No, we should be taxing their pants off.
There should be no ruling class.
this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2026
17 points (66.0% liked)
News
36063 readers
3018 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
They don't even post the bootlicker author's info. Even if this was AI, a human still decided to publish this propaganda. It would be nice to have a public record for accountability.
Say what you will about the Economist; at least they're consistent in their "will nobody think of the rich?" point of view.
Fuck the economist
Wealth caps, now! Nobody should be worth over 1 million
You clearly don't understand what it costs to fund even a modest retirement.
Cap wealth at a level that, if annuitized, will generate a revenue stream that's a small multiple of median earnings. And make inheritance tax steeply progressive. That'll prevent people from hoarding money to the point at which they can distort the political process, and will also reduce unearned wealth that comes to people because of who their parents happened to be.
Useful idiot consumerist detected.
You're part of the problem.
So, creating structures to send more money upwards is fine, just don't seek out anything to reverse that trend? I think whoever wrote this think piece needs to go fuck themselves.
Nobody wrote this...
I sympathize, but respectfully disagree. Whoever wrote this should get fucked by an angry mob hellbent on vengence.
Not only do the rich not pay enough taxes, they are the greatest beneficiaries of taxpayer funded programs like SNAP since it allows them to underpay their employees. So we basically subsidize their gains.
They're also the ones responsible for why everything is so expensive to begin with.
Don't go after the rich
That's rich.
Booming stockmarkets, meanwhile, have reinforced the idea that inequality is too high
Oookay couldn't take the article seriously after reading that.
Lol, I couldn't get past the headline.
Please don't tax the rich people, it's the fault of poor old people you see and bad budgets.
Fuck off.
Please don't go after Smaug! He's so misunderstood and taking a bit of gold from his gigantic pile will fix nothing.
Just go mine more gold, or maybe mithril from the Mines of Moria. Nevermind the rumors of orcs or a Balrog!
The economist's credibility problems were always bad, but they went super sketchy over the last 10 years. I used to enjoy reading them. Now it's just a clown show of billionaire penis polishers. They don't even pretend to have objectivity anymore.
They are desperate, and its going to get a lot worse.
The Economist is weird, since there's a huge gap between their journalism, which is generally of a very good standard (especially for non-UK news), and their opinion section, which consistently parrots whatever idiocy the Conservative Party is currently spouting, though they do bleat a little when the Tories get too authoritarian (which, especially since Thatcher, they usually do).
You can smell the desperation.
The things, nobody else can get taxed to fix the budget, and nobody is going to cut anything like the military aid for Israel.
Knob gobblers.
Even if we try to tax the Epstein class income, the tax system is still designed to be rigged by them. They take out loans on their stocks to avoid paying taxes. And captialism is still designed for "number line go up"
We need to vote for representatives that represent us instead of our rulers.
We're too stupid to do that which is why things never improve for us.
if we try to tax the Epstein class income
Disagrees with
the tax system is still designed to be rigged by them
Defeatism is not a desirable trait.
No but tearing down the system is
Not just taxes, I want wealth caps
Nobody should have a networth over 1 million
Net worth of over a million? That's way too low, sorry. If you buy even one house and pay it off, you are practically in that territory now.
I'd be fine with a cap of one billion, adjusted for inflation every year.
I'd go with half a billion, just to be sure nobody gets near a billion.
Inflation is calling. They wanted to let you know that a very very modest homeowner in an unfashionable part of town in many cities around the world, is over 1 million. The people squeeking by aren't the problem. Aim higher.
Oh no, how will people survive with a net worth of only $1 million????
What's your net worth, by the way?
If you inherited your house from your parents, you could be penniless and have a net worth over $1 million.
$1 million is an arbitrary number and is not what it used to be, even 5 years ago. Even if you count everyone with $5 million net worth on one side and everyone over that on the other, the over $5 million side still owns most of the global economy.
The guy doing well in the next neighborhood over has essentially nothing to do with the wealth gap and resulting economic stagflation. The people with "too much" money have so much of it that it evades human comprehension.
So... sell the house and you have $1 million to buy a more modest place to live and you will still have hundreds of thousands of dollars left over.
Everyone who says a net worth of $1 million isn't enough should look at their own net worth before sucking off people who have more.
You need to travel more and see the world. I mean this with no offense intended, but you comment smacks of naivety. Context matters.
"A more modest place". I bought one of the smallest, shittiest oldest places in the unfashionable sectors of my city and it hit a mil 15 years ago. There is nothing shittier. To get cheaper I have to leave the city altogether where my profession doesn't exist. Your war is not against "homeowners". We should aspire to raise everyone up and out of precarity, not shoot everyone who is not poor.
I'm priceless. ;)
Always a laugh seeing suckers get taken for a ride.
You don't get invited to parties very often do you? This is why.
Lol, keep being wrong.
I completely agree.
Everyone saying $1 million isn't enough should consider how many people go their entire lives without making anywhere near a million dollars.
We should be helping those who have less before those who have more.
It's not as if the rich became rich in a vacuum and then appeared in society. They used society to get rich, and the money came from literally everyone else in that society - everyone who struggles to make ends meet is struggling because the rich are hoarding their share of the money.
They're hoarding our share of the money.
The premise that the people want to go after the rich 'to fix broken budgets' is absurd. The rich must pay their fair share. Separately many budgets can be improved, but saying one is only sought to do the other is wrong
Both the standard of living in a society and the rate of innovation are strongly positively correlated with the progressivity of the tax system. Yet we should believe the author's unsourced "research" that supposedly proves having wealthy people live in slightly smaller mansions will dampen innovation somehow. Horseshit. Both the Netherlands and Switzerland, countries that are more prosperous and more innovative than the US, have wealth taxes (albeit not very high ones) and far more progressive income tax brackets as well (albeit not at Nordic levels).
Why not have the 1950s once more?
Only pining for the structural racism and sexism and so on is okay, pining for the tax system of the 1950s is "fringe" territory, I guess.
I have a theory that this decline of America began with the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That's when America started really being for "everyone" and not just white people. White people got upset they couldn't bully minorities any more, and Republicans preyed upon that vitriol to get half of the country to vote for representatives that only serve the ruling class.
Add in no fault divorce and women owning property and being able to have a banking account, The Pill and access to abortion (what the cons call "on demand" which they think is a real slam but is really telling on themselves), is something that really drives a lot of conservatives crazy. Most of those things happened in the 70s.
Some of them definitely want to roll all of that back. They say so. They already did a body blow on abortion, that's for sure.
view more: next ›