A lot of claims of which there is no evidence to support.

@redbai Google “companies leaving California “ and “Companies leaving Illinois “

@BD66 IOW, go do a homework assignment. You know I don't do that so the answer is disingenuous at best.

LOLROFL

@Druvius @ChestRockfield @redbai

If you guys are too lazy to use Google to confirm what I have stated. Hopefully you are not too lazy to click the links I have provided for you:

Companies leaving Illinois:
[usnews.com]
[illinoispolicy.org]

Companies leaving California:
[buildremote.co]

Companies that have left the USA:
[cnbc.com]

@BD66 I find it disingenuous to make an argument regarding businesses leaving when the meme is about taxing billionaires. Billionaires are not businesses, they are individuals who must file individual tax returns on their income regardless of what company they may be associated with. If any random billionaire decides to move somewhere else good riddance but it's not about taxes.

The reality of today is that a billionaire concerned about taxes on their income owns several homes across the nation and they have their official residence in whatever state charges them the least amount in state taxes and lives where ever the fuck they want. Since they pay the same federal taxes where ever they live it doesn't matter where they live in the country. If they want to leave the country instead of pay their fair share, again, good riddance.

@redbai You are starting to catch on. Billionaires will move from state to state to minimize taxes. They will also move from country to country to minimize taxes. Have you ever heard of the Beatles? Have you ever heard their song "The Taxman"?

Do you think the Beatles continued to pay 95% marginal taxes to the UK?

[faroutmagazine.co.uk]
[marketplace.org]

@BD66 I was wondering when your BS condescension would kick in. My stating the obvious is not "catching on" because I'm discussing this with you. It's me pointing out that it doesn't make a difference where they live, something you don't appear to be "catching on".

Did the Beatles leave the country to avoid those taxes? No. So how is that evidence that taxing billionaires more money will somehow negatively affect the economy?

The faroutmagazine link says nothing about taxes so I don't know why you posted it.

The marketplace link demonstrates that they were simply ignorant of using corporate law to get around paying the 95%. Once they discovered the government gave them a way around that they were fine. But's what's missing is them leaving the country to avoid paying those taxes as you claimed was the issue, so again, what's the relevance?

@redbai Don't like my Beatles and UK example. How about hedge fund managers moving to Puerto Rico?

[bloomberg.com]

[dlapiper.com]

[eurekahedge.com]

[dailymail.co.uk]

@BD66 Good riddance why do I care if they live in the country? While they may live on some island somewhere they still come to America to obtain resources and entertainment. They are still taking advantage of American markets to make their money the same way they would if they lived in NY city. So all that is missing is their personal presence in the country, who cares?

You haven't provided a shred of evidence that their leaving is actually detrimental to the economy you just claim it as if it is self-evident. It's not which explains why you can't find anything that conclusively demonstrates it.

@redbai Because you don't collect any taxes from them. Look at your average billionaire and the corporation that made him the billionaire. If his company makes a profit, the state gets the first X% of the profit. Uncle Sam then gets the next 21% of his profit. Now if the guy actually wants to spend some of the money tied up in shares of his company stock, he will pay 20% federal capital gains selling the company stock, and X% state capital gains selling the company stock. Then when he buys something, he will pay X% state sales tax to buy something in that state where he makes the purchase.

If you push the rates up too high, he says "screw it" and moves himself and his company to Puerto Rico. You are not collecting corporate taxes at the state and federal level You are not collecting capital gains at the state and federal level, and the majority of the sales taxes and local taxes are going to Puerto Rico. So by being too greedy and wanting too much of that billionaire's wealth and income, you end up losing all of it.

@BD66 See how you're switching to businesses again? As I said, that's not the point and I have enough confidence in Americans to believe those greedy businesses can be replaced. New businesses start up every day.

So what if their sales taxes and local taxes are going to Puerto Rico? Their amusement money is spent in LA, NY, and Las Vegas and the many other places around the world that caters to their tastes. No less money will be invested or managed by Wall Street. This may surprise you but they don't have to live in Puerto Rico to take advantage of the tax loopholes and they know that.

I also find it ridiculous bullshit and another classist trope to claim it's "greedy" to tax individual billionaires more money so that resources and services can be provided to more people. Somehow it's more greedy to want someone who has more money than they will be able to spend in their lifetime to share it for the general welfare than to hoard it for personal use. That's some twisted logic unless you've redefined the word greed.

@redbai Also, they could just as easily add a tax to imported goods of companies that moved their operations overseas to dodge taxes as a way to make the same (or more) money, incentivize companies to stay, and punish companies that don't. The only reason they wouldn't is so they can watch companies leave and then say, "See, companies leave. THAT'S why we have to let them pay no taxes!"

@redbai It's businesses and individuals. Most billionaires became billionaires because they started successful businesses (going back to my original comment). The state and federal governments collect money from the successful businesses they start, and they collect money from those individuals. Driving those individuals (and their businesses) out of the country is a lose-lose situation because the state and federal governments lose both the corporate tax revenue and the individual tax revenue.

@redbai, @ChestRockfield The US Tax Code and the Guidance for the US Tax Code is currently 75,000 pages long. You cannot easily add a "tax of imported goods of companies that moved their operations overseas" The IRS is currently so overwhelmed with how to administer the 75,000 pages of tax codes and tax guidance that it's literally impossible to get any human at the IRS to answer the phone when you call.

@BD66 It's businesses because you can't come up with any rational reason not to tax individuals more and thus your arguments are moot. All the rest are self-serving assumptions you make because you can't back up the claim that individual billionaires leaving the country harms it's economy in any significant manner with factual data.

How many pages make up the tax codes is not an argument for not taxing billionaires.

@redbai if you tax the wealthy individuals too much, many bad things happen:

1. They may move overseas or out of state.
2. They may move the businesses that made them wealthy overseas or out of state.
3. Other people who are considering starting new businesses will be inclined to start those businesses overseas or out of state.

This is simple common sense. I can show you:

Companies that have moved from Illinois
Companies that have moved from California
Companies that have moved from the USA
Hedge Fund Managers who have moved themselves and their hedge funds to Puerto Rico.
Hedge Fund Managers who have moved to Singapore.

Put yourself in the shoes of someone who is contemplating starting a company and putting thousands and thousands of hours working trying to make that company a success. If that individual succeeds, would that individual want to:

1. Give the majority of what he made from the business enterprise to politicians in Sacramento and Washington DC to spend?

OR

2. Have control of how the wealth is spent himself?

Someone who spends tens of thousands of hours on a successful company will spend a few hundred hours making sure he has control of the wealth he creates rather than giving control to a bunch of filthy lying politicians.

@BD66

If you tax the wealthy individuals too much

How much is too much? Since I've only implied raising the current amount you're either claiming the current amount is too much or you are arguing some ambiguous amount that no one has agreed to either being to much or too little.

You have not demonstrated that a billionaire leaving the country harms that country in the least, you just keep claiming it.

If they move their business out of the country then another company will take their place in the market or even better, multiple companies may do that eliminating monopolistic tendencies in the market. Regardless, your claims about companies leaving is nothing except a desperate attempt to make your arguments relevant to the point. Are hedge fund managers not still investing in America? Yep. Who cares where they claim is their residence for tax purposes.

Others start their companies in other countries now and the country has been able to manage that for generations.

Personally I would want the money to do the most good for the most people as I would want any goods and services I create. I'm not some greedy ego driven personality who thinks I can solve all the problems in the world if I personally controlled things.

This may shock your sensibilities but being a billionaire doesn't eliminate the ability to be "filthy" or "lying". See POTUS 45.

@redbai "How much is too much?"

That depends on each billionaire. I've started a company and probably put more than 30,000 hours making is successful. If I was a single 25 year old guy with no kids, I would already be in Puerto Rico. However it would be extremely difficult for me to get my children to all move to Puerto Rico with me, so I'm stuck here in IL for at least 6 more years.

"You have not demonstrated that a billionaire leaving the country harms that country in the least, you just keep claiming it."

If a billionaire leaves the USA and gives up their US citizenship, that billionaire will stop paying taxes to the USA. That loss of tax revenue will harm the USA.

"If they move their business out of the country then another company will take their place in the market or even better"

Look at these companies who moved out of the USA: [cnbc.com]
They are still collecting revenue in the USA, just paying less in taxes to the USA.
Same thing for companies who moved out of Illinois: [usnews.com], [illinoispolicy.org]
And companies who moved out of California: [buildremote.co]

"Others start their companies in other countries now and the country has been able to manage that for generations."

That is true because we have had a relatively free market and relatively low taxes. That's why most of the world's largest companies were founded in the USA and most remain in the USA. If our government becomes more predatory towards the people who found successful companies in the USA, that trend may not continue.

"Personally I would want the money to do the most good for the most people as I would want any goods and services I create. I'm not some greedy ego driven personality who thinks I can solve all the problems in the world if I personally controlled things."

They do. That's why guys like Bill Gates form the William and Melinda Gates Foundation. Bill believes he can make better decisions for how to spend his vast fortune than the people in DC can, and I'm 100% sure Bill is right.

"This may shock your sensibilities but being a billionaire doesn't eliminate the ability to be "filthy" or "lying". See POTUS 45."

If we try to rank policians by sleeze factor, it would take years.

@BD66 Your answer to how much is to much is some irrelevant BS about your personal life so I assume you are avoiding answering that with a distraction. Not surprised as history has demonstrated it as one of your tactics to avoid actually answering questions.

If a billionaire leaves the USA and gives up their US citizenship, that billionaire will stop paying taxes to the USA. That loss of tax revenue will harm the USA.

Define "harm"? More of your ambiguous terms to avoid providing relevant responses.

Demonstrate that any of those companies leaving the country has harmed the economy of America in any meaningful way.

If our government becomes more predatory towards the people who found successful companies in the USA, that trend may not continue.

Predatory? What hyperbolic nonsense. Then you tie in your apparent ability to read the future. IOW, bullshit.

They do. That's why guys like Bill Gates form the William and Melinda Gates Foundation. Bill believes he can make better decisions for how to spend his vast fortune than the people in DC can, and I'm 100% sure Bill is right.

You being sure of something is not evidence that it is true or factual in the least.

@redbai @BD66

If a billionaire leaves the USA and gives up their US citizenship, that billionaire will stop paying taxes to the USA. That loss of tax revenue will harm the USA.

Define "harm"? More of your ambiguous terms to avoid providing relevant responses.

>>>>> Lost tax revenue.

Demonstrate that any of those companies leaving the country has harmed the economy of America in any meaningful way.

If our government becomes more predatory towards the people who found successful companies in the USA, that trend may not continue.

Predatory? What hyperbolic nonsense. Then you tie in your apparent ability to read the future. IOW, bullshit.

>>>> History has many cases of governments destroying their private sectors. Venezuela, Cuba, The UK's flirtation with socialism. None of those thing turned out well.

They do. That's why guys like Bill Gates form the William and Melinda Gates Foundation. Bill believes he can make better decisions for how to spend his vast fortune than the people in DC can, and I'm 100% sure Bill is right.

You being sure of something is not evidence that it is true or factual in the least.

>>> Here is the link to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. I am 100% sure Bill will make better decisions than Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer for how to spend Bill's money. That's my opinion. You are free to make your argument for why two people who helped run up $30,800,000,000,000 in debt will make better decisions than a man who helped create $2,072,000,000,000 in wealth.

[gatesfoundation.org]

@BD66 Lost tax revenue of a single billionaire is a not even blip on the nation's GDP and you haven't demonstrated any different.

Hmmm. What billionaires left Venezuela, Cuba and the UK that contributed to the negative economic experiences they've endured? As far as Venezuela and Cuba, the negative aspects of those countries has more to do with the USA screwing them than any billionaire movement.

As I expected, more rants without evidence. You'd make a great theist.

About Bill and Melinda...

[grunge.com]

NPQ has several articles criticizing the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and one discussed how the foundation contributed to the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa's (AGRA) failed regenerative agriculture efforts. As the main funder for the project, Gates believed that improving the landscape through modern methods with the aid of the private sector would produce more food, thus increasing profits.

[Gates] favored [a western business model] over traditional food production methods and 14 years later, the project was deemed a failure via a report titled False Promises. Several organizations contributed to the report, saying the program did more harm than good. 

[W]hile the public's perception is one of gratitude, critics believe the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is nothing more than a tax shelter that uses philanthropic investments to avoid paying taxes while furthering their own agenda.

@redbai You want to get more money out of each billionaire. At some point each billionaire will decide it's better to move to a different tax jurisdiction, so you lose all future tax revenue from the billionaire. That threshold is different for every billionaire.

When Venezuela and Cuba started going too far left, everyone with wealth who could get out, did get out, leaving Venezuela and Cuba two of the poorest countries in the Western Hemisphere.

Bill Gates believes he can spend his own money better than Biden/Pelosi/Schumer can, so he created the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Only a tiny fraction of Gates's vast wealth will ever be taxed, and Bill can decide what he wants to do with his money. You may or may not agree with him, but Bill has used the tax code to achieve his goal of spending his own money the way he sees fit rather than letting Biden/Pelosi/Schumer take his money at gun point and spend it as they see fit.

@BD66

You want to get more money out of each billionaire. At some point each billionaire will decide it's better to move to a different tax jurisdiction, so you lose all future tax revenue from the billionaire. That threshold is different for every billionaire.

Then good riddance. If they're personal wealth, even if it's more than they could spend in a dozen lifetimes, is more important than the general welfare of America, good riddance. Go. Who gives a shit?

So you can name no billionaires who left either of those countries demonstrating that they have nothing to do with your argument except in your desperate need to validate your claims.

What Bill Gates believes is not necessarily reasonable, logical or right and you've done nothing to demonstrate that his belief in himself reflects reality in the least except your blind faith.

@redbai

In December 2007, Rogers sold his mansion in New York City for about $16 million and moved to Singapore. Rogers said he moved because now is a groundbreaking time for investment potential in Asian markets. His daughters speak fluent Mandarin to prepare them for the future.

[luxuriousmagazine.com]

[lovemoney.com]

[axios.com]

[cbsnews.com]

[visualcapitalist.com]

@BD66 ... and them being gone has affected the lives of Americans in no significant manner at all (you know, the point) and you have not demonstrated that it has.

And FTR, leaving the United States is not the same as leaving Cuba or Venezuela the countries that were actually being discussed. Am I surprised you disingenuously changed the country in question to try and make your answer relevant? Nope. You're that predictable.

@redbai Wealthy people pay a lot of taxes. When wealthy people move in to the USA, the USA (and the states) collect a lot more taxes. When wealthy people move out of the USA, the USA (and the states) collect less in taxes. Our current national debt is right around $30,800,000,000,000, so we cannot afford to force the wealthy taxpayers overseas.

@BD66 Nothing you have presented has demonstrated that taxing rich greedy billionaires more negatively affects the lives of anyone and that's the relevant point. You haven't demonstrated that billionaires leaving matters to the economy of the country, or that they are being "forced". You just claim billionaires are necessary and that they are some kind of victim like a theist claims a tree proves god.

@redbai You don't believe loss of tax revenue is a bad thing? You don't believe the loss of companies is a bad thing? You don't believe that making a country a more hostile place to start a new business is a bad thing? You don't believe that making a country a more hostile place to existing profitable businesses is a bad thing? It's impossible to debate someone as confused as you are.

@BD66 I believe the amount of tax revenue lost is a relative thing in relation to need. I don't believe that the loss of any particular company is a bad thing unless it can be DEMONSTRATED that the loss is relevant (something you have yet to do). You haven't demonstrated that the environment is "hostile" just because billionaires have to pay more personal income taxes you just claim it.

The only reason you can't discuss this with me is because most of your arguments are based on ignorant classist tropes that you simply assume are axiomatic instead of being able to demonstrate it.

@redbai Take Google, Microsoft, Tesla, Netflix, Microsoft, Cisco, Amazon, Intel, Oracle out of the picture, and where would be as a country? What would our national debt be without all the wealth and high paying jobs that come from those companies? Want to get an idea? Visit Cuba and Venezuela.

@BD66 What a load of crap. More claims without evidence to support. What are depending on to make this argument, your powers of defining realities that don't exist?

@redbai Before this conversation, I always asked myself how a population could be so stupid to let leftists take over a government and drive the overwhelming majority of the population into poverty. You have helped answer my question. Thank you for that.

@BD66 Yeah, not agreeing with you is somehow a condemnation of left politics because you've demonstrated your intelligence by not backing up a single BS claim you made with factual information. The hubris and ego is pathetically self serving and demonstrates nothing. I can always count on you for that POV.