Home | About | Donate

Ocasio-Cortez's "Not At All Outlandish" Proposal for 70% Tax Rate on Uber-Wealthy Could Raise $720 Billion Over Decade


Ocasio-Cortez's "Not At All Outlandish" Proposal for 70% Tax Rate on Uber-Wealthy Could Raise $720 Billion Over Decade

Jon Queally, staff writer

As many historians, economists, and informed citizens were forced to point out in the wake of the freak-out over a proposal by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to raise the current tax rate on the very wealthiest Americans to 70 percent, such a rate is not at all unprecedented and higher rates were the norm for a large portion of last century.


Higher tax rates on the ultra wealthy is by definition “trickle down economics”. Always has been.


Brava to Alexandria for her speaking truth to power and thanks to Paul Krugman for defending her common sense leadership for the “little people” and society over the 1% greedy and corruption on a massive scale!

The truth is also that the billions and trillions that have over decades been given to the wealthiest by elected representatives working for them, and not the vast majority of people that elected them and who they are supposed to serve, have been used to buy even more politicians, representation and legislation, media control, and policy decisions that have served a very small segment of the American people while the vast majority struggled to just survive. By any honest measure that domination of government, media and advantage thru the control of wealth is a crime that begs for redress and accountability!

Our national priorities - our civilian priorities - have been starved and diverted by the de facto purchase of government, legislation and political influence, by the tax-cuts for the wealthiest th, in no small measure accelerated by the vastly wrong Citizen’s United travesty that legalized the corruption of democratic processes, turned into rule by the richest! THAT corruption of tax-cuts to gain dominance over democracy must be reversed - tax rates for those wealthiest must be restored to a progressive taxation that comes close or rivals the highest rates under Eisenhower that did make our nation great!.


Somebody has to talk about this stuff, so I thank AOC.

Meanwhile, Pelosi talks about paygo.


Here is a representative article/essay of the power of wealth in New York, for wealth and elected corruption and influence to dictate government policy and the diversion of funding government from the wealthiest to those least able to pay - the travesty in NY from 1972 to this day that has robbed the poor and middle class to enhance the wealth of the already richest! The wealthiest have decades of robbery to repay…with freakin interest!

.From local property taxes funding public education, to many “fees” including MVD, building permits, all manner of diversions from those most able to pay to those least able, ant that is a pattern that must be reversed…with taxation on the wealthiest restored to historic fair levels


How many corporations have been taking ‘corporate welfare’ originating in our taxes?
What are the estimated percentages of wage shaving to pay stock holders?
How much of ‘raw’ materials imported involve slave wages and conditions at the extraction origin?
How much of the financial body of a corporation is ‘offshore’ to avoid taxation?
In Agriculture, what expenses have been incurred from CAFO and agribusiness agrotoxins?
The list of questions - increasingly now lists of damning evidence - of industrial malfeasance of such a scale there are few parallels in history. The most heinous being the ‘externalized cost’ of the destruction of ecological infrastructure of nature herself.

The questions about legal functioning alone indicate 70% being a JUSTICE / JUST tax.

What is not figured into these questions is the negation (a variation on ‘externalized cost’) of tax revenue that funds education and infrastructure. The former creates a class of financial ‘victimization’ and breakdown of societal integrity. As has been done in the past, all too often the plutocracy then turns this on its head and claims the victims are responsible. This level of heinous sociopathic methodology MUST BE CALLED OUT for what is, what it does, how its ‘externalized costs’ are now generating exponential consequences and the ledgers MUST be set right.



> This $720 billion in a decade is not nearly enough to fund Medicare for all, which has been estimated to increase government outlays by about $30 trillion over a decade (while also zeroing out premiums and deductibles paid by Americans).

This is absolutely UNTRUE. While Bernie Sanders S. 1804 would increase government spending by an unknown amount, HR 676 would actually decrease spending by about $300 billion/year.


Alexandria is the best thing that has happened to congress in my recollection, (71 years). Being a billionaire should be illegal in my opinion and the extreme wealth that the top .005% is hoarding should be put to good use restoring the commons.


For the life of me I cannot figure out why we are talking about the expense of Medicare For All??? Several reports indicated that we would save close to a Trillion the taxpayers over 10 years by cutting Admin, fees, and drug prices which all produce good results for consumers. Consumers would pay higher tax rates but would not have an insurance premium. One of the reports was Koch’s and one was Keizer I believe.

No wonder the American public is so confused. It is ridiculous that news media cannot get all facts together and report them over and over again. It sounds like you’re saying Medicare For All is just way to expensive??? Now I will go and finish this article.


Ain’t it funny that the corporate mouthpiece called the evening news likes to interview those who think taxing the rich is bad for the economy. The guests tend to be senators, representatives, and administration officials, who all represent multi-millionaires and they themselves are multi-millionaires.


“In an era of widespread deceit, telling the truth is considered a radical act” - George Orwell

“Taxing the rich is bad for the economy” is the deceit that the Reagan revolution was founded upon…they called it trickle down economics.

Despite Dubya’s and Trump’s tax cuts putting trickle down on steroids, the color of trickle down continues to be yellow and will continue to be unless voters embrace AOC and other real progressives.


And other Dems’ BS:


Corporate welfare – bank bail outs – this link posted on side but really like it so putting here- watch u tube link too.


Here is the great dance video:

And this from Dancing in the Streets–Martha and the Vandellas, 1964 video

Michael Jackson

Our next mass demonstration…



Emphyrio, thank you for noting that not only was the bribing of “our” elected official by the rich for their personal selfish benefit rather than the benefit of the masses a crime but that the crime must be punished as well. I couldn’t agree more and have a thought as to how we can rectify that crime. There are statistics published annually that show what percentage of income due to increased production goes to the 99%and what percentage goes to the parasitic class. How about if we take those statistics for the past 39 years and simply reverse them (for example if statistics show that 5% of increases due to increased production went to the 99% who actually produced them and 95% went to the parasite class or 1% we simply swap those values so that 95% goes to the rightful owners and 5% to the fat cats.) We then use those reversed figures, add them up for the past 39 years (since the beginning of Reagonomics) and confiscate the grand total from the 1% and redistribute the funds to the 99% who created the gains in the first place. Unfortunately that would be a tremendous amount of work and still leaves the 1% unpunished for the crime of bribery. So the question that needs to be dealt with is how do we provide restitution and punish the rich for their crimes while keeping the solution fairly simple? Easy. Confiscate all of the fucking income of the 1% for the past 39 years, redistribute those funds to the 99% who created them in the first place then lock the 1% up for life.


Tom, adding millions of recipients to medicare will not bring costs down. Same like adding millions of previously uninsured to an insurance pool did not bring down costs with Obamacare. On the contrary the costs went thru the roof.

The only one with that is actually telling the truth about medicare for all is AOC. “You just pay for it”. Look at every country that has free healthcare and their tax rate and if someone is telling you it will be free, that are lying.

Free healthcare is fine. I had it when i lived in Canada. But as i posted here o several occasions, my tax rate about 20% on $25k income.


The confusion comes from talking about savings. Savings for society, or the state? Medicare for all would save society trillions, but it would require an increase in government spending. Not an issue, as the state can spend what it wants, and it can be funded in a revenue neutral way, but it would result in the state spending more and us spending little to nothing out of pocket. When the hacks in the media talk about single payer, they mention the cost to the state, and pretend that there is no offsetting reduction in out of pocket expenditures. It is intentionally misleading.

Jake Tapper threw out that 40 trillion dollar figure to AOC, as the cost of all her programs, but that was the amount the state would spend over a decade, or whatever it was. He didn’t mention the reduction in out of pocket expenditures. So, the costs to society of single payer is a negative number, which represents societal savings. Single payer would be a net cost to society if it cost more than the present system, which it wouldn’t. The same is true of publicly funded college education. Yeah, there would be a cost to the state, but there would be an offsetting reduction in out of pocket expenditures. If the cost of that program is greater than the cost of the funding as is, there is a net cost increase to society, although that isn’t even true, because the federal government doesn’t really use or need our tax dollars to spend. But a net increase in any program represents a net increase in societal spending on something. That number, whatever it is, is often small, in the case of single payer, the savings alone would pay for everything else AOC is calling for.


What are you talking about? Expanding the pool of Medicare would of course bring down costs, as younger people would be added to the pool. They would add into the pool more than they take out, since they, on average, are younger. As they get older, they will require more care, and over time, they will start to take more out of the pool than they take out, but young people then would add more than they take out. And we know that there would be a huge reduction in waste in the system, as single payer is, for many reasons, far more efficient. In 2010,the WHO did a study of waste in private versus public healthcare systems around the world, which I can link for you if you would like. It found that overhead in private insurance was about three times higher than in public systems. Again, there are clear reasons for this. But literally, every single payer system costs less per capita, less as a percentage of GDP, and they have less overhead. There is less overhead in tradition Medicare than in private insurance, and it isn’t even close.


And Sammy Davis Jr. dancing

Mr. Bojangles

Nitty Gritty Dirt Band

I knew a man, Bojangles and he danced for you

In worn out shoes

Silver hair, a ragged shirt and baggy pants

The old soft shoe

He jumped so high

He jumped so high

Then he’d lightly touch down

I met him in a cell in New Orleans, I was

Down and out

He looked to me to be the eyes of age

As he spoke right out

He talked of life

He talked of life

He laughed, clicked his heels and stepped

He said his name, Bojangles and he danced a lick

Across the cell

He grabbed his pants, a better stance

Oh, he jumped so high

Then he clicked his heels

He let go a laugh

He let go a laugh

Pushed back his clothes all around

Mr. Bojangles

Mr. Bojangles

Mr. Bojangles


He danced for those in minstrel shows and county fairs

Throughout the south

He spoke with tears of fifteen years how his dog and him

Traveled about

The dog up and died

He up and died

After twenty years he still grieves

He said I dance now at every chance in honky tonks

For drinks and tips

But most the time I spend behind these county bars

He said I drinks a bit

He shook his head

And as he shook his head

I heard someone ask him please


Mr. Bojangles

Mr. Bojangles

Mr. Bojangles


Songwriters: Jerry Jeff Walker

Mr. Bojangles lyrics © Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC, Warner/Chappell Music, Inc


OK, I’m down on one condition: the Pentagon gets NONE OF IT.