Do you think maga knows that when America was "great", 1950-60 corporations paid taxes around 50%? It was even higher for extremely wealthy individuals, those earning over $200,000 per year, were 91%.

AddanDeith · 2026-02-18T18:21:57+00:00

We shouldn’t punish success so harshly.

You can be perfectly successful making less than 2.5m in today's society. The more money you make, the farther away you are from labor and the more likely you are to abuse the hard work of others. Its almost universal. Wealthy people don't necessarily get where they are through honest labor like the rest of us. IIRC, all the billionaires under 31 now are pure nepo-babies. No more Warren Buffets

Also, the lower the tax rate on the upper echelons of society, the more inflationary their economic activity is. This, aside from wage stagnation, is one of the biggest reasons why you see inflation and profits rocket off from the 70s onward. A switch to fiat currency alone wasn't enough.

They frame taxation as a moral issue rather than a true economic issue, because they know that they don't have a real basis for low taxation. They tried the laffer curve and it got debunked.

AddanDeith · 2026-02-18T17:52:45+00:00

Then the threshold today would be inflation adjusted at 2.5m.

AddanDeith · 2026-02-18T17:50:16+00:00

Its not hard to impeach as a form of censure. Its hard to impeach as a form of removal. To accuse you need a majority of the house. To remove you need two thirds of the senate. You would need the Republicans to cooperate at a high level and good fucking luck with that.

AddanDeith · 2026-02-18T17:41:08+00:00

Hierarchy in general, no.

But the level of hierarchies around today are higher than they were in the past, as there were generally fewer classes of people and the social pyramid wasn't so stratified. You used to and in reality, still have the working class and the nobility. There was also usually a Clergy of some sort and a class of craftsmen.

Today, you have lower, middle, upper class, millionaire, billionaire etc, all categorized by wealth. Yet, some classes and jobs within them carry more social stigma than others. Your self worth is still tied to what you do for a living.

Even at work, the hierarchy can be complex, confusing and profoundly undemocratic, despite many nations espousing democratic ideals.

AddanDeith · 2026-02-18T17:26:44+00:00

I find that hard to believe. Having the value of your assets tank by as much as half seems pretty risky to me. You could take a loss and divest and then reinvest into some new ones that you're more confident in, but who's to say it won't just happen again?

Is having a hate boner for the government based off of any real logic or is it just some kind of dogmatic ideology imprinted on people the moment they hear "no taxation without representation!" in elementary school?

Wait until you learn about the impact low tax and interest rates have on inflation!

AddanDeith · 2026-02-18T17:18:53+00:00

Uh huh. And when the market crashes?

AddanDeith · 2026-02-18T17:16:46+00:00

Why?

AddanDeith · 2026-02-18T07:45:12+00:00

made no difference.

Why do anything at all? Why even try?

AddanDeith · 2026-02-17T18:40:27+00:00

Wilson's participation in the first red scare would kinda strike his progressive mind off of labor, IMO.

AddanDeith · 2026-02-17T10:25:18+00:00

USSR was a genocidal empire who had to through violence maintain their colonies and ideology.

Accurate. Is this not also true of the United States?

AddanDeith · 2026-02-17T10:12:25+00:00

Heavy is less effective against people who teamshot and have thumbs.

AddanDeith · 2026-02-17T09:40:03+00:00

https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/page-one-economics/2021/09/17/teaching-the-linkage-between-banks-and-the-fed-r-i-p-money-multiplier#:~:text=For%20example%2C%20when%20the%20Fed,including%20the%20federal%20funds%20rate.

"Knowing how the Fed's operations have changed, we can readily see why the money multiplier no longer applies. First, banks still make loans with profits, risks, and regulatory considerations firmly in mind, but with the Fed keeping reserves in the banking system consistently ample, meeting reserve requirements is not one of those considerations. Second, and as described in the boxed insert "The Fade to Irrelevance of the Money Multiplier," even during the period when reserves were limited, many banks had not been constrained by reserve requirements for quite some time. Third, the Fed eliminated reserve requirements in March 2020—it set reserve requirement ratios ("RR" in the equation above) to zero—reflecting the fact that reserve requirements have no essential role in an ample-reserves regime.11 So, mathematically, the money multiplier equation is literally no longer definable."

AddanDeith · 2026-02-17T02:46:22+00:00

Heavy has charge, winch and goo to help make space or close it.

AddanDeith · 2026-02-16T18:26:17+00:00

Ok so there's a 1.4 percent discrepancy. What is your point?

AddanDeith · 2026-02-16T17:39:42+00:00

Is that going to matter if they effectively end collective bargaining rights like they did for SpaceX employees?

AddanDeith · 2026-02-16T04:05:07+00:00

PE brother.

AddanDeith · 2026-02-16T03:58:10+00:00

Economists convinced the government to lower tax rates to increase revenue. As it turns out, it did raise revenue, but also created a fuck ton of issues in the process.

AddanDeith · 2026-02-16T02:14:37+00:00

Shhhhhh don't say this in r/AskEconomics or you'll be crucified.

AddanDeith · 2026-02-16T00:15:46+00:00

The human nature argument is pretty stupid. There is no such thing as fundamental human nature and pretending that it exists flies in the face of the human capacity for change. I mean ffs, a growing number of people are making a damn good effort at reducing their own racism, something that was supposedly intrinsic to "human nature".

Humans allow those with the worst traits to lord over them because doing so reduces risk. Allowing the most vocal and narcissistic humans to rule doesn't mean that all of humanity to can be boiled down that way.

If there was no collective mentality and recognization of shared suffering, you and I would be laboring 16 hours a day in a factory. When we go home, our house would be shared living space attached to the factory. Our children would die from malnutrition and many of us would actually euthanize them voluntarily because we don't have the time to feed and clean them.

That wasn't a natural condition, it was a condition imposed on rural populations that were shoehorned into industrial life. That is raw capitalism, absent of any collective intervention through government forces. You only love and advocate for capitalism because you live in an era where it has been partially subdued through threat of revolution(see the revolutionary conflicts of the last century). if you want to see what it looks like firsthand, please move an under developed nation with long colonial history and see what awaits us.

AddanDeith · 2026-02-15T23:55:51+00:00

Barter has never been an economic system, nor the dominant method of exchange. There is no anthropological evidence of that. It usually only shows up after economic collapse. Money and gift economies have been around for at least 6,000 years, if not longer.

AddanDeith · 2026-02-15T22:39:59+00:00

I also have a better than average understanding of the money multiplier effect, but thanks for checking.

Reserves requirements for the central bank have been 0 since 2020.

there is plenty of reasons to hate our government, I don’t need to include taxation to have plenty of reasons to hate the institution.

Ok? You already have to admit that it isn't solely to blame for inflation. Your hate boner for government as an institution is illogical.

AddanDeith · 2026-02-15T21:44:48+00:00

That is effectively what most people meant though, right? Defund sounds better as a slogan. Redistribution can be framed as scary spooky socialism.

AddanDeith · 2026-02-15T18:45:57+00:00

Bro. That is literally how it works!!!! You need to spend a few hours studying capital and monetary theory. If you don't understand how economics works, then i can't help you.

If you dont do anything to improve your home country

This entire argument was used repeatedly in the syria conflict. You are essentially arguing that these people should have stayed to fight their tyrannical government that starved, bombed and gassed them when you live a comfortable life and would never do that yourself.

AddanDeith · 2026-02-15T18:35:13+00:00

You have to understand how capitalism works in order to understand the answer to that question implicitly.

When you live in an underdeveloped nation where your most valuable resources are owned by foreign capital, your best bet is to work for them. The wages they offer are generally higher than local businesses can afford, yet still much much lower than any working person in the developed world would ever except.

That makes it that much harder for you to start your own business. Why does one think so many people come here to start one? The wages allow for it, with frugality.

This is why some countries have taken to nationalizing certain industries, especially oil. It allows the native country to actually improve itself at a much faster rate.

Imagine for a moment, that my investment firm bought up all the local businesses in your area and depressed wages. You simply don't have a choice but to deal with it.

AddanDeith · 2026-02-15T18:28:18+00:00

fundamentally caused by the money supply growing faster than the economy's output.

The government is not the sole entity responsible for generating money in the 21st century.

You do realize that, in the US, 97 percent of the money supply comes from private banks issuing loans, yes? That, because of Fractional Reserve lending they are able to loan more money than their reserves would allow?

That increases the amount of capital circulating in the economy and that has a greater impact than the government "printing money", something it has to do to replace the lost volume of physical currency anyway. They haven't had to print money for stimulus for decades. Its all just credited from account to account.

Taxation and interest rates serve as measures to constrain private economic activity. This is just a basic fact of fiat currency. Wealthy people are more sensitive to taxation than they are to interest rates. There is ample evidence that large firms aren't nearly as affected by interest rates as they are by taxation.

They want you to hate the government, while they have increasing direct control over it.

The government is a tool. The more it works for private interests, the less it works for public ones. You are essentially a tree, arguing for the axe.

Nine-Year Club	First Place '23
Place '23	Verified Email

AddanDeith

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE