On this week's Economic Update, Prof. Richard Wolff presents updates on Citibank says it favors the rich, French presidential elections, US college admissions favor the rich, injustice of US property tax system. In the second half of the show, Prof. Wolff is joined by Dr. Harriet Fraad who will talk about the economic and psychological causes of Trump's election and Trump's performance to date.
Showing 4 comments
I saw so many posts from people pretending to be Left wingers that spewed the hate of Obama in such a way that it seemed clear to me they were lying, they were playing a part. Democrats were turned off to voting and just did not show up – because they did not know there was manipulation and dirty tricks afoot. The lowest Democratic turnout of the century and even before. People lost the feeling that they were part of a citizenry and ended up thinking they were being mobbed. People gave into the mob.
I am not convinced about this. While I do feel their should be no difference at all in the rate of taxation of earned income and investment income and that the only difference should be in the marginal rate of taxation as a function of how much the taxpayer makes. That is I am a total believer in progressive taxes, and even in the maximum wage as was mentioned by Dr. Wolff here as well.
Let’s say I worked all my life and saved up a million dollars to retire on. What would be the rational for taxing the principle of that, assuming it was invested in some smart retirement way, the stock market, bonds. What is the reason the someone should have to pay taxes on the money they have in their wallet for example? I can think of a reason, but I’d like to know what Dr. Wolff thinks or said … maybe I missed something.
With taxing land, I think the assumption is that the value of land is always increasing, so taxing it is fair, and creates a sort of situation where land is leased from the citzenry, which I should be I think philosophically. No rich person for example should be able to buy up all land and take over the world.
But with savings … I can think of only 1 reason … and that would be if someone had to much money. The assumption should be that something went wrong with the country if some people have way too much money, that makes sense to me. He was talking maximum wage, so I assume this is like maximum bank account. What is the legal, economic and political backing for this idea?
I have heard of people talking about a one time surtax on wealth to pay off the deficit, which I think is a great idea. Any answers?
1. ‘Proposed cuts to WIC’ that subsidize healthy fruits and vegetables
2. ‘Child-care subsidy is not subsidized’ at all in America
3. ‘Cuts to Planned Parenthood’ which screen for cancer, PAP smears, STDs, etc…
4. ‘Cuts to domestic-violence programs and battered women shelters’ (1600 death/yr)
5. ‘Children who suffer domestic-violence’ will not receive treatment’