Warren’s Wealth Tax: How A New Bill Would Convert The Tax Code Into A Canned Hunt

Below is my column in The Hill on introduction of Elizabeth Warren’s wealth tax.  The bill contains two notable addition: a massive increase in the size of the IRS and what I call a “captivity tax” to try to keep the wealthy from fleeing. The odds are that Democratic leadership will see some of the same problems with this bill, but the danger is that such legislation will be difficult to oppose due to its public appeal. Moreover, there is a lack of honestly about the constitutional and practical issues surrounding a “wealth tax.” Such details are lost as Warren pledges to go after the “Rembrandts … diamonds and … yachts”  of the wealthy.

Here is the column:

For the purveyors of identity politics, there is no surer bet than leading the masses against the “super rich.” Since philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau spoke of “eating the rich” before the start of the Reign of Terror, politicians have had an insatiable appetite for class warfare politics.

In her “wealth tax” legislation, Senator Elizabeth Warren insists she is merely nibbling on the rich but still can seize $3 trillion over the next decade, a figure challenged even by one Biden administration economist. Warren has also included an “exit tax” to stop the rich from fleeing. Not surprisingly, it is wildly popular outside of super rich circles. It also is arguably unconstitutional and manifestly impractical. Yet, in Washington, bad policy often makes for good politics.

Warren would impose a 2 percent annual tax on the net worth of households and trusts above $50 million and a 1 percent surtax on the net worth of those above $1 billion. She is not the only politician pledging to soak the rich. Some state legislators have proposed their own versions. The difference between the federal and state proposals is that express language of the Constitution would seem to bar a wealth tax. Article One permits Congress to “lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises.” However, it requires that these “be uniform throughout the United States.” The next section says “no capitation or other direct tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.”

A wealth tax is a “direct tax.” While James Madison and Alexander Hamilton disagreed on the constitutionality of such a tax, they agreed a direct tax under the Constitution would include a wealth tax. Hamilton agreed with Madison that a direct tax could be a tax “on the whole property of individuals or on their whole real or personal estate.”

There are good faith arguments that a wealth tax would be constitutional, and there are cases on both sides of that issue. Estate taxes and other forms of taxation can be cited to challenge the bright-line meaning of these terms. However, the problem does not end with Article One. When the 16th Amendment was ratified, it allowed for federal income taxes, and only income taxes: “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”

Putting aside the dubious constitutionality of Warren’s tax, there are even greater practicality problems. Valuing wealth from real estate to luxury items would require a massive increase in the Internal Revenue Service and a huge increase in reporting responsibilities. Warren seems to acknowledge how much of a bureaucratic increase is needed: The bill mandates a breathtaking $100 billion increase in IRS funding over the next ten years.

Even with a massive increase for 2021, the IRS annual budget is just over a tenth of that figure, at $11.92 billion. Warren also seeks to mandate a greater number of annual audits for this engorged IRS to conduct: Each year, one third of those covered would be audited, on everything from cars to art. Such calculations would require establishing not just their purchase price but their current market value.

Then there is the practical problem that billionaires are mobile — not fixed — tax sources. Put simply, they can leave. That is what happened in other countries pursuing a wealth tax, which found the practical enforcement of such taxes was more difficult than assumed. France lost 12,000 millionaires per year and later reversed course with tax cuts, to try to lure back the wealthy. Only a handful of countries are still trying to make such taxes work.

Warren believes she has a solution to that, too. It is another tax, of course. Call it a “captivity tax.” If you decide you do not want to be the subject of what liberal tax expert Josh Bivens calls the “very big experiment,” Warren threatens to hit you with a confiscatory tax of 40 percent of your net worth (above $50 million). Thus, if you accumulated stuff worth $500 million, Warren would make you leave more than $180 million as the price to be free of her tax regime — it is pay or pray.

Of course, not only will many consider leaving before such a tax is imposed, but many billionaires are likely to have second thoughts about coming to the United States (and investing here) if they will be captive to the Warren tax like some money mastodon stuck in a tax tar pit. The promise of being audited for everything you own every three years down to your last Cartier watch is not very appealing.

The captivity tax highlights the wealth-redistribution mindset underlying Warren’s “experiment.” Warren thrilled audiences for years by telling the rich she was coming after “your Rembrandts, your stock portfolio, your diamonds and your yachts.” In one Democratic debate, she got applause by rubbing her hands together after saying she would take some of the wealth of fellow candidate John Delaney, a self-made millionaire worth $65 million. She has now made good on that threat.

Warren and most of her colleagues have, of course, not made such fortunes. But where others make wealth, her skill is taking wealth from others, and she believes she has achieved the holy grail of the taxing set: Preventing flight with a captivity tax. She hopes to now pursue Delaney and others for their art and diamonds and they won’t be able to escape, even on their now-fully-audited yachts. It is like a tax version of a canned hunt.

Biden administration officials like Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen recently said they are considering this option and other tax increases to help pay for trillions in new spending. But the problem with a Rousseauian diet is that it is as addictive as it is rich. It relieves politicians of responsibility for uncontrolled spending by fueling a type of class warfare. It all may collapse in court, but that is years — and trillions of dollars — down the road.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can find his updates online @JonathanTurley.

157 thoughts on “Warren’s Wealth Tax: How A New Bill Would Convert The Tax Code Into A Canned Hunt”

  1. How do you start a recession? This is a good first step. Nothing kills investment like these kinds of taxes. A captivity tax? What is next? A wall, how about and iron curtain. Except that did not do so well as history looks like it might repeat. They never learn.

  2. Captivity tax. I suppose they’ll start building cages to confine those seeking to flee to the south of the border with more than the allowed amount of undeclared value.

  3. OT For those on the left that get everything backward and applaud those that have done the most harm…
    —-
    Voters in poll pick DeSantis as best governor on COVID, Cuomo as worst
    DeSantis took less intrusive approach, Cuomo enforced strict mitigation measures.

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis had the best response to the COVID-19 pandemic, while New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo had the worst, said respondents in a new Just the News Daily Poll with Scott Rasmussen.

  4. Today it is a tax the rich scheme, over time the definition of rich will keep shrinking. Government greed for money and power is the worst kind of greed. It is insatiable and is backed by the force of law, armed police and power to jail those that don’t comply.

    1. The quiet part the Dems dont say out loud? The only way to generate the tax revenue they want has to come from the middle class. Thats were all the income is. The rich dont dont have much taxable income. They have revenue. All the wage earners are low and middle class

      1. Warren Buffet always says his secretary pays more taxes than him. Because she has income, he does not. He uses the loopholes to get around paying taxes.

  5. “You can only confiscate the wealth that exists at a given moment. You cannot confiscate future wealth – and that future wealth is less likely to be produced when people see that it is going to be confiscated.” – Thomas Sowell

    This is more important to the economy than whether the tax is constitutional or not.

  6. But at least she can go to her constituents and tell them she tried to soak the rich for her profligate spending — as the Dems then increase taxes on the rest of us. It’s just part of the bait & switch.

  7. Joe Biden and his corrupt cashing-in family of grifters, are all worth hundreds of millions. Why isn’t Joe Biden donating HIS presidential salary too? He doesn’t work but part time, so why keep his whole $400k paycheck? He was at Camp David again this weekend. With the “crime family” of Biden grifters. Does the man EVER actually “work” on behalf of the Amercian people? Doubt it. Loser. Fraud.

  8. [my previous post was incomplete. dennis hanna]

    Daniel Webster (1782–1852)
    “The power to tax is the power to destroy.”

    This quotation comes from the words of DANIEL WEBSTER and those of JOHN MARSHALL in the Supreme Court case, McCulloch v. Maryland.

      Webster, in arguing the case, said: “An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy,” 17 U.S. 327 (1819).

      In his decision, Chief Justice Marshall said: “That the power of taxing it [the bank] by the States may be exercised so as to destroy it, is too obvious to be denied” (p. 427), and “That the power to tax involves the power to destroy … [is] not to be denied” (p. 431).

    Taxation, at best, consists merely half of the equation.

    The other half, the most important, I submit, consists of the expenditures, i.e., spending.

    United States’ current debt exceeds 28 trillion Federal Reserve Notes.

    United States’ deficit for the last fiscal year amounts to $3.1 trillion in fiscal year 2020, more than triple the deficit for fiscal year 2019. This year’s deficit amounted to 15.2% of G.D.P., the greatest deficit as a share of the economy since 1945.

    The debt and deficits are projected only to increase.

    United States’ openly disclosed (“off book,” “black budget,” etc. excluded) military spending 732 billion F.R.Ns., which is 3.4 percent of G.D.P.

    United States’ military spending exceeds all the countries in the world combined and more.

    The United States consists and functions as an Empire. All empires collapse from over extending. [ The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, by Paul Kennedy (self described liberal), Colossus: The Rise and Fall of the American Empire, by Niall Ferguson (self described conservative). We are different, however. Why? We are Exceptional!

    Predicting is difficult, especially about the future. Yogi Berra

    No one can see or predicted the future.

    History repeats because man’s passions simply do not change. Demosthenes;
    384 B.C.E. – 322 B.C.E.

    There are military, numerous military, officers you have stated and written the United States can defend itself and more with military expenditures of 200 to 300 billion F.R.Ns.

    The last president, Eisenhower, a former military officer, not only contained military spending, but also reduced it, real nominal and inflation adjusted F.R.Ns.

    President Eisenhower also promoted and oversee the largest infrastructure development after 1945.

    He also did not start or promote any Wars of Aggression. In fact, citizen Eisenhower argued against military action in Korea. He said, “I cannot support military action in Korea because it would be a War of Aggression. I just finished fighting a War of Aggression. I don’t want to fight in another.”

    When the War of Aggression came, he, of course, did support it. It forced non-political citizen Eisenhower to run for President on the platform to end the “police action in Korea in six (6) months, if elected President. President Eisenhower failed; it took him seven (7) months to end the police action in Korea.

    On leaving office President Eisenhower warned of the Military Industrial (original draft included “Congressional) Complex (M.I.C.)

    Since then the Military Industrial Surveillance State (M.I.S.S) has given the United States the Vietnam Conflict, Desert Storm and the War on Terror. Along with these Wars of Aggression comes the United States’ debt and deficits.

    I am not a pacifist. During the Vietnam Conflict, I wrote I could understand, accept, but not agree with dropping all of the United States’ nuclear weapons on Jerusalem, the Vatican, Macca and Medina after a Declaration of War Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution of the United States.

    I am retired and live on the North Shore of Kauai.

    The Missile Defense Agency (M.D.A.) is soliciting public comments through April 12 on the $1.9 billion missile radar system in Hawaii after narrowing down the possible locations to the Army’s Kahuku Training Area on Oahu or the Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai.
    Opponents point to the Pentagon’s own misgivings about its value. The Pentagon admits that the project is already outdated and would not be able to detect the latest Chinese hypersonic missiles. In addition, it is undisputed the missile radar system will take years to build and that space-based alternatives will become available before it’s even complete.
    In February 2021 the Pentagon announced that it was defunding the $1.9 billion Homeland Defense Radar-Hawaii, local activists celebrated it as a victory. But in June, the Senate Armed Services Committee added a full funding provision as it made its markup for the Fiscal Year 2021 National Defense Authorization Act.
    Hawaii’s freshman congressman Rep. Kai Kahele has thrown his support behind the Kauai site.
    Many people “think” Hawaii’s largest employer is the tourism industry. Wrong.
    The largest employer in Hawaii is the Pentagon and the largest employer of the Pentagon on Hawaii is the Army.
    History, particularly the history of military spending in general and particularly as to Hawaii, suggests the out dated, ineffective and useless middle defense system will be built.
    Why?
    Based on United State’s’ expenditures … military spending … is now not only a defense imperative, but also and more importantly an economic and financial imperative.
    dennis hanna

    1. President Eisenhower in his farewell speech also warned of the dangers of domination of the nation’s scholars by Government: “The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present — and is gravely to be regarded.”

      The Climate Science Industrial Complex represents a stunning exactly the dangers of which President Eisenhower warned us over 70 decades ago.

  9. There is nothing unconstitutional about a wealth tax … so long as it is apportioned as being a direct tax. An ad valorem property tax is a direct tax. Since Hylton v. U.S. a tax on land has been viewed as a direct tax. Follow that up with Veazie Bank v. Fenno, Springer v. U.S., Pollock v. Farmers Loan & Trust. In Pollock, a tax on personal property because of ownership has also been viewed as a direct tax). Indeed, practice also shows that a tax on land is a direct tax since direct taxes were laid on land in the late 1700’s-early 1800’s. This issue isn’t even close – there is so much precedent and practice. An inheritance tax was distinguished from a wealth tax as a tax on the *transfer* of wealth (see Knowlton v. Moore). The requirement of apportionment would doom the tax. California, Texas, and Florida would have to shoulder a combined 28% of the total wealth tax burden based on their population.

    1. Congress has the power to tax for “…general Welfare…,” omitting and, thereby, excluding any power to tax for individual welfare, specific welfare, charity, redistribution of wealth or State or enterprise bailouts.

      General means all not one, some or a few, and includes infrastructure used by “…general…” or ALL such as roads, electricity, water, sewer, trash collection, U.S. Mail, etc., and direct cash payments to ALL individuals.

      It’s not the method of taxation but the purpose which is severely limited and restricted.
      ________

      Article 1, Section 8

      The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States;

    2. Just ask Virginia about ad valorem tax and they’ll just tell you a Property Tax IS an Excise Tax like alcohol or cigarettes…

      ….BECAUSE that makes a lot of sense. But, ole news. And the world has not even 2 cents left to spare. 🙄😆

      🤡 🌎

  10. The Missile Defense Agency (M.D.A.) is soliciting public comments through April 12 on the $1.9 billion missile radar system in Hawaii after narrowing down the possible locations to the Army’s Kahuku Training Area on Oahu or the Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai.
    Opponents point to the Pentagon’s own misgivings about its value. The Pentagon admits that the project is already outdated and would not be able to detect the latest Chinese hypersonic missiles. In addition, it is undisputed the missile radar system will take years to build and that space-based alternatives will become available before it’s even complete.
    In February 2021 the Pentagon announced that it was defunding the $1.9 billion Homeland Defense Radar-Hawaii, local activists celebrated it as a victory. But in June, the Senate Armed Services Committee added a full funding provision as it made its markup for the Fiscal Year 2021 National Defense Authorization Act.
    Hawaii’s freshman congressman Rep. Kai Kahele has thrown his support behind the Kauai site.
    Many people “think” Hawaii’s largest employer is the tourism industry. Wrong.
    The largest employer in Hawaii is the Pentagon and the largest employer of the Pentagon on Hawaii is the Army.
    History, particularly the history of military spending in general and particularly as to Hawaii, suggests the out dated, ineffective and useless middle defense system will be built.
    Why?
    Based on United State’s’ expenditures … military spending … is now not only a defense imperative, but also and more importantly an economic and financial imperative.
    dennis hanna

  11. There is one aspect of Warren’s Wealth Confiscation Act that seems to be missing, not only from the discussion here but from her own explanation of the plan on her website (https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/ultra-millionaire-tax). That is that, unlike income and capital gains taxes which are taxed only once, wealth is something that would be taxed annually, again and again and again.

    Dizzy Senator Lizzy provides a number of examples on her web site to illustrate how her scheme works, for example

    Married couple with household net worth of $100,000—the median level in the United States:

    • Pays zero tax because they are below the $50 million threshold

    or

    Hedge fund manager with a net worth of $500 million:

    • Pays a 2% tax on the $450 million in net worth above the $50 million threshold, producing a total annual liability of $9 million.

    Each example on her site is structured to show only how assets would be taxed in any one given tax year. None shows how the plan works year-on-year. One gets the impression that she’s trying to hide something.

    If Liz were honest, she would include maybe at least one example showing how things work over time. She doesn’t so allow me:

    Crazy Uncle Zeke has $100 million, which he keeps in sock drawer beneath his collection of dirty magazines:

    • Year 1: Pays a 2% tax on the $50 million in net worth above the $50 million threshold, producing a total annual liability of $1 million and leaving him with $149 million.
    • Year 2: Pays a 2% tax on the $49 million in net worth above the $50 million threshold, producing a total annual liability of $980 thousand and leaving him with $ 148.02 million.
    • Rinse, repeat…
    • After 30 years, Uncle Zeke still has around $77.3 million, having lost $22.7 million to subsidize overpaid lobbyists and other grifters in the beltway.

    Of course if Uncle Zeke had invested $50 million at 2% interest, he’d have a little over $140 million, off of which the IRS could skim capital gains taxes. In fact, if the government shook him down for $22.7 million in the form of CGT, they’d have their tribute and Uncle Zeke would still be about $17.3 million richer instead of $22.7 million poorer.

    Warren probably thinks she’s being clever, but this is just the Chris Moltisanti approach to finance: “When you’re bleeding a guy you don’t squeeze him dry right away. Contrarily, you let him do his bidding suavely. So you can bleed him next week and the week after at minimum.”

    https://youtu.be/L1UNhJn95yQ

    It’s short-sighted as hell, but, hey, you know, Sopranos.

    She may do well to remember what P. J. O’Rourke said many years ago: Wealth is not a pizza, where if I have too many slices you have to eat the Domino’s box.

    Maybe she should propose taxing income and capital gains in the same iterative way. I bet that would go over well.

    1. Crazy Uncle Zeke is truly crazy if he’s only earning 2% on his $100M. “Over the past 30 years, the S&P 500 index has delivered an average annual return of more than 12%.”

  12. – FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY MEANS FREEDOM OF SEGREGATION

    – CONGRESS HAS THE POWER TO TAX FOR “…GENERAL WELFARE.”

    – AMERICA REQUIRES MASSIVE CORRECTIVE ACTION

    Of course, per Article 1, Section 8, Congress cannot tax for anything social except “…general Welfare…,” omitting and, thereby, excluding taxation for individual or specific welfare, charity or redistribution of wealth, in all its glorious forms and configurations. Congress may tax to send a check to every American, but Congress may not tax to bail out States, municipalities or private enterprises or, otherwise, favor the friends of Congress.

    This tax is as unconstitutional as compulsory integration. Americans enjoy the freedom of Assembly which means Americans enjoy the freedom of Segregation. In order for Americans to freely assemble, they must have to the freedom to freely segregate. If Americans may not freely segregate, Americans may not freely assemble.

    The singular American failure has been and is the Supreme Court, with its power of “judicial review,” and most of the judicial branch – the entire American welfare state must have been immediately struck down by judges and Justices.

    Freedom is tough. Freedom is a terrible thing to waste.

    Communism is worse – Communism is slavery.
    ____________________________________

    People must adapt to the outcomes of freedom.

    Freedom does not adapt to people, dictatorship does.

  13. Warren knows that the litigation against a wealth and captivation tax would be tied up in the courts forever. Her actions are designed to reach the hate the wealthy folks such as Sal Sar, JoeFriday, and Elvis Bug. She sits in her mansion counting her money and laughs at the suckers who paid for her education because she was Pocahontas. Here’s the grift that keeps on grifting. Tell the people that the rich took the money from the poor and we can confiscate their wealth and kill them if necessary. History tells us of the use of this tactic over and over again. It worked for her friends Mao, Joseph, Adolph, Fidel, and many more. We have someone who has clawed her way to the top on the backs of native Americans and we can somehow give credence to her recommendations and her soak the rich pablum. I use the word pablum because it is used to feed babies. When the babies are hungry they cry for more and she provides.

    1. for TIT there is NO level of income or asset inequality that will bother him or her. For my part I said $50 M was too low, but 1 Billion was not.

      For him or her, there is NO level of overweening social economic and political power imaginable to him or her that reduces us to slaves by comparison, that will justify US crafting laws against THEM. We just have to suck it up and let Jack Dorsey and Zuckerberg censor us, Bill Gates lock us down with his COVID schemes, and Bezos drive one small business into oblivion after another.

      You know, Amazon wants to sell services too? You will kiss another ten thousand small businesses goodbye if he gets away with that. “Oh but people will save money!” some folks will say. Suckers who think Jeff Bezos is their patron!

      Don’t compare Liz Warren to Stalin and Hitler. That’s preposterous. She may be “Fauxcahontas” she may be obnoxious she may be a typical self serving politician but she is hardly them. Your hyperbole here defeats meaningful conversations.

      Now back to the billionaires. Let’s kick it up to the centi-billionaire level. That’s way above Trump by the way who is supposedly around 2 now. He’s pocket change to them. Not that one guy matters in this debate, he will be fine either way. Let’s look at the centi-billonaire level. A level undreamed of even by King Midas. They dwarf not some nations but most. And they are astride us all like A Colossus! Who are they?

      Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg.

      Now I admit I like Musk. I want humanity to colonize Mars and he’s on the job. Swell. But don’t miss the point. The group is what matters here, their overweening control over the rest of us, and that group is no friend of ours.

      You can pull Bill Gates TED Talk where he said in 2010 that by giving better health care and vaccines he was going to reduce the global population by 10-15%. Gee I sure hope I don’t end up the recipient of his charity such that I become the 10-15% of humanity that goes away! But you can volunteer for his munificence if you like!

      Sal Sar

      1. Warrens philosophy is the same as all central government socialist of the past and the present. She just doesn’t have the power that they had yet, but she demonstrates what she would do with the power if she had it. Sal you are her defender. We have many areas where we can improve but the one trick pony hate the rich mantra has had a devastating effect on mankind. Same pony different rider same result. You like the idea of colonizing Mars. Imagine what life would be like on the red planet. It wouldn’t even make a good penal colony. Maybe it would be a good place to send Papillon. As to Silicon Valley billionaires. I too am worried about their power. I would be especially worried if they cut off Joe Biden’s ability to communicate with the nation and I would say so. When it happened to Trump the only thing that our “Mr. Fair” Sal Sar did was hit the mute button.

        1. You are totally factually wrong. I was all over Jack Dorsey for banning Trump. You have been corrected once, and now you lie. I don’t need to converse with liars.

          Why are you so keen to apologize for bilionaires TIT? You got a job shining shoes on Wall Street? Most of us dont.

          You know some days I gotta laugh. I got this one fool TIT who says I failed to stick up for Trump and then we got AnonJF who is usually here needling me because I liked him.
          it’s too bad you weren’t both on the thread at the same time, that would have been a hoot.

          This is the internet of course. Use it much and this kinds of vexatious interlocutors always make themselves known. Sal

          1. Sal, one of is playing fast and lose with the truth. I read your posts for many months. Indeed I have read your posts against the billionaires but I have not seen an individual condemnation of the prohibition of Trumps speech. Those who post here on a regular basis will have to access your statements as to there veracity. In history attacking the rich has been an excuse to gain power by despots and has ended in the deaths of millions. To base ones entire political philosophy on rich versus poor feeds the possibility of that danger coming to fruition. I believe that reining in robber barons is a good idea. Painting all the people who have gained wealth with the broad brush of evil is only born of the sadness of envy. The real danger lies in the fanning of the flames of envy by the most envious.

            1. I been posting on here for years., Formerly under another name. The posts may be under Kurtz. Look it up or dont. I don’t want your likes nor dislikes nor comments nor your retraction if you muster one up. You owe me one but fools like you have words that are worthless both coming and going.

              You are a blind partisan invoking empty slogans like “socialist.” You have nothing to contribute to the specifics in question or you would have already

              I could care less if you approve of me or not. I don’t seek the approval of avatars on the internet.

              Now go say high to AnonJF that is gouging me now because I supported Trump. You clowns deserve each other! Sal

              1. Now AnonSal tells us that he used to post under Kurtz and to look up his post condemning Dorsey for prohibiting Trumps communications. Only one problem. Trump was banned on twitter and Facebook long after Sal had dropped Kurtz for Sol Sal. So Sal condemned Dorsey before he was Sal. If this is true Sal couldn’t have Defended Trump against Dorsey because when Sal was Kurtz Trump had not yet been banned.

                1. Whatever. I said what I said. who cares if you can verify it. Also who cares about the sequence of all that. I don’t need to please your anybody else, You’re a pest. You got something better to do than cyberstalk me, goofball?. Sal

                  1. Sal, you told us that you defended Trumps speech by being against Dorsey. When I present a timeline that proves you are not telling the truth you tell us that the timeline of when you changed your identity from Kurtz to Sal doesn’t matter. Oh my you say, I have been caught in a lie but it really doesn’t matter. You are correct, to you it doesn’t matter.

      2. So Sal, first you say that Musk is one of the Colossus who stand over us all and then you tell us you like him. Oh now I understand???

        1. Yes TIT my mind can encompass contradictions. Can yours? Apparently not. Go on back to Ayn Rand world of oversimplifications, it will be a safer space for you. Sal

      3. “Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg”

        are just “poor people with boats”, to the people who are actually pulling the strings, Sal. Including the strings connected to the 4 guys cited above.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CV3ILX8rQc

        All of the rest of us can squabble over who pays what until we’re all dead and gone. But as long as the puppet masters are running the worldwide show nothing of any real substance is going to change.

        1. WTF. I have seen that interview. In fact I have seen the whole interview. I dont know if Pawlecec was credible or not. His contention was that RFID implants have been around for years before they came into public view. I accept that. But this is not what we are talking about. And even if he had insights about RFID implants, or computer programming, or black projects, or new technologies, why would I assume that he had a profound insight into other things. So that’s all I got to say about him.

          About the interviewer. I am not sure if you know about him. The interviewer stephen greer is a person of mixed and dubious reputation. I have to credit him for predicting that “Disclosure” was coming from the US government where UFOs were combined. He was right about that and it’s underway. Apparently there is a big report from Def Dept coming out beginning of June. Per a USA today story and comments from Former DNI Ratcliffe that ran just today. But yeah we were not talking about UFOs either.

          But Greer has some major drawbacks. I won’t elaborate on the dirt. Instead i want to dispute this frequent intimation that his interviewee makes, that he often has made as well. This method of referring to “unseen controllers.” This is a canard. It is an excuse. I have heard patriots using that term for decades. It’s almost a marketing ploy as I have seen it aimed at one group of patriots after another going back to the 80s.

          See if you can’t identify who these supposed controllers are, then you can’t fight them. See? Makes life easier. “The controllers!” cant be fought so you can rest easy. You don’t have to do anything. you just shrug and keep on submitting to the actual schemes imposed upon you by real culprits who do have names and faces. Like Gates. No, Im not worried about who’s behind Gates, I suspect it is just GATES behind Gates. I find my viewpoint modestly empowering, however humble we are.

          I’m not worried about the “unseen forces” atop the billionaires. For my humble opinion, they are in charge. The people in government may be their rivals at times, but for the most part, they are schlepping about helping Gates and that kind do their thing. For example the heads of the Federal Reserve. He is not unseen. He is named Powell. There are boards of governors. It is a government chartered bank that acts as both a cartel leader for the private banks, but also as a government chartered central bank. Hey I been down this road before. It may be a private employer for purposes of worker’s comp, but it’s not a private bank. It is most certainly a GOVERNMENT BANK. And it executes a certain policy and with sufficient political pressure, policies can change. Sal.

    2. Marxist policies and confiscatory wealth taxes have destroyed economies and democracies wherever they have been implemented. So much for an Ivy League education. They only thing that degree guarantees
      these days is how to accumulate power by appeasing the masses.

      1. Cindy, I didn’t go to an Ivy. Anyhow what are “Marxist policies?”

        like, “free public education?” I have studied the Manifesto and I see a lot of policies that have mostly been implemented already.

        You know Karl Marx praised Lincoln for the Civil War? Does that mean that Lincoln was wrong?

        What about nearly the entire FDR administration. Throw it all out? We’re way past it now.

        I think you get my point. Don’t be so sure that something is wrong just because a “commie” says it.

        If Hitler said the sky was blue on a sunny day, does that mean it was grey?

        A policy might be a good thing or not. Don’t worry so much about who came up with it, worry about the details of it, and the why and whether of if it fits

        Sal Sar

  14. Talk about missing the forest for the trees. The most important point in this post is the imposition of an exit tax. This is not a Warren idea. The idea has been floated in California with taxing their citizens even after they have left the state. They have come up with the idea because they are beginning to realize that the migration from California is beginning to have a real effect on their tax base. So let’s say that Anonymous Elvis Bug lives in California and he decides to move to Texas because there is no state income taxes but more importantly the cost of living is significantly less. Come the next January he gets a notice of taxes owed to the state of California. I wonder what Elvis Bugs reaction would be. Warren knows that a wealth tax would cause a migration of wealth from the U.S. far greater than what the new tax would provide, thus the captivation requirement. You live in this neighborhood so every week our guy will come around for your contribution. If you move your business to Manhattan we have guys who will find you to get what you owe so you best just stay put. Does youes get my drift.

    1. The US already has an “exit tax” on those with assets over 2 million who give up their US citizenship – equal to the max rate of the estate tax (55%). (Look up “expatriation tax” for details.)

      1. Who said they would give up there citizenship. They would just move their Ford plant to Mexico and the Mexico First administration wouldn’t have a word to say. Has Pocahontas shed a tear for the people at Ford who have lost there jobs. Remember she of the little people (tribesman). If you find a post anywhere by the Indian Princess in concern for the American jobs lost please provide a link. Surely you have hours and hours and days and days to find one.

    2. TIT you are apparently unaware that there is already an exit tax on those who expatriate themselves for income tax purposes. It would take a bigger bite than what she’s proposing.

      here, you need to read up some instead of just talking out of your waste orifice

      https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2017/02/27/renounce-u-s-heres-how-irs-computes-exit-tax/?sh=533ec6ed287d

      When you learn the ABCs then let me know if you want to try and write a sentence. For now your confidence exceeds your information.

      Now this is the second time today I mentioned that expatriation tax. If you would have read what all I wrote today instead of firing from the hip, then you might now have hit a target. Sal Sar

Leave a Reply