It’s so important to include the context of the very different world that’s been standard in the last 20 years when considering how demographic behavior patterns have changed.
A growing number of Americans are “financially vulnerable,” and even those who are more stable aren’t putting away the level of savings than before.
It’s cool how the party of free and open markets is commited to policies that aren’t only racist but which will negatively impact the economy.
I’m just saying what if authorities cracked down on the tax evasion of the wealthy as harshly as they did the fare evasion of the working class?
Competition is keeping prices down, but only for the wealthy. Meanwhile, the cost of goods commonly used by those at the lower end of the income ladder keep rising thanks to corporate consolidation and the quest for profits.
Even aside from greatly reducing income inequality and poverty, drastically increasing the taxes of the ultra-wealthy would be worth it just to reduce their political influence.
Midsize companies are worth more on average than they were 40 years ago, but there are fewer of those companies and their growth isn’t as fast as the larger firms.
You can take issue with certain points in Warren’s plan, but it seems much more convincing and honest than, say, the 2017 tax cuts.
We knew it then, it’s incredibly apparent now.
Raising concerns a wealth tax could negatively impact philanthropy and foundations overlooks the public good that would (hopefully) be more evenly distributed through increased government services financed by those taxes.