Below is my column on Fox.com on the new push by Democrats to impose a wealth tax nationally. While the proposal currently focuses on billionaires, this legislation would be a test case for the federal courts in asserting this new and unlimited tax authority. If allowed, Congress would then be able to set any wealth level for special taxation. At the same time, Democrats in states from Washington to Virginia are moving to impose a ten percent millionaire’s tax on income.
Here is the column:
“Enough is enough.” With those words, Senator Bernie Sanders (I., Vt) launched a push to impose a 5% annual wealth tax on America’s billionaires. With Rep. Ro Khanna (D., Cal.), the legislation, “Make Billionaires Pay Their Fair Share Act,” echoes the growing “eat-the-rich” mantra on the left — seeking to replicate a disastrous push in California that has led to an exodus from that state and an estimated loss of $2 trillion in taxable assets.
It is also flagrantly unconstitutional.
Under the plan, Congress would target 938 billionaires to tap them for $4.4 trillion. That money would then be redistributed as a $3,000 direct payment to every man, woman, and child in a household making $150,000 or less – $12,000 for a family of four.
The timing of the move is telling. Not only is it calculated before the midterm elections, in which the Democrats hope to retake power, but it follows the push by California Democrats and unions to impose a similar wealth tax in that state.
Khanna, who represents Silicon Valley, has supported the state law, which includes a ruinous provision for startup entrepreneurs. The law would not only be retroactive to try to trap wealthy taxpayers who have fled the state, but also base wealth calculations on the voting shares of corporate executives. Often, with start-ups, entrepreneurs hold greater voting shares than actual ownership. However, just in case they need more incentive to leave the state, they will be taxed as if their voting shares represented actual wealth.
The practical problem is that the wealthy, like their wealth, are mobile. As a result, many are fleeing California. So now Khanna is joining with the nation’s leading Democratic Socialists to ensure there is nowhere to hide in the United States. For billionaires in California, they could be double-tapped for ten percent of their wealth.
It has long been the dream of the far left. Years ago, Sen. Elizabeth Warren delighted Democratic voters in her run for the presidency by telling the rich she was coming after “your Rembrandts, your stock portfolio, your diamonds and your yachts.” In one debate, she dramatically rubbed her hands together after saying she would take some of the wealth of fellow candidate John Delaney, a self-made millionaire.
In my book, “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution,” I discuss the growing threat of “economic factionalism” as politicians fuel rage against the wealthy based on the false premise that they are not “paying their fair share.” While there are good-faith arguments for adjusting tax burdens to address budget demands, the top 1 percent pays more taxes than the bottom 90 percent combined.
There is little reason to believe that a wealth tax targeting billionaires will not, if upheld, be later extended to lower tax brackets, starting with multimillionaires. That is the signature of economic factionalism, which feeds an insatiable appetite for greater wealth seizure.
The Sanders-Khanna plan is notable in its express commitment to direct wealth redistribution. It also explains why the left has made the packing of the Supreme Court a priority. As Harvard professor Michael Klarman explained years ago, the radical agenda to change the system to guarantee Republicans “will never win another election” requires control of the Supreme Court to uphold such measures.
The problem is that the Constitution bars the implementation of such a federal wealth tax. 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.”
The effort to expand federal taxation beyond income taxes will require either a constitutional amendment or an enabling, packed Court.
Nevertheless, these politicians will continue to dangle wealth distribution before voters. They will demonize figures like Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk for their wealth while ignoring that these same figures are wealth and job creators, driving our economic growth. Instead, Sanders declared that “Billionaires cannot have it all.”
The irony of Rep. Khanna (who has been floating a run for President in 2028) turning on his own constituents in Silicon Valley underscores the appeal of wealth-redistribution campaigns. He is turning the very heart of his state’s economic growth as state deficits and out-of-state migration increase.
For Sanders, the legislation is a key moment to advance his long-standing socialist agenda. He declared the beginning of the end of “unprecedented income and wealth inequality” in the United States through such redistribution. The stated objective of erasing wealth inequality highlights how this is just the start and the end of wealth taxation.
As discussed in Rage and the Republic, none of this is new. Countries like France previously targeted the wealthy, triggering an exodus of taxpayers and their businesses from the country. It had to reverse its policy as the economy collapsed.
Of course, many young people have no memory of such failures in the 20th Century. Instead, they are drawn to the very same soundbites used in France and Great Britain before disastrous experiments with socialism. With no experience with socialist economies, figures like socialist mayor Zohran Mamdani can entice voters to “the warmth of collectivism.”
There are legitimate concerns over the glaring and growing wealth gap in the United States. However, a wealth tax is neither a constitutional nor a practical way of addressing the problem.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the author of the New York Times bestselling “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
Democrats snatched a stunning flip this week in a Republican stronghold after Democrat Bobbi Boudman won a state house seat in a rural New Hampshire district where President Donald Trump won by double digits just 16 months ago.
Boudman’s 52-48 victory over Republican Dale Fincher in the special election marked her third attempt at the seat and signaled a dramatic shift in voter sentiment,
Republicans have found themselves underwater since Trump’s election, with Democrats having now flipped 28 state legislative seats since he returned to the White House,
Boudman’s campaign hammered affordability, education, and fiscal responsibility, issues where Trump’s polling has cratered. Recent surveys show 62 percent of Americans disapprove of his economic stewardship, with 48 percent convinced his policies are hurting the economy.
Boudman won on a shoestring budget of just $12,000 with minimal outside help.
Turns out affordability isn’t a hoax after all.
Go figure.
Oooooooooooooh, what exciting news! A rural NH district elected a Democrat! Life on earth will never be the same, all wars will end, cancer will be cured, pigs will fly, and I’m all a-twitter!
In other off-topic news worth sharing due to its earth-shattering nature: When I walked my dog this evening, he defacated twice. That’s really unusual, because normally he defacates only once. I expect this to be a front-page story in tomorrows newspapers.
“. . . .with Democrats having now flipped 28 state legislative seats”. You didn’t mention if these changes were the result of realignment of the voting districts, which all too often is used to gain seats in any state. It happens in both parties.
OT:
ISIS-supporting Old Dominion shooter shouted ‘Allahu Akbar’ before killing ROTC instructor, injuring two others: FBI
When translated into English, “Allahu Akbar” means “I’m going to kill you because you’re not Mulsim” (translation of concept, not exact words).
At the of the founders Islam wasn’t that up and running. The neuvo riche can’t handle it, eh?
Definitely theocracy is a no go…
You can be sure Bernie checked in with his accountants before his latest proposal to ‘take from the successful and give to the left wing base’, to be sure his net worth has not moved to the billionaire category from his current millionaire category. That old communist/socialist grifter knows how get the ‘where is my free chit’ crowd to crawl out of their section 8 housing and vote democrat on election day.
Exactly
Below there was discussion about regressive taxes and flat taxes.
There are some 29 million employees in city/county/state/federal out of approximately 164 million employed in total, leaving 135 million supporting 29 million.
An example of regressive tax, I assisted my wife’s god child on her taxes, she made $41K, and paid almost 7% federal, and 5% in state income taxes, netting after SS and Medicare a take home pay of $1,350 bi-weekly. Total tax +/- 14% strangling it is!
The Persian Empire was Great. Persians are great. Where the —- are they? Where the —- are the Great Persians in their Finest Hour?
Any government needs an “X” amount of tax revenue (income) to fund government services (ie: police, municipal services, military, etc).
If one state has lots of young adults, that state may prefer sales tax and payroll taxes since the majority of taxpayers are employed with fewer assets.
Another state with lots of older retired residents may prefer personal property taxes since many of their residents are no longer employed and don’t spend as much money to boost sales tax income.
The USA as a whole is getting older with Baby Booming retiring so income tax alone won’t net the required amount of tax revenue.
The one success story was legal immigration, young immigrants were paying into the tax system essentially subsidizing Baby Boomers through general revenue, social security taxes and Medicare. This shortfall in birth rates (future tax payers) is what inspired MAGA movement for more sex to increase birthrates, requiring fewer immigrants.
So the tax system has never been totally fair. One thing is certain, the government will generate revenue one way or another.
Sweetheart taxes aren’t needed at all if you knew how not to print out too much money. Just equalize interest or usury. Want to charge interest on loans, then balance that with dividends if you have to make money on money aka usury. Such bs.
The gubment wasn’t supposed to be the nations biggest employer. 😂.
Billionaire Warren Buffet once said that his secretary paid a higher tax rate than he did.
That’s called a “regressive” tax rate, those making a lower income pay higher tax rates, while richer Americans pay a loser tax rate.
A “progressive” tax system works the opposite way. Loser income Americans pay a lower tax rate than billionaires.
At this point a “flat” rate system might be fairer – both working class Americans and billionaires pay the same tax rate.
In a flat rate tax system Warren Buffet would pay the same rate as his secretary.
A flat tax is the fairest. It doesn’t punish people at either end of the income spectrum. It would also lead to more jobs and economic activity, as the disincentives would be gone. As I said below, the solution is a Tax Uniformity Amendment to the Constitution, which clarifies that the effective rate of taxation cannot depend on the quantity of the thing being taxed.
We all pay the same amount to enjoy Walt Disney World.
There is no progressive or regressive admission rate.
I wonder if the ticket price for Walt Disney World is covered by the Equal Protection Clause.
He takes less income than she does. He lives in an old house and drives caddie…
What a lie. Mr Buffet could hand the government a big check any-day. But he doesn’t.
Among the many things that bother me about Democrats like Warren, Sanders and many of their fellow travelers is their wish list constantly has on it what they and others of their ilk can take from someone else. Today it is wealth. Yesterday it was stolen land. For four years under Biden it was the value of citizenship. Who knows what it will be tomorrow. In spite of their demands that others give up what they have, I never hear any of them stepping forward to give away anything they have. It seems to me that they are just so much hot air. To add to the ridiculous self-portrait they have made, they also are condemning President Trump for starting the war with Iran because gas prices have gone up. Let me get this straight. These Democrats would rather have a nuclear armed Iran who will destroy Israel and cause World War III than have to pay few dollars more for gasoline. I wish we had a loyal opposition instead of the opportunists calling themselves Democrats who have lost sight of what America means.
Great points honestlawyermostly. Another example is the gun-grabbing legislation the professor wrote about yesterday, and John Kerry flying around in gas-guzzling private jets to preach that the downtrodden must give up affordable energy. He justifies it by saying his work in suppressing affordable energy is so important that it’s fine for him to emit tons of carbon dioxide, but others shouldn’t.
honestlawyermostly and NotSoOld:
It sure ain’t the old “Mr. Smith” who goes to Washington to fight corruption anymore. It’s Washington fighting Washington.
p.s. re: gas prices. I note that every spring gas prices go up by @ 50cents (well-documented) caused by seasonal additives, etc. , so it’s hard to separate that from Democrats’ complaint about gas prices (although a continued a/o escalating hike would of course be).
So sick of the media stoking unhappiness.
After 2026 election and after 2028 election, Israel will no.longer exist.
Place is done. None of us are fortunate. Eternity of poverty, crime, oppression.
Is the devil a pedophile? He is. Guess which religion recommends it? It’s not a fobia. Some just hate the devil. No, I won’t bow down and worship you by doing what you say to do.
Btw, why is there a devil mayor? You don’t know the difference?
PT, for one espousing freedom under 1A you sure do censor.
Adieu
It is odd that the eye is always on what others have HLM and how they can steal it. They call it sharing.
There was not going to be a nuclear armed Iran. That is a lie.
^ Gigi the fool lives in a fantasy world filled with rainbows and unicorns.
John D Rockefeller “The growth of a large business is merely a survival of the fittest…The American Beauty rose cheer to its beholder only by sacrificing the early buds which grow up around it. This is not an evil tendency in business. It is merely the working-out of a law of nature and a law of God.”
The idea that government works according to plans is both hysterical and frightening. One example: ‘The Farm Tenant Act’, where landlords evicted workers and withheld their share of benefits payments. The tenants organized a union Southern Tenant Farmers’ Union which functioned poorly, one of the members was quoted “an industry that is disorganized, pauperized and kept alive only by government subsidy.”
Government greedy charlatans have always pursued the prosperous and wealthy for more and more money.
In 1916 to fund government operations the Revenue Act of 1916 had changes which doubled the basic income tax from 1 to 2 percent, lifted the sur-tax to 13 percent on incomes over $2 million, added estate tax up to ten percent, and added taxes on corporation’s capital, surpluses and excess profits which pleased President Wilson.
I only included the above to caution those that may believe the government will not pursue a new wealth tax, they will without question use some lame progressive notion to pass than enforce new taxes, and of course just ignore the continuing debt which is now approaching $40 trillion smack-a-rounee’s!
President Wilson.
The Prez who hated blacks. Nice guy.
The real difference:
Billionaire: “I’ll have a double cheeseburger with everything on it.”
Non-Billionaire: “Hold the pickle. Hold the lettuce… Oh, and by the way, I brought my own bun.”
“THEY ARE NOT TO LAY TAXES AD LIBITUM FOR ANY PURPOSE THEY PLEASE”
Will the Supreme Court provide a citation to the Constitution for a legal basis for imposing these taxes that violate the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause and Article 1, Section 8, which limits taxation to debt, defense, and general welfare?
AI Overview
In his 1791 Opinion on the Constitutionality of a National Bank, Thomas Jefferson argued against an expansive interpretation of Congressional power, stating that Congress is not authorized to “lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please”. He insisted they are restricted to enumerated powers, or they would have unlimited, dangerous power.
I look at things this way. 1 billion dollars extra in the hands of a billionaire or 1 billion dollars extra in the hands of the US government.
I know where the 1 billion will go if the billionaire gets it. He invests in companies that produce jobs and more wealth.
Now, I ask all you lefties, where do you think the 1 billion dollars will go?
Meyer – intersting point. The wealthy don’t put their money under the mattress, they invest it into wealth-creating endeavors which require paying other people. A common-sense way of understanding this is: if a person needs work to feed his family, does he seek out a poor person and ask for work? No, he seeks out someone with means, who almost always has a paying job for that person to do. If we punished people for having wealth, then we are creating a situation where it’s harder for low-income citizens to find the means to make a living.
No they don’t–the wealthy spend their money on themselves, their collectibles, travel, and other self-indulgent things.
That is the very kind of economic ignorance I was talking about. When they spend their money on themselves, they are transferring money to someone else. But you never thought of that, did you?
Moreover, their tax-deductible charitable donations can be up to I think it’s 60% of their AGI? (I am not a tax atty)
So a lot of other good out there.
Lin – Blue Anonymous’s comment to which I responded is absurd in so many ways. I just picked one. Another would be some kind of distinction where only billionaires spend money on themselves, whereas all other members of the economy limit their spending to charitable causes, and never spend on themselves. Regardless of who is spending money, economic activity is taking place, which has two results: (a) under a free market resources are directed to their highest and best use, thereby creating more aggregate wealth for the citizenry as a whole, and (b) taxable events are taking place so that the government gets its piece of the action. And again, this is not to mention that people in need of a job want the rich to spend money on themselves because that is how they get some of that money. The idea that someone should become successful and then never spend that money on themselves is not only absurd, but un-American.
Good, but I simply meant that ‘charitable donations” are “transferring money to someone else,” (more precisely, to the benefit of someone else),” as you noted.
“transferring money to someone else”? Who? The sellers of furs, designer clothes, shoes, handbags, etc.–much of which is imported? How about those who sell yachts, private jets, expensive cars and high-end real estate? Then, there are those people who sell high-end art and rare collectibles; as well as travel, airlines, gourmet dining, fine wines, expensive jewelry? How about plastic surgery, maincures, hairdressing, expensive cosmetics? Then, there’s the stockbrokers, investment counselors and estate planning attorneys. How many Americans benefit from trading in any of these things? Money spent on these enterprises does not “trickle down”. What they DON’T do is build factories here in the US, because they don’t want to pay union scale. How many of them invest in enterprises in other countries? How many of them have undocumented nannies, maids, housekeepers, cooks, landscapers, gardeners, chauffeurs and pool attendants? Lots of them–because these people will work for peanuts, they don’t require benefits and won’t file for unemployment or sexual harassment.
I worked for a billionaire for a few years. He started multiple companies, and bought other companies, and created hundreds if not thousands of well-paying of jobs in the US. Many of those were professional jobs and many were blue collar jobs. Anyone who owns a yacht has created good-paying jobs for people who build yachts (including blue collar workers) and the staff that works on the yacht. The US once tried a yacht tax and that only sent yacht-building jobs to other countries, so it was quickly repealed.
https://boattest.com/article/day-us-cruiser-industry-was-murdered
You seem totally unaware of economic realities. Your kind of thinking, if put into practice, only leads to poverty for everyone. Plus, your underlying position that people who have a certain amount of money should not be able to determine what to spend that money on is patently absurd, and basically a fascist attitude. As I said yesterday, the Left’s instincts are always totalitarian.
How many people in the United States are employed in the building of yachts? A handful at best. Porsches, Lamborghinis and Ferraris are not built here in the US. Many designer clothes, handbags, shoes, etc. are imported. In fact, most of all of our clothes, shoes and accessories are imported. The majority of Americans do not benefit from the purchase of these goods. I’m not going to accuse you of not knowing “economic realities”–you are just repeating MAGA media slop to try to convince the masses that helping the wealthiest maintain as much wealth as possible is a good thing for the rest of us. It is not.
A huge theme of MAGA media, created by the American oligarch class after Nixon was caught in the Watergate scandal, is to attack mainstream media, to make people so confused by endless claims of lies and contradictions to wear them down to divert them from thinking about what is really true. Why hasn’t proof of widespread voter fraud or proof of massive numbers of non-citizens voting ever been uncovered? Because it doesn’t exist. Does that stop Trump and MAGA from continuing to claim otherwise? They are pushing for the SAVE Act for survival, based on lies. They are trying everything possible to rig the midterms and prevent probable Democrats from voting by intimidation and threats, and quite possibly, having Trump falsely declare some kind of “national emergency” so as to cancel or try to federalize elections.
Republicans thought they could save Nixon’s presidency if they had sympathetic media that would accuse Woodward and Bernstein as well as the Washington Post of lying or being unfair–but, they weren’t and they couldn’t get media to cover up Nixon’s crimes. Tricky Dick was guilty, and Republicans at that time were patriotic enough not to look the other way. Barry Goldwater went to Nixon and told him he was toast–either resign or we’ll impeach and remove you. Nixon resigned and Ford pardoned him. Republicans never got over it. They weren’t going to let this happen again. They believed that controlling media was the answer, since it was media and dogged reporting by Woodward and Bernstein who brought Nixon down.
So, now, we have MAGA media, pretending to be journalists, but which are just massive propaganda outlets set up by the American oligarch class. Some of them even use “News” in their titles, and sit behind desks, like real journalists. They even sometimes report actual news, but most of what they do is propaganda–pro-Trump, pro-Republican, anti-Democrat, and the kind of crap that Turley writes. MAGA is going after local newspapers and local television stations, too–Sinclair Broadcasting is buying up large numbers of local television stations. MAGA is going after law firms and universities, anyone and anything that can push back–and that’s all part of the authoritarian playbook. Whiskey Pete won’t allow media into Pentagon briefings unless they agree, in writing, to only publish what he approves first. He has banned media that published photos of him that he thinks aren’t flattering. Turley has chosen to become part of this. They pay well, apparently.
One of the latest examples is the Trump war against Iran. Trump promised no new “forever wars”. Trump promised transparency. Trump promised to release the Epstein files. Trump started a war and still has not come up with one cohesive reason why. According to Senator Kelly, he’s given at least 11 different reasons why. He bombed a girls’ school, lied about Iran being responsible, and when proof that the US really did it, lied and said he didn’t know anything about it. Bondi is clearly covering up negative references to Trump in the Epstein files, which is a violation of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, and has outed the names, and even images of some the victims–another violation of the Act–and no one in their right mind believes that any of this is accidental or an oversight. It’s to humiliate and degrade the victims. There are those who claim that Putin has Trump in a bind–proof of things from the Epstein files, which, according to recent reports, has been accessed by foreign hackers. One thing is clear–Putin IS benefitting from this war–less help by the US for Ukraine, and Trump lifted sanctions against Russia so it could take advantage of the higher price of petroleum. Others claim that one reason Trump started the Iran war, in addition to paying back the Saudis who gave Jared Kushner $2 B to bail out a real estate investment, the Qataris for the luxury flying palace, and UAE for the $2 B purchase of his worthless cryptocurrency is to divert attention away from the claim of the 13 year old who claimed he tried to rape her. One thing is clear–Trump lied about Iran being ready to nuke us or even having the capability of doing so.
So. what does MAGA media do? Anything other than attack Trump. They mock Kamala Harris, Bill Clinton, and go after Democrat politicians, especially women, and especially women of color, like AOC, Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley, and others. And, they push the usual MAGA media tropes–that billionaires shouldn’t have to pay higher taxes, even though they could do so.
You show complete ignorance of how the economy works, not to mention callousness about people losing their jobs. You could pick any topic and say that only a handful of people work in that particular speciality. The point is about the economy as a whole. When anyone gets paid by a rich person, they don’t stuff the moeny in their mattress, they spend it on other things. The money keeps getting transferred to other people in exchange for work, and on and on. That’s why things we need exist, because someone worked. People who earned money lawfully have a right to spend it on any lawful thing they want. At least that’s true in any free country. But you show by your comments that you hate freedom, and so you are the fascist that you people on the Left pretend to dislike. The Left’s instincts are always totalitarian, born of ignorance and envy. With your ingorant and envious comments, you are proving the truth of that today.
That’s why things we need exist, because someone worked . . .
*And got paid for their work.
You pretend to care about jobs being sent overseas, but then when I point to a concrete example of when your preferred tax policies are documented to have sent jobs overseas, you shrug and say it only involved a handful of people.
Besides your starting premise is false. Per a google search: The U.S. boat building industry, which includes yacht manufacturing, employs over 50,000 workers directly. Including suppliers, dealers, and related services, the broader recreational boating industry supports more than 812,000 jobs across over 36,000 businesses. The sector is concentrated in states like Florida, Washington, and Virginia.
So you’d say “FU” to all 812,000 jobs, and the families that depend on those incomes. Pathetic.
“recreational boating industry supports more than 812,000 “
Hey Gigi / Natasha / blue anon, I helped to support 812,000 people. What did you do to help them?
Well not that it’s any of your business, but I do own: a pontoon boat, a ski boat, a Jon boat and a Grumman canoe. Of these, we had the most fun in the canoe, which we could take to more remote places and see scenery where motorized craft couldn’t go. Once we rescued a duck who was caught in a fishing line with a hook in her bill. Once a school of fish jumped over the canoe and a couple of them landed in the boat. Paddling is also good upper body exercise.
Most boat related jobs aren’t for luxury yachts.
What a bad person you are. You have so many things, while others are having trouble paying for their pharmaceuticals. You have your toys and value them, but you won’t look down to see what others don’t have, while your greed and envy make you look up wanting to take what isn’t yours.
Oldman.
Lets not forget Boeing too. Thousands work for them.
Seattle and WA state wouldn’t be where is today with out Boeing.
Using just two producers of goods: If we didn’t buy Porches from Germany, they wouldn’t have the money to buy our walnuts. Do you want the growers of walnuts to starve?
Sometimes those markets produce aesthetics that can be seen by rich and poor or a symphony that rich and poor enjoy. Everyone doesn’t frequent the Walmart aesthetic nor should they forcibly.
“How many people in the United States are employed in the building of yachts?”
And in the industries that supply wood, paint, instruments, transportation, engines . . . to the yacht building industry.
OMFK is right: You are ignorant about the realities of economic activity. An economy is an integrated whole.
You need to go to a local college and attend a course in economics 101. . .the law of supply and demand.
Touching only on the most expensive things like good art, there would be no beauty in the world if it wasn’t for high-dollar collectors. One of my favorite museums is the Frick Museum in NY. He or his curator had fabulous taste. The collection and the house holding the collection belonged to Frick. It is now public for the enjoyment of everyone, along with many other contributions to society. On the weekend, there was free music in the gardens. Millions of people have enjoyed that spot. What have you given to society?
Meyer – excellent observation. But you should know that Gigi would only see that as proof billionaires are bad because people should not be able to enjoy themselves. She writes from a soul corrupted by a toxic brew of hatred, envy, bitterness, and ignorance.
My former pity for those like Gigi has soured into disdain. It is impossible to maintain respect for those who would compromise the standard of living for millions while actively working against the interests of the greatest superpower ever to exist.
Enjoy this Oldman
__________________
Donald Trump famously rehabilitated the Wollman Rink in Central Park, New York City, in 1986 after the city failed to fix it over six years. Trump completed the project in just four months, finishing ahead of schedule and under budget.
I suppose this commie never spends ANY money on himself cause that would be wrong….
I bet he never gives away any of his ill-gotten gains to anyone not as well off as him.
economic ignorance? willful ignorance & just standard commie greed. it’s their main assertion; the right to take from others.
Every single human in America is amongst the top 1% richest people in the world. Even homeless people own cars and receive checks. you don’t see that anywhere else.
Oldman
Love it………………. HAHAHAHA
ah! the greedy useful idiot rears his stupid head. That’s not how it works lefty moron! read a book
Ya envy the wealth of others much? Don’t believe in yourself enough to seize life’s opportunities for yourself? Lazy?
Get off your mother’s couch and get a job!
That would be Bernie Sanders?
Right
Isn’t that horrible! Imagine, spending your money on what you want! Heavens!
Can a comment be more wrong?
How much money can one individual spend on personal needs? John Ellison spent 175 million dollars on his home in PB Fl. Then he bought a hotel down the block for 250 million dollars. At an approximate 10% return on his investments, he makes around 1.75 billion dollars a month. Since I gave you two of the biggest purchases he made for his personal needs, what do you think he does with the rest of his money? His home cost 1/10th of his monthly increase in wealth.
The type of logic you use doesn’t demonstrate logic, but envy. He came from a working-class family, just like many others, maybe even just like you. Did he earn that money because he spent so much on himself? No. He invested that money, and that is what he does today.
Envy is the parent of malignity.
Meyer – when you look up “malignity” in the dictionary, there is a photo of Blue Anonymous.
Meyer, I just remembered that Blue Anon is Gigi, hence the insanity coming from her pen.
You made me laugh. She was also Natasha.
Reminds me of the old saying. . .”If all of the richest people in the world gave all their money to the poorest people in the world, the rich would have it back in 5 years.” The rich are rich because they know how to make money and manage it.
Anonymous 2:23 PM-Yeah they probably buy cars built by workers, travel which helps the hotel industry workers, cruise lines that have almost as many employees on ships as passengers, clothes – which have to be made by someone, shoes which have to be made by someone, gas stations which are staffed, homes which require construction, electricians, plumbers, drywallers, roads that have to be paved, county and city maintenance to handle trash, repair streets and roads, move snow. Collectibles are in the eye of beholder. When you “spend money on yourself” as we all do, unless you personally manufacture everything you use, then someone else is getting paid to do it for you. Thank god for all those “others” who make things for all of us.
And if you were wealthy, you’d spend your money on yourself, your collectibles, travel, and other self-indulgent things. See how this works?
To Somali’s?
S. Meyer,
Great way to sum it up.
If we use non-profit like paradigm, only about 8% of that billion will actually go to whatever cause the money was meant for.
Upstate.
Remember all that money raised for the folks in Calif after the fire…
I sure didn’t go to them…
More MAGA lies. The wealthiest spend their extra money on themselves, on their children, and donating to to try to get Republicans elected so they will advocate for things like rolling back environmental and consumer protections and subsidies for their businesses, to increase their wealth even more. Take Miriam Edelson —she gave $100 million to Trump to get him to use the US military to support whatever Israel wants to do, which is one reason why over 140 American military members have been injured and 7 of them are dead. According to a study reported by Wealth Tender, here’s what the wealthiest do with their money:
“Here are the areas where they plan to spend more in the coming year than they did last year:
Real estate: 73 percent
Entertainment: 65 percent
Domestic travel: 48 percent
Education: 45 percent
Collectibles: 38 percent
International travel: 34 percent
Yachts or boats: 19 percent
Most plan to increase their spending on real estate and entertainment, with nearly half planning to spend more on education and domestic travel. More than 1 in 3 plan to spend more on international travel and collectibles.”
MAGA media always tries to push the idea that helping the wealthiest get even wealthier is better for all of us–not true. Reagan pushed the concept of “trickle down economics”–the wealth spent by the richest would eventually “trickle down” and benefit all of us. It wasn’t true then and isn’t true now. Part of the cacophony of lies pushed by MAGA media, such as the following that MAGA media never challenges:
–Iran bombed its own school with a Tomahawk missile, even though only the US, England and Australia have Tomahawks and England and Australia aren’t involved in the Trump-Iranian war. Our own intelligence is saying that we used outdated information to bomb this school, which was on the edge of a military installation–but was separated by a wall. Trump’s first lie was to blame Iran. Now, he’s saying he doesn’t know anything about it.
–Trump really didn’t lose in 2020, despite all evidence to the contrary; he says his “landslide victory” was stolen by fraud, proof of which does not exist; based on this lie, he got hundreds of gullible people to attack the Capitol, beat up police officers, trash the building and try to stop Biden’s victory from being certified; he sat by, over 3 hours, and watched police being beaten, the Capitol being trashed and did nothing until it was obvious that Pence wouldn’t be intimidated from certifying Biden’s victory. Then, he had the audacity to pardon each of these crooks. Now, Trump and Republicans are pushing for the SAVE Act–lying about large numbers of non-citizens voting, pushing for a law that the US government can seize all voter rolls and information and do whatever they want with the information. All of this is to try to rig the elections to deny the American people the right to choose our leaders, and/or intimidate or punish anyone who doesn’t vote Republican. He’s threatening to send ICE agents to polling locations to intimidate voters. He has already seized ballots and voting records in Fulton County, GA, and is trying to get the information in Maricopa County, AZ.
–taking away healthcare subsidies “encourages individual initiative” and “independence”; we have bilions to bomb Iran, but nothing to help Americans stay healthy and be able to afford health care.
–COVID will just magically disappear “one day” (it didn’t; it got better because of vaccinations); Hydroxychloroquine will cure COVID (it doesn’t); Ivermectin (an anti-worm medicine) will cure COVID (it doesn’t); you can’t trust rMRA vaccines because they alter your genetic code (they don’t);
–In June, 2025, declared that Iran’s nuclear enrichment facility was “totally and completely obliterated”, and then, months later, they were on the verge of building 11 nuclear bombs–even though our intelligence sources and the International Atomic Energy Commission both say this is not true;
–Obama was born in Kenya and Trump told Meredith Vieira that he had people gathering proof, and “you won’t believe what they found” (he’s right about that–we won’t believe it);
–has gullible supporters holding up signs with lies–like “Bigger Paychecks”; “Lower Grocery Prices”–all lies. Lies about inflation and the net loss of jobs since he took office. Promised to end Putin’s war with Ukraine on day one (he didn’t, he couldn’t, and now, is actually helping Putin kill Ukrainians). There are people who say that Putin has the goods on Trump vis a vis Epstein. We’ll eventually find out.
These are just a few examples. Republicans know they are going to get trounced in November, so they use people like Turley to do the next best thing–attack Democrats unfairly, hoping to convice voters that Democrats are more toxic than Republicans and will do bad things that will hurt them economically. Lying about billionaires paying extra taxes being a bad thing for America is just part of the strategy. They’ll just have less money to spend on themselves, their toys and other luxuries.
Where does wealth come from?
that’s a lot of words to justify your greed. Disgusting.
Sorry commie, we have private property here in the greatest country on earth. Try taking our stuff.
Again, your greed is absolutely disgusting and reprehensible, i can’t stress this enough. Are you even human?
Just more AI generated gaslighting.
“Take Miriam Edelson —she gave $100 million to Trump “
Thank God for Trump and Israel. And thank you, Miriam, for your donation.
Hear, hear!
Meyer.
I guess our lib failed to notice she donated her money, not forced by Government.
I wonder if our lib know Mr Soros… and the cash he gives away.
“Here are the areas where they plan to spend more in the coming year than they did last year:”
Good lord. You keep shooting yourself in the foot.
Do you not realize that *people* work in those industries? And that they are better off with customers than they are without customers?
THE PRINCIPLES OF COMMUNISM ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Karl Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto 59 years after the adoption of the Constitution because none of the principles of the Communist Manifesto were in the Constitution. Had the principles of the Communist Manifesto been in the Constitution, Karl Marx would have had no reason to write the Communist Manifesto. The principles of the Communist Manifesto were not in the Constitution then, and the principles of the Communist Manifesto are not in the Constitution now.
In fiscal year 2025, the United States spent roughly $7 trillion and collected about $5.2 trillion in tax revenue. That leaves a $1.8 trillion gap that has to be closed.
And that’s why a balanced budget amendment would be so valuable. The problem is that members of Congress don’t want one. They would rather have their pork-barrel spending to help get reelected than do what’s right for the United States. That’s why Congress has never sent a balanced budget amendment to the states for ratification.
You’re right. The first thing members of congress do after they are elected is to send federal money back home. . .along with carve-outs for particular programs and projects that provided the funding needed to get a congressional seat. If not, they would only last one-term. See how this works?
And Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, to mention only the three largest and most costly communist redistribution of wealth programs, are unconstitutional.
Read Article 1, Section 8, regarding what Congress may tax for, fund, and regulate; it isn’t retirement financial planning and healthcare.
And for the non-billionaires like me…..
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/6b/65/3c/6b653cfc834889c2aa120edfab9df7a1.jpg
Lin,
Put a U-Haul logo on the side of the wagons and there you go!
Elon Musk has taken 38 billion dollar in Federal Grants – that’s American Tax payer money – over the years to help support his businesses that have brough him extraordinary wealth. Meanwhile he paid NO FEDERAL INCOME TAXE in 2025 thanks to tax credits, depreciation and stock credits. Over the past three years (including 2025), Tesla reported $12.58 billion in U.S. income but paid only $48 million in federal taxes, an effective rate of 0.4%. Does anyone reading this actually think this is fair – regardless of your political affiliation?
“Grants?” You are completely misusing that word, giving away your politics. No Federal tax in 2025 – well, I’m sure he followed existing law. Now google what he paid in 2021 just for balance. “Fair” has nothing to do with it – and a billionaires tax is not a way towards fairness. The government wastes a ton of money, reducing spending is the path. Google Federal spending over the last decades – it has exploded.
This guy thinks a grant is free money. maybe in minnesota, but the rest of us consider that fraud. read a book.
Elon doesn’t “take” money, he’s just abiding by the regulations Congress has passed. If you want something different, vote differently.
Could you explain how you know how much musk paid in 2025 especially considering taxes are still not due for another 5 weeks for 2025
MISSING FROM COLUMN:
HOW TO PAY FOR IRAN
George W famously cut taxes before invading Iraq. That entire war was essentially ‘charged to the credit card’. And the balance is still there.. with interest mounting.
Last year, Donald Trump pushed through the Big Ugly Bill with its tax cuts for billionaires. Now we’re in another war. Though comically some in the administration are calling this an ‘operation’ instead of a ‘war’. Like Putin’s ‘special operation’ in Ukraine (now in its fourth year).
So curiously Turley makes no mention of this war and its billion dollar a day price tag when telling us what a looney Bernie Sanders is. ‘Yes’, Sanders has no regard for fiscal prudence. But neither does Trump. This war is going on the credit card at a time when out National Debt is at a record high.
. . .with its tax cuts for billionaires. . .
That’s the same tired old line Dems always trot out, but they never substantiate the implication that only billionaires had their taxes cut. If Trump cured cancer, eliminated the national debt, and lowered taxes for everyone, the TDS democrats would weep and gnash their teeth about a “tax cut for billionaires.” Pathetic.
. . . curiously Turley makes no mention . . .
That kind of hackneyed phrasing is only used by commenters whose IQ is below 75.
Billionaires didn’t ‘need’ any tax cut. We need to pay-down the debt.
That has nothing to do with the comment you replied to. Besides, even if the US confiscated all the wealth of all US billionaires (assuming that was even constitutional), and then used all that money to pay down debt, it would reduce the national debt from $38T to $30T. Then what would you do with a population that just lost its major wealth and job creators and was still $30T in debt? And why do liberals rely on emotionally-satisfying political phrases like “eat the rich” rather than thinking through the economic realities.
OldManFromKS,
For people who are emotion based, “thinking through the economic realities” is too hard. For them, screaming at the sky “eat the rich” is a instant solution.
Upstate
Has Mr Sanders said anything about cutting the spending…. NO!
Or reducing how much he is paid as a Senator.
Iranian IRG is in for a rood wakening
How did LBJ pay for Viet-Nam. Hmmm
Lin – if the tax is based on income then you’re right, it’s an income tax, not a wealth tax.
Scalia once said during oral argument that “a tax upon sleeping, measured by the number of shoes in your closet, is in fact a tax upon shoes.”
Like with gun-grabbing legislation, left-wing politicians will always seek political brownie points from their left-wing constituents with tax-the-rich propaganda. The temptation to kill the golden goose so as to get at the gold inside is too great to resist. They are well aware that killing the golden goose means no more golden eggs, but their own re-election is more important than sound tax policy.
A solution would be a tax-uniformity amendment, applicable to both the feds and the states, that clarifies that the effective tax rate on a thing – whether then thing is wealth or income – cannot depend on the quantity of the thing being taxed. Not only would that curtail these counterproductive efforts, it would be a boon to job creation and overall economic wealth.
Envy is one of the seven deadly sins. It does not merely touch upon wealth gaps but can make us constantly compare ourselves unhappily with most of our fellows in some way. In time, we view ourselves as victims.
“According to St. Thomas Aquinas, the struggle aroused by envy has three stages:
During the first stage, the envious person attempts to lower another person’s reputation
In the middle stage, the envious person receives either “joy at another’s misfortune” (if he succeeds in defaming the other person) or “grief at another’s prosperity” (if he fails).
The third stage is hatred because “sorrow causes hatred”[37]
Bertrand Russell said that envy was one of the most potent causes of unhappiness, bringing sorrow to committers of envy, while giving them the urge to inflict pain upon others.[38]”
en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Seven_deadly_sins
Sanders and Warren both suffer from this disease and encourage it in others.
edwardmahl,
That was very interesting. Thank you for posting that.
Estovir, whose little girl are you picturing for Edward Mahl? Just a stock picture you stole somewhere? Good human touch; like Edward’s granddaughter.
Grow up… You know zip!
DustOff,
Actually the annony’s comment reflects edwardmahl perfectly: Annony is full of envy of people like edwardmahl, Estovir, yourself, the good professor and me as we have something he will never have, credibility. We see it everyday with his comments, full of envy. He fits edwardmahl, comment to a T.
Has Sanders or Warren ever talked about cutting their Government pay check
Heeelll NO!
But they sure like to complain about money others make.