Home | About | Donate

Tax on Super-Rich a Popular Idea, Except in the Media

Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/08/31/tax-super-rich-popular-idea-except-media

McQuaig sez:
“Given that 26 individuals now have as much wealth as the bottom half of humanity (3.8 billion people), one wonders at what point conservative commentators might consider this a problem.”

Nah, no problem … each and every one of those “conservative commentators” is in queue to be the 27th individual.


An argument might be attempted that a wealth tax is not the best way to handle the overly skewed distribution of wealth in a country. It is certainly not the only option to be considered.

Another possibility would be to choose an optimum distribution of wealth in society and then have an taxes automatically vary each year in a manner that will move society towards having that distribution of wealth. There are varying ways of doing this.
For example, if in that pattern the upper 1% is to have 10% of the wealth, then in years when they have more than 10% of the wealth their tax rate for the year increases. And in years when they have less than 10% of the wealth their tax rate is decreased. Similarly the tax rate of the lowest 10% would rise and fall depending on how well they matched the chosen income distribution. And so on up the income distributions.

For an automatically varying wealth tax to work properly we would need to severely curtail sales taxes and flat rate taxes. Sales taxes are mostly an effective way to transfer taxes from the rich to the poor, enabling a reduction of income taxes, which in a progressive tax system more benefits those at the higher incomes. The change from a tax system based mostly on income to a system based largely on sales taxes is a change from a largely progressive tax system to a largely flat rate tax system, and is a change that advantages the already wealthy to become even more wealthy at the expense of the poor.

It is like a game of “Survivor” where one of the 26 is about to be kicked out so that there are only 25 individuals left to share that half of the wealth. And so on . . .

Gee, I wonder how THAT happens

Chris Matthews
Salary- $5 million /yr
Net Worth - $20 Million

Wolf Blitzer
Net Worth: $16 Million
Salary:$5 Million /yr

Rachel Maddow
Net Worth: $20 Million
Salary:$7 Million /yr (must drive misogynist Tweety out of his little mind)

Lawrence O’Donnell
Net Worth: $16 Million
Salary: $4 Million /yr

Joe Scarborough
Net Worth:$25 Million
Salary:$8 Million /yr

Don Lemon
Net Worth: $10 Million
Salary: $4 Million /yr

Anderson Cooper
Net Worth: $200 Million (well, he had help)
Salary:$12 Million /yr


another is we could kill 'em and eat 'em.
I hear they’re great with Fava Beans and a nice Chianti

Geezz…we’ve had a media concentration problem for over 50 years resulting in bias, a reduction in coverage and outright omision of news stories necessary to Canadians to participate in a Democracy.

  1. 1970 Davey Commission
  2. 1981 Kent Commission

These two Royal Commissions warned all Canadians about the existing problem but Canadians did not understand the warning and allowed the continuation of the concentration of the corporate owned media to continue.

Journalism Professor’s even wrote books about the problem. https://fernwoodpublishing.ca/book/yesterdays-news

One started a web site trying to educate Canadians of the problem.

Newspaper’s today in Canada have become a bad joke or punch line at family get togethers.
They are essentially," Manufacturing Consent".

Thanks Ms. McQuaig for your continued writing about two of my greatest concerns.

Mr. Blair M. Phillips
St. Catharines, Ontario
Retired Autoworker and
son of a " Tax Man"


“Without them, he argued with extensive data, wealth will become ever more concentrated, allowing the mega-rich to swallow up an ever larger share of the world’s resources.”

Piketty also argued that this trend is eventually corrected by only one thing: World War.

Both of which are owned lock, stock and barrel by the super rich and their Multi-NaZional Korporations . . .

“a 2 percent annual tax on wealth above $50 million”
It’s a nice thought Liz, but seriously. Starting at 50 million!?

If we are going for crumbs lets begin with 2% at 10 million and 4% at 50.