above 25K at 100% to create a social safety net that will last until...

Too bad he was posing that question to the poor and sick on welfare and not the corporations on welfare.

>Wealth redistribution
Stay the fuck away from my lawnmower, Red.

How does it become your lawnmower?
By using a combination of legalism and currency to bar all others from its use.
Property is theft, comrade.

FUCK the subaltern!
>Here in reality, the 8 wealthiest people earn more than the bottom half of the planet.
It is PRECISELY because of this that I violently oppose your commie redistribution schemes. This 8 rich men are a red-herring you use to distract the guillible from the fact that their possessions and and economic status will be redistributed to the foreign hordes as well.

Here's a bullet for free.

Nice porky pinko

>will be redistributed to the foreign hordes
Workers of THE WORLD unite, ethnonationalist.

In lieu of an argument, of course.

Thanks

I had read in "Freedom From Fear" that congress passed a tax scheme that was in large part symbolic because only 1 person actually made enough income to be in the highest tax bracket--John D. Rockefeller

>This 8 rich men are a red-herring you use to distract the guillible
It's almost like you didn't read the rest of the post, which expounded upon the evils of property, inheritance, capital accumulation, and the pernicious myth that wealth corresponds directly to one's merit.

But then again, I may expect too much.

Tax brackets are idiotic. One's taxes should be calculated as a linear function of one's income. There should be no "great leap" from one bracket to another, it should be a gradient.
alexandervanloon.nl/english/?p=1526

The rich want a small number of tax brackets because it creates a difficult "barrier to entry" between middle class and upperclass, and also the middle class earns through income while the upper class earns through capital gains, which are only taxed at 15% in America.

I'm not in this thread to talk about the finer points of tax policy, this is a history board.

Linear equations and the finer points of tax policy are both part of history, and the majority of their foundations lies in thought older than 25 years.

what's the difference?

What is theft?

I wasn't sure if this was addressed at the image or the

>individuals who rely on inheritance, capital gains, and the labor power of others

In case you meant the image and not the substance of my post (which is likely), Here is my answer:

He has the weapons, the means of producing weapons, and the men trained with weapons.

In short "private property" and "employee-owner relationships," in the absence of a regulatory government, returns to feudal conditions. The power vacuum of the "ancap revolution" simply results in something resembling feudalism.

One receives massive amounts of aid, when it could do fine on its own (corporate welfare).

The other jumps through hoops to receive very little aid, even when it is needed (poor people welfare).

Chinese company Foxconn as we speak is receiving a 3bn subsidy to "create" only an estimated 3000 jobs, and a factory, in the US. This is the result of private sector interests taking over the apparatus of the nation state.

We need a state which acknowledges the private sector as the 4th branch and balances its power with the other 3: Legislative, judicial, executive.

The false claim of permanent ownership over that which must eventually be returned. I.e., property.

>Assumes the guy he's responding to is a communist
>Assumes that all communists support redistributing to foreign hordes

What is the real limit between private property and personal property?

>The false claim of permanent ownership

No, it's taking shit from someone without their consent. Is English your first language, Boris?

...

>Here in reality, we are aware that an individual making 6 times the average household income does not in any conceivable reality, work 6 times harder than the average household.
>Implying all work is equally hard to perform for one hour

Anyone working in, say, investment banking or stock trading, has to do much more demanding job than a factory worker. While the worker sorts products on an assembly line by colour, the investment banker has to monitor worker output, profit margins, estimate future dividends, review accounts, and communicate with his clients in order to make sure the company provides good enough returns for him to be able to pay his clients the interest he promised on their investments. Therefore, the investment banker does indeed work 6 times harder for his salary, and thus is justified in taking a larger wage.

>One receives massive amounts of aid, when it could do fine on its own (corporate welfare).
What if it couldn't do fine on it's own? Is it the government's job to decide whether a market is successful?
Like, take fat chicks.
If not "enough" men are fucking fat chicks, is it the government's job to make it so?
No, because the government is composed of fallible human beings, not benevolent angels that get to decide the laws of nature.

>The other jumps through hoops to receive very little aid, even when it is needed (poor people welfare).
"Jumping through hoops" is a fact of life.
The trouble is when we have to jump through contrived, artificial hoops instead of naturally emergent ones.

What's the difference between 10,000 americans
a) voting for a public charity to receive funds which then has to be inspected and audited and approved
b) pledging a dollar to their own fund directly

>The same mill that grinds out the extra rich is the same mill that will grind out the extra poor, because, in order that the extra rich can become so affluent, they must necessarily take more of what ordinarily would belong to the average man
The New Deal didn't go far enough. SHARE OUR WEALTH>

Why does /leftypol/ keep coming back here?
You're more annoying than /pol/.
& Humanities was a mistake

The investment banker is an investment banker because of environmental conditions enabling discipline, education, focus, understanding, not because he is necessarily a superior individual to the factory worker. Nonetheless, 6 times was my go-to example. There are people who make as much in 1 day as the average household does in a year, off of capital gains alone. Jeff Bezos holds 80 billion in amazon stock. The market forces do not efficiently reward raw ability, even if it seems to from a distance because "highly trained guy makes lots more than factory goon."

>What if it couldn't do fine on it's own? Is it the government's job to decide whether a market is successful?

No. However, there is no other known apparatus with which to mitigate the corruption of private sector. Unregulated industries trend towards multinational monopolies, companies so large and strong that they can force the dependence of a regional population, and decide the fates of lives.

>What's the difference between 10,000 americans
>a) voting for a public charity to receive funds which then has to be inspected and audited and approved
>b) pledging a dollar to their own fund directly

B will happen far less often because, as some never tire of pointing out, humans are naturally greedy, and given to irrational accumulation even to the extent that it benefits them in the long term less than sharing would. This is because the human brained evolved when it did not know the limits of the Earth or its resources, and lived in small groups.

>Eliminate the entire existing tax system
>Implement a single flat rate tax on business profit and capital gains
>Allow no deductions, exceptions, or loopholes
>Throttle the total compensation package of the highest paid employee of any company to 100 times the compensation of the lowest paid employee (inb4 "waaah! How will those poor CEOs live on a measly $1,000/hour?")
>Pay each citizen a basic income set to 60% of poverty level
>Eliminate all existing welfare/social security programs
>Single payer universal healthcare system with the option to pay more for priority service
>Refocus healthcare system on preventative care, rather than emergency and chronic care
That's about 80% of the way towards fixing America. The last big thing is sorting out the education system, but that's an unsalvageable fucking mess, top to bottom.

>muh determinism
If you want to go there...

Firstly, evening out everyone's "privilege levels" is a gargantuan task complicated by corruption in whatever institution you grant the power to do it. Freedom is not only an inherently good thing, it is also a practical policy. Rather than fucking a country up in a "revolution" that inevitably won't end up as the utopia you asked for, just let trust fund babbies fritter away their money on frivolous luxuries sold by streetwise hustlers. This is a more effective "redistribution of wealth" all things considered.

Even if we put practicality aside, investment bankers are only statistically more likely to have had a better upbringing. Even assuming it is the case for this particular banker, they could have taken the lazier route like the trust fund babby. Instead they maintained the virtues conferred to them by their family and continued to beat the market average as their 19th century industrialist great great great grandfather did when he clawed his way out of the slums by his fingernails. You are not simply sticking it to some snobby rich guy, you are exterminating another entity that wanted to escape from the mediocrity of the masses, that decided it was going to abide by übermensch principles whether or not the rest of the world would follow, virtues you now want to extinguish because their ideas are too dangerous and their success is a crime. It is like you want to prove Ayn Rand was right.

You know most stocks capital management is done by computers, right? The marginal return on capital is increasing faster than the marginal return on labor, meaning that the owner of capital needs to do relatively less work to make his income grow. This is why the 1% is seeing massive gains even compared to the 4% below them.

Because the alternative is death by the King's hired goons, and the seizure of your possesions

The limit is that anything a communist owns is personal property and anything a communist wants to take from another person is private property

shit boot lickers say