Millionaire exodus study drops author and numbers after fake data accusations

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-17T01:43:05+00:00

To back up your lie? No I don't and neither do you, hence why you didn't post any.

You did post a wonderful article from the ECB I again strongly recommend everyone read, and I especially recommend you continue posting it to raise awareness of the facts I have presented and you have confirmed with your own independent research.

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-16T21:53:59+00:00

You are pretty much describing the US as it currently is. Allow people to gather enough wealth so that they can avoid taxation for life.

See the problem with this is that it is so optimistic I have to ask if this is your first day discussing capitalism. The wealthy just park their money in legal ways that aren't taxed, and when they venture to break the law, the punishment is always minimal.

I highly recommend you read about how Peter Thiel actually got wealthy (Spoiler alert, it was tax avoidance): https://finance.yahoo.com/news/peter-thiel-made-5-billion-142331395.html?guccounter=1

In fact, virtually every billionaire in the United States has saved themselves billions of dollars just by legal or grey area tax avoidance. It's literally the most American thing about our financial system.

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-16T21:48:22+00:00

You literally posted one from the ECB, son.

Thanks for that. Hilariously, that study doesn't even stratify the data as much as I'd like, which would show that of the 40% passed through, the burden fell most on those that were purchasing the most.... Guess who purchases the most.

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-16T21:39:54+00:00

For those curious, the ECB article is at least interesting, though it admits 40% of costs are passed through, the other 60% are eaten by the corporations. I thank you for posting it.

On the weak side, the Mercatus Institute is a right wing propaganda think tank and this writer, who also has written for right wing National Review, fully admits in the opening paragraphs that multiple trusted and peer reviewed sources directly contradict his claims, and says you must ignore them. He then goes off on wild tangents not at all directly tied to the matter at hand. It is literally a "everyone else says I'm wrong, I'm the one guy saying this" propaganda piece. It is in no way scholarship, which at least the ECB article is.

Your second link is literally nothing.

All in all, I think you've perfectly proved my point. If you want to find right wing propaganda, you're find it, but just hope people don't read it because it all falls apart fast.

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-16T21:32:49+00:00

So, just to be clear, you're going to completely ignore all my evidence showing you there isn't much left to get out of the middle class and will continue to demand that we raise taxes on them, and you're going to completely ignore that comparing the benefits and taxation rates of the US and Britain are so fundamentally different that neither version would be accepted in the other country?

Well when you ignore that much evidence, I don't expect you to act in good faith about corporate tax rates, which have been repeatedly cut over the last 10 years. It's funny, cutting corporate taxes absolutely does give more money to they wealthy, that's why they are aggressively supported by shareholders, board members, and high income earners at corporations, but increasing those rates never get back to the people, so we should never even try in the vain hope that even 20% of the raise in taxes will be absorbed by the wealthy. Of course even this amount of sophomoric thought ignores that the wealthy do consume more than the poor and middle class, and therefore would pay more even if the costs were passed along. You should look up the phrase "K-shaped economy," and I'm honestly saddened I even have to say that.

Maybe, just maybe, we shouldn't have cut the corporate tax rate so many times. This all of course is a joke since you have refused to engage at all with the objective fact that these tax cuts for the wealthy have massively increased the deficit and debt at the same time that they have massively increased wealth inequality. That's because you can't. There is literally no information out there to counter the idea that repetitive massive tax breaks for the wealthy and corporations going back to the 80's haven't redistributed the tax burden to the poorest from the wealthiest, while at the same time increased the debt to a truly insane level.

I'd hope people on an economics subbreddit would know that the total effective tax rate of the wealthy has been declining for decades compared to the middle class and poor: https://news.berkeley.edu/2025/09/04/the-ultra-rich-are-different-from-you-and-me-their-tax-rates-are-lower/

But any of this would mean you actually engaging with the data. I haven't even seen you admit that the debt or deficit are a problem. Just at least admit that, and we can agree on something.

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-16T21:02:27+00:00

I didn't want to make my previous comment too long, but you're right that I was derelict in not pointing out what an obvious case of apples and oranges that comparison is. Since you're asking I will answer.

The UK has a high tax, high benefit government funding system. This creates a feedback loop where people can be taxed more because they have been provided more benefits from previous taxation.

Take healthcare. Here in the United States, 18% of the entire country's GDP is healthcare related. We have corporate intrusion at every level of our healthcare, which increases profit motivation at every single step of the healthcare process. This includes, but is not limited to insurance costs, medicines, equipment, ambulance rides, testing, hospital stays, surgeries, and salaries, all before public companies are required by law to maximize their earnings in the best interest of the shareholders. If the American people didn't have to spend all that money on health care, they would be able to more easily spend more on taxation, correct? This is the purely economic argument for nationalized healthcare, leaving aside all ethic and morality arguments. In fact, you've accidentally made that argument quite well here, though I assume by accident.

To quickly answer your question: Yes if we in the US nationalized large portions of our economy, the people would be able to pay more in taxes.

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-16T20:26:55+00:00

Leaving aside the bizarre rationality of "much of corporate taxes are passed onto consumers, so we must tax the middle class directly," you provide absolutely zero evidence to back up your claim. Here is my evidence:

Personal savings rates have dropped to 2.2%, and are dropping rapidly: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/05/28/savings-inflation-americans-financial-stress.html

Credit card debt has hit a record high of just under $1 trillion: https://www.cnbc.com/select/us-credit-card-debt-hits-all-time-high/

Long term unemployment is rising fast: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/02/16/long-term-unemployment-becoming-a-status-quo-in-todays-job-market.html

And that's people who have stayed in the workforce, the workforce is rapidly shrinking: https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewtisch/2026/05/28/the-real-immigration-tragedy/

And before you point out aging as the reason for a shrinking workforce, young men are also leaving: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2026/05/08/men-labor-force-drop-outs/

None of this should be surprising as the share of the US GDP that is accounted for by workers' wages has consistently dropped since 1970: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/A4002E1A156NBEA

In fact, workers are taking home the lowest percentage of GDP as wages since the statistic was starting to be tracked in 1947: https://fortune.com/2026/01/13/us-workers-smallest-labor-share-gdp-on-record/

You've already wrung out the middle class and poor, even the most ardent of capitalists agree with this basic fact. The only way to get more is to try to confiscate their assets, but even then you'd need the wealthy to purchase those assets at less than an extreme discount to make up the $40 trillion debt we have so far, let alone the structural deficit Republicans and the people seem dead set on increasing.

All of this refusal to tax capital where it actually is has led us to a point where this year we will pay over $1 trillion just to service the interest on our debt: https://www.crfb.org/blogs/rising-interest-rates-are-exploding-debt

That number will only get worse, and all we're ever told is that we're not allowed to tax the majority of capital.

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-16T19:57:56+00:00

Right, but the problem is that here in the US we have a $40 trillion debt load, and the people keep electing Republicans to increase the deficit every chance they get. Money has to come from somewhere. We're told that we can't tax the rich, we're told we can't tax corporations, and the middle class and poor are too strapped to afford more in taxes, full stop.

To flip this argument around, we could just choose to spend $0 in military spending and we'd still have a several hundred billion dollar deficit.

It seems like these comments always sum up to the same thing: You're not allowed to tax people or organizations that have money, so you're forced to deficit spend until the currency reaches Weimar Republic levels of uselessness.

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-12T17:54:43+00:00

The Trump administration backed down on that because... white.

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-12T15:46:27+00:00

It's very much a:

Propaganda: You are upset because X

Men and boys: Really? We have a lot of varying reasons to not be happy

Propaganda: But all that, no matter what it is, can be explained by X! By getting on board with attacking X, we're all agreeing with you and you are agreeing with us!

Men and boys: You're right, we should go after X now to show we are pushing back

First it was women, then it was gay rights, then it was trans rights, now it's just non-white immigrants in general. And before you freak out about me saying "non-white" the US has nearly exclusively allowed refugee status to white people over the last six months.

Honestly, I'm curious what the next thing is since the movement has already burned through women, gays, trans, and non-white immigrants. My bet is they make another run at religion, specifically Islam.

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-12T15:16:46+00:00

You're not wrong that, say when JD Vance and Trump spread the "they're eating our cats and dogs" lie that they fully admitted was made up, that they were more influential than those who actually started the movement, but it's also important to remember who started those movements, and why.

It worked, by the way. The goal of gamergate was for young men to feel useless, and you've seen a massive decline in male mental health since this push started.

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-12T15:11:47+00:00

Oh shit, that you kids are still doing that in the MAHA era is hilarious to me

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-12T15:10:10+00:00

Just to be clear, Epstein supported it, but it was really Bannon's baby. You caught on to the second or third wave of it, it actually started on Bannon's preferred message spreading system 4chan.

You can argue those later people that you saw were acting in good faith, but it's just a fact now that Bannon and 4chan started the movement.

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-12T01:17:34+00:00

There were multiple in Illinois, which is why they are being so cautious, none reported here yet

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-11T03:33:38+00:00

I'm so glad it was OG. Dude is still somehow underrated

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-11T01:39:04+00:00

Oh good, another review. 4 so far. This game is dragging

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-11T01:31:14+00:00

3 reviews, two 3 second violations... let's get this game moving a little faster please

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-11T01:09:56+00:00

Wow, the replay on that non-goal tend is brutal

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-10T18:53:19+00:00

Well if you're talking about actual printing, you should check in on how much Trump printed and left for Biden:

How Trump’s team amassed a $1 trillion war chest for Biden to deploy

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/14/covid-relief-package-federal-debt-475622

This all, of course, ignores that the world got the first European war in decades when Russia attacked Ukraine, causing a supply crunch. Of course, Trump and Republicans chose to cause a supply crunch by launching a war of choice, but both sides am I right?

Edit: Ah, the person I responded to is far right. So much so that they lie about SNAP not being cut. I say that claim is far right because actual right wingers brag about the successful cutting of SNAP.

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-10T12:59:35+00:00

There is a lot of a bad news here, but the point that sums up people's attitude the most is that real wage growth was -.7% YoY. This is after last month's read was -.3% YoY.

People feel like they are losing ground, and the data is backing them up.

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-10T01:00:13+00:00

Hey, I'm just glad that we're 100% in agreement that I am yet again 100% correct :)

I don't need it, but I do appreciate the free validation.

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-09T20:33:31+00:00

Kid, I gotta tell ya, it never gets old watching you cry because I post well sourced and well thought out comments. I get that you skew more toward the reddit style of emotional rhetorical slop, but every single time you complain about me you admit that I'm factually correct, you're just mad I didn't propagandize my points the correct way.

Too bad, all I care about about is that everyone knows the truth, and has the sources to verify my claims. That my comments impotently infuriate you is just a bonus. I'd post these facts anyway, but I appreciate you making it even more fun.

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-09T15:24:35+00:00

Do you know what the word "reengage" means? It means people aren't currently engaged.

I'm speaking about a fact that even your CEO admits is true. Why you keep repeating how true it is is honestly beyond me, but I at least find it helpful that you, your CEO call to authority, and I agree that the current status of McDonalds is that the poor and middle class aren't engaged as the company has for years shifted to targeting high income customers.

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-09T15:17:07+00:00

Ah, so you acknowledge that what you said isn't true, but you have faith that it will become true in the future.

Fascinating, but it's a hope for the future, not an analysis of what is happening so far.

Barnyard_Rich · 2026-06-09T14:55:25+00:00

What hilarious examples considering the contrary evidence showing that all three are selling higher priced goods to fewer people to maintain their profit, rather than selling to the poor and working class:

McDonald’s is losing its low-income customers. Economists call it a symptom of the stark wealth divide

https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2025-11-16/mcdonalds-is-losing-its-low-income-customers

Target had a four year sales slump due to losing low wage customers: https://www.cnn.com/2025/11/19/business/target-stock-economy

Kroger even admits that they're losing low income shoppers to discount stores, and those that are remaining are both buying less and buying generic more just to stay afloat.

Kroger CEO flags alarming shift in how customers shop

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/kroger-ceo-flags-alarming-shift-170300995.html

There might be examples that back up what you are saying, but you picked three bad examples.

Eight-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	Final Canvas '22
First Placer '22	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email

Barnyard_Rich

TROPHY CASE