Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by doodle » Fri Aug 28, 2020 12:14 am

glennds wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 12:05 am
doodle wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 11:58 pm
At the end of the day we have devised a world system where 1% of the population has the same amount of wealth as the lower 99%....at what point does this need to be perhaps reconsidered? Is there any point where we sit down and think that maybe the rules we have devised for our game perhaps don't lead to the best outcomes?
I'd say it's the immutable law that every good idea can be taken to the point of absurdity.
The corollary being that anything, and I mean anything becomes bad when taken out of moderation.
Another corollary that I used to hear a lot in the health insurance industry; even the best ideas only work temporarily.

But like you say, any suggestion of even the smallest ratcheting in the other direction is met with howling, terrifying visions of a totalitarian, Marxist, communist, bolshevik wild ride straight into the ninth circle of Dante's Inferno.
Exactly, which is odd given how many healthy functioning Western democratic socialist examples exist...even in the United States social security and Medicare are quite popular programs...ironically Republicans frequently tout their defense of these systems which is a total mind Fu** for me.....how much more of a leap would some basic form of universal health insurance be?
User avatar
Ad Orientem
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3483
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 2:47 pm
Location: Florida USA
Contact:

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by Ad Orientem » Fri Aug 28, 2020 12:26 am

doodle wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 11:52 pm
glennds wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 11:46 pm
Ad Orientem wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 9:03 pm
FWIW that's $200,000,000,000.00...

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/26/amazon- ... llion.html
On the one hand.... good for him. He has proven to be a remarkable combination of a visionary with ability to execute. And the market has rewarded him with what it has determined the value of his enterprise to be. He didn't set the price.

On the other hand.... when we reach a point where three individuals can possess the equivalent wealth of the entire lower 50% of the country, roughly 165 million people, then there is a wealth imbalance so extreme that it ought to be a societal stability red flag. looking back in history I'm not sure how many democracies have survived past a certain point of disparity between haves/have nots. We might not be there yet, but we're on the way IMO.
Perhaps I'm echoing doodle's comment above.
Especially in a 'democracy' where the Supreme Court has ruled that money is speech. I'd classify the United States today as an oligarchy.

I think that's a fair statement. And I say that as someone whose views are probably well to the right of most on this forum. But I am also a historian by academic training. And I would caution those who heap scorn on words like "fairness." I am no egalitarian but extreme disparities in wealth have historically lead to social destabilization. The guillotine and the gulags did not emerge from a vacuum. They were the end result of that kind of shallow contempt for basic standards of decency by the ruling class.
Last edited by Ad Orientem on Fri Aug 28, 2020 1:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
glennds
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1265
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:24 am

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by glennds » Fri Aug 28, 2020 12:33 am

doodle wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 12:14 am
glennds wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 12:05 am
doodle wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 11:58 pm
At the end of the day we have devised a world system where 1% of the population has the same amount of wealth as the lower 99%....at what point does this need to be perhaps reconsidered? Is there any point where we sit down and think that maybe the rules we have devised for our game perhaps don't lead to the best outcomes?
I'd say it's the immutable law that every good idea can be taken to the point of absurdity.
The corollary being that anything, and I mean anything becomes bad when taken out of moderation.
Another corollary that I used to hear a lot in the health insurance industry; even the best ideas only work temporarily.

But like you say, any suggestion of even the smallest ratcheting in the other direction is met with howling, terrifying visions of a totalitarian, Marxist, communist, bolshevik wild ride straight into the ninth circle of Dante's Inferno.
Exactly, which is odd given how many healthy functioning Western democratic socialist examples exist...even in the United States social security and Medicare are quite popular programs...ironically Republicans frequently tout their defense of these systems which is a total mind Fu** for me.....how much more of a leap would some basic form of universal health insurance be?
The other mind bender is if you look at the publicly available info on the highest bracket tax rates in the countries that might be considered democratic socialist. Among the ones with universal health care (Canada, Germany, France, even Scandanavian countries), the tax rates are not really that much higher than ours, especially if you live in a state with comparatively moderate state income tax. I hear people talking about how health care will take our taxes up to 80% or some such ridiculous number. But we already have Medicare and Medicaid now, so we'd be adding the large missing increment, but an increment nonetheless. I would estimate it would move our tax rates less than most assume, and surely there would be offsetting savings to employers who would otherwise be paying premiums. And we know from actuarial science that the larger the group, the more efficient the risk pool, and the more efficiency due to elimination of redundant administration.

The best thing about universal healthcare, there will finally be a mechanism for a focus on prevention and wellness. Right now the emphasis on prevention is a joke. I have had two commercial insurers (United Healthcare and Cigna) tell me that the reason is because no private insurer wants to provide benefits to an insured that will take years to show results and most likely accrue to their competitor when the insured eventually switches carriers. Only you care about your long term wellness, or a payor who is invested in you for life.

The best way to reduce health care cost is to reduce utilization. The best way to reduce utilization is to emphasize wellness and prevention, the earlier the better. Right now there's no incentive to do so except for some insureds. And the insured has no say in anything.
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by Kriegsspiel » Fri Aug 28, 2020 5:41 am

I don't like the idea of taxing away someone's net worth or income. I think some kind of general VAT/sales/excise tax it isn't a bad idea.
You there, Ephialtes. May you live forever.
User avatar
Maddy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1694
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 8:43 am

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by Maddy » Fri Aug 28, 2020 6:51 am

Would it be so hard for the 99 percent, if they really cared, to stop buying from Amazon? Problem solved.
User avatar
drumminj
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 319
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2015 9:16 pm

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by drumminj » Fri Aug 28, 2020 7:04 am

Maddy wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 6:51 am
Would it be so hard for the 99 percent, if they really cared, to stop buying from Amazon? Problem solved.
Exactly.

IMO it's consumers who killed all the small-town, mom-and-pop stores, as they chose to stop spending money there. The market "spoke". Jeff Bezos and Sam Walton didn't do that.

Whether the current mega-companies are good for society is a different discussion, but I don't see how one can blame Bezos for building a successful company that people want and choose to do business with instead of their local merchants.
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by doodle » Fri Aug 28, 2020 7:53 am

Maddy wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 6:51 am
Would it be so hard for the 99 percent, if they really cared, to stop buying from Amazon? Problem solved.
It's another example of a well known economic concept called tragedy of the commons. This particular issue stemming from the negative cumulative effects of rational individual choices needs to be addressed in our capitalist system through policy. Extreme adherence to the principle of individual choice when we know for a fact that this has unintended negative outcomes isn't much of a realistic policy prescription unless one favors long term negative outcomes for the whole of society.
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by doodle » Fri Aug 28, 2020 8:04 am

Kriegsspiel wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 5:41 am
I don't like the idea of taxing away someone's net worth or income. I think some kind of general VAT/sales/excise tax it isn't a bad idea.
I agree, wealth tax has been shown to be largely ineffective. Taxing income...well that is pretty common. I'm not sure of the mechanism by which one goes about bring our economic system back into balance between labor and capital and address the extreme disparity. I think it would help if workers representatives had seats on corporate boards as they are mandated in Germany for all larger corporations...perhaps it would result in some moderation of the extreme disparity between CEOs and labor.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codet ... n_Germany

I don't think it's a radical idea that workers should have a place at the table concerning decisions for how the companies they spend their lives at are run...how stock is issued, and to whom. Right now these decisions are all incestually concentrated amongst a small class of people which seems pretty undemocratic to me.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4393
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by Xan » Fri Aug 28, 2020 8:35 am

doodle wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 11:15 pm
Xan wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 11:05 pm
Doodle, do you have a citation for your "no taxes" statement? Just looking to get some more precision on what we're talking about.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.c ... -year.html
I thought it might be something like this. The article is about Amazon, not Jeff Bezos. And its questionable validity aside, it has zero to do with Jeff Bezos's personal taxes. This is an even deeper misunderstanding (earned income vs capital gains) than Mark thought you were making.

Bezos definitely pays taxes whenever he wants to exchange his valuable Amazon shares for cash. Probably more in a year than any of us will in a lifetime. It's completely disingenuous to claim Bezos pays no taxes.

That's not to say that you don't have some good points, or that concentration of wealth isn't an issue.
User avatar
shekels
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 520
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:01 am

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by shekels » Fri Aug 28, 2020 10:09 am

Xan wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 8:35 am
doodle wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 11:15 pm
Xan wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 11:05 pm
Doodle, do you have a citation for your "no taxes" statement? Just looking to get some more precision on what we're talking about.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.c ... -year.html
I thought it might be something like this. The article is about Amazon, not Jeff Bezos. And its questionable validity aside, it has zero to do with Jeff Bezos's personal taxes. This is an even deeper misunderstanding (earned income vs capital gains) than Mark thought you were making.

Bezos definitely pays taxes whenever he wants to exchange his valuable Amazon shares for cash. Probably more in a year than any of us will in a lifetime. It's completely disingenuous to claim Bezos pays no taxes.

That's not to say that you don't have some good points, or that concentration of wealth isn't an issue.
Concentration of wealth is not as big of an issue when Individuals can feed and house ourselves, and living the Good Life.

As AD points out " I am no egalitarian but extreme disparities in wealth have historically lead to social destabilization."

In a System that does not Enforce it's own Laws, and given the Continuing Theft and Class Warfare the system breaks down.

It becomes a fight for Power/Control .
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
D1984
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 730
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 7:23 pm

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by D1984 » Fri Aug 28, 2020 10:41 am

Xan wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 8:35 am
doodle wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 11:15 pm
Xan wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 11:05 pm
Doodle, do you have a citation for your "no taxes" statement? Just looking to get some more precision on what we're talking about.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.c ... -year.html
I thought it might be something like this. The article is about Amazon, not Jeff Bezos. And its questionable validity aside, it has zero to do with Jeff Bezos's personal taxes. This is an even deeper misunderstanding (earned income vs capital gains) than Mark thought you were making.

Bezos definitely pays taxes whenever he wants to exchange his valuable Amazon shares for cash. Probably more in a year than any of us will in a lifetime. It's completely disingenuous to claim Bezos pays no taxes.

That's not to say that you don't have some good points, or that concentration of wealth isn't an issue.
That would depend on whether he has good smart tax advisers or not; I presume someone with his level of wealth (or even one one-thousandth his level of wealth) isn't just using whatever accountant is available at the local H&R Block. The fact of the matter is that once you get to several tens of millions of dollars of assets or more, there are plenty of ways to monetize appreciated assets (or at least do a transaction that would accomplish most/all of what a sale would without actually incurring any immediate capital gains taxes) and not pay current capital gains taxes. Some of these include:

1. Long/short transactions, option collars, put call/spreads, other techniques that use various options or derivatives or hedged market neutral positions to essentially sell a stock without actually selling it (and thus without actually incurring capital gains taxes); Congress and/or the IRS put the kibosh on certain types of these transactions (like long-term "short-against-the-box" transactions, long-term ultra-deep ITM call options that were by all rights a sale in substance even if not de facto, and option collars that literally left almost no upside gain nor downside risk and thus violated the spirit of the whole "not really a sale" thing even though they were technically not a violation of the letter of the law) in the late 90s and early 2000s but transactions that aren't quite as flagrantly a constructive sale in substance are still legal; IIRC a Mr. Robert Gordon at Twenty First Century Securities (a firm that specializes in transactions like this; Mr. Gordon is its principal and main shareholder) has stated that as long as at least 15% to 20% of the "benefit and burden" is left for the owner of the stock (i.e. at least that much potential price upside---and downside) then even for long-dated option transactions and long/short spreads the owner of the stock would still likely prevail if he/she gets audited and/or the matter ends up in Tax Court.

2. CRTs (aka CRUTs and CRATs); the owner of the stock contributes it to an irrevocable charitable remainder trust and not only does the trust not incur capital gains taxes wen it sells the asset but the owner also gets an upfront tax deduction. The trust will then take the proceeds of the sale, invest it in a diversified portfolio of assets, and use this to pay the former owner/s of the appreciated an income for the rest of his/her life (and the rest of another person's life as well if it's a joint trust) and whatever is left at his/her/their passing goes on to charity. The income from the trust IS taxable to the person receiving it but the major upfront hit--having to pay cap gains taxes on hugely appreciated assets with a basis of almost zero--is avoided, plus the donor gets an upfront tax deduction; plus, if the owner had sold the appreciated asset/s and then invested it to produce income he still would've had to pay taxes on that investment income stream every year anyway. The trick is to structure the trust so that the bare minimum of assets is left to charity and almost all of it instead is paid out to the trust's income beneficiaries; the IRS obviously has rules (based on interest rates, life expectancy, etc...in other words, it is likely impossible to set up a CRT that over time gives you everything back as income and leaves nothing or almost nothing for the charity) governing how much can be paid out but as long as you stay within those rules there is nothing they can do to stop you.

3. Simply borrowing against the stock/other appreciated asset and capitalizing the interest (i.e. letting the interest accrue each year rather than paying it off); as long as the asset appreciates at a faster rate than the loan interest (and the loan interest will be barely over the T-bill rate plus maybe a half or a third percent or so) and/or so long as the borrowed amount in question is a tiny amount to begin with versus the total value of the assets (for instance, say Jeff Bezos borrows $1 billion against his $200 billion of Amazon stock; the chance of the accrued loan interest EVER being more than the value of Amazon stock--even if Amazon stock falls 80 or 90%--is somewhere between "almost never" and "when Hell freezes over" ) then no assets ever need be sold to pay off the loan. When the borrower finally passes away the assets get "stepped up" in basis to whatever they were worth the minute he/she drew their last breath and the heirs thus get an asset with no capital gains taxes due upon sale even if the original (now deceased) owner's basis was only one billionth of what the stock is now worth. This "borrow against your assets instead of selling" is used by many UHNWIs; probably the most famous example is Mark Zuckerberg.

4. If the owner of a massively appreciated low-basis asset wants to sell it but only to diversify his/her holdings (rather than to immediately realize cash to fund his/her current lifestyle) then there is a financial instrument called a "swap fund" or an "exchange fund" that in practice lets the owner of said appreciated assets do something like a 1031 exchange but for stocks/bonds/gold/privately held or closely held companies/etc rather than only for land or real estate. If the owner holds the shares of the exchange fund that he received in return for his appreciated asset for a given time period (IIRC it is seven years) then no capital gains taxes are due until/if he actually sells the underlying assets in the partnership share of the exchange fund that he received.

There are several more advanced tactics but these are just some of the more common and less sophisticated ones

With all of the above said, I admit I have no idea if Mr. Bezos uses any of these tactics/strategies (or similar ones) or not.....I just wanted to point out that it is something of a myth that centimillionaire, billionaire, and multibillionaire owners of highly appreciated assets always have to pay capital gains taxes just like the rest of us; when you get rich enough there are sophisticated strategies that can and do (quite legally under current law) minimize the amount of taxes you have to pay.
glennds
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1265
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:24 am

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by glennds » Fri Aug 28, 2020 11:21 am

shekels wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 10:09 am


It becomes a fight for Power/Control .
Or in some historical cases, survival.
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by doodle » Fri Aug 28, 2020 12:01 pm

MangoMan wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 11:14 am
doodle wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 7:53 am
Maddy wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 6:51 am
Would it be so hard for the 99 percent, if they really cared, to stop buying from Amazon? Problem solved.
It's another example of a well known economic concept called tragedy of the commons. This particular issue stemming from the negative cumulative effects of rational individual choices needs to be addressed in our capitalist system through policy. Extreme adherence to the principle of individual choice when we know for a fact that this has unintended negative outcomes isn't much of a realistic policy prescription unless one favors long term negative outcomes for the whole of society.
You are contradicting yourself. If it is a capitalist society, and you want innovation which in turn provides jobs and stimulation to the economy, there has to be incentive to take risks with time and capital. Negative outcomes to some, positive outcomes to others. Jobs, jobs, jobs. Jobs at Amazon, at FedEx or UPS that deliver packages, at the oil companies that make the gasoline that the trucks run on,at the truck manufacturers that make the vehicles used to deliver, etc.
Not understanding contradiction....tragedy of commons is well known and proven phenomenon. When individuals make rational decisions in their own best interests the cumulative effect of these individual decisions could have net negative outcomes for these same individuals. Amazon is great for consumers,...but we aren't just consumers, we are workers and citizens who generally like active vibrant communities. In the case of the latter our individual decisions as consumers have a net negative effect on other things we value....hence tragedy commons.
User avatar
shekels
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 520
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:01 am

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by shekels » Fri Aug 28, 2020 12:34 pm

glennds wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 11:21 am
shekels wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 10:09 am


It becomes a fight for Power/Control .
Or in some historical cases, survival.
True.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4959
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by Mountaineer » Fri Aug 28, 2020 12:47 pm

Re. the thread title - good for him. He won't be taking it with him when he croaks, so what do you think will become of his money/investments/assets then? Plowed back into the economy or coverted to gold and hoarded? Or something else? Or maybe given to Iran (at least it would be his to give and not the taxpayers).
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
User avatar
Ad Orientem
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3483
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 2:47 pm
Location: Florida USA
Contact:

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by Ad Orientem » Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:05 pm

Mountaineer wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 12:47 pm
Re. the thread title - good for him. He won't be taking it with him when he croaks, so what do you think will become of his money/investments/assets then? Plowed back into the economy or coverted to gold and hoarded? Or something else? Or maybe given to Iran (at least it would be his to give and not the taxpayers).

Rem acu tetigisti. I am not so concerned with Mr. Bezos having earned a staggering fortune, provided he is paying his fair share in taxes (which is highly unlikely but we will set that aside for the moment). Broadly speaking though he earned the money and once he's paid his taxes what he does with it is his business. What alarms me is what happens to his fortune, and other similar ones, after he dies. The great threat to democracy and society doesn't come from people like Bezos who work hard, build a better mousetrap, and reap the rewards. It comes from the succeeding generations, that in most cases do little or nothing to earn the money but become staggeringly wealthy by virtue of winning the genealogical lottery. Vast inherited dynastic fortunes that simply accumulate and snowball generation after generation are the great threat. Sanders is wrong in his desire for a wealth tax which in addition to be grossly unfair, is also unconstitutional on its face. But I have no sympathy for the children of plutocrats. The traditional policy to prevent these obscene hereditary fortunes has been the death tax, which is both eminently fair and constitutional. Alas, anti-tax fanatics have succeeded in demonizing it.

IMO the estate tax should be left as is up to $100 million. Every dollar above that should be taxed at 50% and every dollar above $1 billion should be taxed at 75%. Even then my guess is Bezos' kids will not wind up on public relief.
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by doodle » Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:13 pm

Ad Orientem wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:05 pm
Mountaineer wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 12:47 pm
Re. the thread title - good for him. He won't be taking it with him when he croaks, so what do you think will become of his money/investments/assets then? Plowed back into the economy or coverted to gold and hoarded? Or something else? Or maybe given to Iran (at least it would be his to give and not the taxpayers).

Rem acu tetigisti. I am not so concerned with Mr. Bezos having earned a staggering fortune, provided he is paying his fair share in taxes (which is highly unlikely but we will set that aside for the moment). >:D Broadly speaking though he earned the money and once he's paid his taxes what he does with it is his business. What alarms me is what happens to his fortune, and other similar ones, after he dies. The great threat to democracy and society doesn't come from people like Bezos who work hard, build a better mousetrap, and reap the rewards. It comes from the succeeding generations, that in most cases do little or nothing to earn the money but become staggeringly wealthy by virtue of winning the genealogical lottery. Vast inherited dynastic fortunes that simply accumulate and snowball generation after generation are the great threat. Sanders is wrong in his desire for a wealth tax which in addition to be grossly unfair, is also unconstitutional on its face. But I have no sympathy for the children of plutocrats. The traditional policy to prevent these obscene hereditary fortunes has been the death tax, which is both eminently fair and constitutional. Alas, anti-tax fanatics have succeeded in demonizing it.

IMO the estate tax should be left as is up to $100 million. Every dollar above that should be taxed at 50% and every dollar above $1 billion should be taxed at 75%. Even then my guess is Bezos' kids will not wind up on public relief.
What if what he does with it is use it buy political persuasion to further personal gain...perhaps rewrite sections of tax code to own benefit? Laws limiting workers unions, labor laws, anti trust legislation, corporate liability, etc. Etc....if money is speech and 3 individuals hold the same wealth as bottom 50 percent of our society I am concerned what he spends his money on.
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by doodle » Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:19 pm

I find it a bit ironic how mountaineer so strongly defends these wealthy oligarchs considering his love of Jesus and how the Bible handles the topic of wealth.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4393
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by Xan » Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:24 pm

doodle wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:19 pm
I find it a bit ironic how mountaineer so strongly defends these wealthy oligarchs considering his love of Jesus and how the Bible handles the topic of wealth.
It is much harsher on covetousness than it is of wealth. And never does it give any quarter to the idea that it's okay to take wealth from somebody by force (quite the opposite), only that it should be given voluntarily.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4393
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by Xan » Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:27 pm

Ad Orientem wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:05 pm
Mountaineer wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 12:47 pm
Re. the thread title - good for him. He won't be taking it with him when he croaks, so what do you think will become of his money/investments/assets then? Plowed back into the economy or coverted to gold and hoarded? Or something else? Or maybe given to Iran (at least it would be his to give and not the taxpayers).

Rem acu tetigisti. I am not so concerned with Mr. Bezos having earned a staggering fortune, provided he is paying his fair share in taxes (which is highly unlikely but we will set that aside for the moment). Broadly speaking though he earned the money and once he's paid his taxes what he does with it is his business. What alarms me is what happens to his fortune, and other similar ones, after he dies. The great threat to democracy and society doesn't come from people like Bezos who work hard, build a better mousetrap, and reap the rewards. It comes from the succeeding generations, that in most cases do little or nothing to earn the money but become staggeringly wealthy by virtue of winning the genealogical lottery. Vast inherited dynastic fortunes that simply accumulate and snowball generation after generation are the great threat. Sanders is wrong in his desire for a wealth tax which in addition to be grossly unfair, is also unconstitutional on its face. But I have no sympathy for the children of plutocrats. The traditional policy to prevent these obscene hereditary fortunes has been the death tax, which is both eminently fair and constitutional. Alas, anti-tax fanatics have succeeded in demonizing it.

IMO the estate tax should be left as is up to $100 million. Every dollar above that should be taxed at 50% and every dollar above $1 billion should be taxed at 75%. Even then my guess is Bezos' kids will not wind up on public relief.
I certainly have some sympathy for what you're saying, although I don't see how this opinion can come from a monarchist. Would the royal lineage be exempt from your death tax?

In any case: maybe you can make a point that society would be better off if ne'er-do-wells could not inherit vast fortunes. But here's the big problem as I see it: who DOES get to inherit the vast fortune? Is the government a better heir than a child? I don't know that it is. Or maybe the point of your confiscatory death tax is to drive people to give their wealth to charity?
User avatar
Ad Orientem
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3483
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 2:47 pm
Location: Florida USA
Contact:

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by Ad Orientem » Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:28 pm

doodle wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:13 pm
Ad Orientem wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:05 pm
Mountaineer wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 12:47 pm
Re. the thread title - good for him. He won't be taking it with him when he croaks, so what do you think will become of his money/investments/assets then? Plowed back into the economy or coverted to gold and hoarded? Or something else? Or maybe given to Iran (at least it would be his to give and not the taxpayers).

Rem acu tetigisti. I am not so concerned with Mr. Bezos having earned a staggering fortune, provided he is paying his fair share in taxes (which is highly unlikely but we will set that aside for the moment). >:D Broadly speaking though he earned the money and once he's paid his taxes what he does with it is his business. What alarms me is what happens to his fortune, and other similar ones, after he dies. The great threat to democracy and society doesn't come from people like Bezos who work hard, build a better mousetrap, and reap the rewards. It comes from the succeeding generations, that in most cases do little or nothing to earn the money but become staggeringly wealthy by virtue of winning the genealogical lottery. Vast inherited dynastic fortunes that simply accumulate and snowball generation after generation are the great threat. Sanders is wrong in his desire for a wealth tax which in addition to be grossly unfair, is also unconstitutional on its face. But I have no sympathy for the children of plutocrats. The traditional policy to prevent these obscene hereditary fortunes has been the death tax, which is both eminently fair and constitutional. Alas, anti-tax fanatics have succeeded in demonizing it.

IMO the estate tax should be left as is up to $100 million. Every dollar above that should be taxed at 50% and every dollar above $1 billion should be taxed at 75%. Even then my guess is Bezos' kids will not wind up on public relief.
What if what he does with it is use it buy political persuasion to further personal gain...perhaps rewrite sections of tax code to own benefit? Laws limiting workers unions, labor laws, anti trust legislation, corporate liability, etc. Etc....if money is speech and 3 individuals hold the same wealth as bottom 50 percent of our society I am concerned what he spends his money on.

My general attitude towards money and politics is that every citizen who has the franchise should be allowed to give what they want, to candidates they want, subject to the following conditions...

* The recipient is a candidate in an election where the donor has the right to vote on the election for that specific candidate.
* The PAC is only involved in elections where the donor has the right to vote in those specific elections.

So no person or entity can donate a single dime unless they have the right to vote in the specific election they are donating money to influence. That would exclude corporations, special interest groups and unions. And no person could donate any money to influence an election where they don't have the right to vote. So while I could donate as much as I want in the presidential election and the election for my local congressman and or senator here in Florida, I could not donate a dime to any political campaign or PACs in California or Texas.

It's imperfect, but it is probably as fair as one can get.
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4959
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by Mountaineer » Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:29 pm

doodle wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:19 pm
I find it a bit ironic how mountaineer so strongly defends these wealthy oligarchs considering his love of Jesus and how the Bible handles the topic of wealth.
Having wealth is not the problem that is addressed in Scripture. It is when one makes wealth into an idol, i.e. a first commandment issue, another small g god that is revered above the one and only God, as I understand it. Do you interpret differently?
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
User avatar
Ad Orientem
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3483
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 2:47 pm
Location: Florida USA
Contact:

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by Ad Orientem » Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:30 pm

Ad Orientem wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:28 pm
doodle wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:13 pm
Ad Orientem wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:05 pm
Mountaineer wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 12:47 pm
Re. the thread title - good for him. He won't be taking it with him when he croaks, so what do you think will become of his money/investments/assets then? Plowed back into the economy or coverted to gold and hoarded? Or something else? Or maybe given to Iran (at least it would be his to give and not the taxpayers).

Rem acu tetigisti. I am not so concerned with Mr. Bezos having earned a staggering fortune, provided he is paying his fair share in taxes (which is highly unlikely but we will set that aside for the moment). >:D Broadly speaking though he earned the money and once he's paid his taxes what he does with it is his business. What alarms me is what happens to his fortune, and other similar ones, after he dies. The great threat to democracy and society doesn't come from people like Bezos who work hard, build a better mousetrap, and reap the rewards. It comes from the succeeding generations, that in most cases do little or nothing to earn the money but become staggeringly wealthy by virtue of winning the genealogical lottery. Vast inherited dynastic fortunes that simply accumulate and snowball generation after generation are the great threat. Sanders is wrong in his desire for a wealth tax which in addition to be grossly unfair, is also unconstitutional on its face. But I have no sympathy for the children of plutocrats. The traditional policy to prevent these obscene hereditary fortunes has been the death tax, which is both eminently fair and constitutional. Alas, anti-tax fanatics have succeeded in demonizing it.

IMO the estate tax should be left as is up to $100 million. Every dollar above that should be taxed at 50% and every dollar above $1 billion should be taxed at 75%. Even then my guess is Bezos' kids will not wind up on public relief.
What if what he does with it is use it buy political persuasion to further personal gain...perhaps rewrite sections of tax code to own benefit? Laws limiting workers unions, labor laws, anti trust legislation, corporate liability, etc. Etc....if money is speech and 3 individuals hold the same wealth as bottom 50 percent of our society I am concerned what he spends his money on.

My general attitude towards money and politics is that every citizen who has the franchise should be allowed to give what they want, to candidates they want, subject to the following conditions...

* The recipient is a candidate in an election where the donor has the right to vote in the election for that specific candidate.
* The PAC is only involved in elections where the donor has the right to vote in those specific elections.

So no person or entity can donate a single dime unless they have the right to vote in the specific election they are donating money to influence. That would exclude corporations, special interest groups and unions. And no person could donate any money to influence an election where they don't have the right to vote. So while I could donate as much as I want in the presidential election and the election for my local congressman and or senator here in Florida, I could not donate a dime to any political campaign or PACs in California or Texas.

It's imperfect, but it is probably as fair as one can get.
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4959
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by Mountaineer » Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:33 pm

Ad Orientem wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:30 pm
Ad Orientem wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:28 pm
doodle wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:13 pm
Ad Orientem wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:05 pm
Mountaineer wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 12:47 pm
Re. the thread title - good for him. He won't be taking it with him when he croaks, so what do you think will become of his money/investments/assets then? Plowed back into the economy or coverted to gold and hoarded? Or something else? Or maybe given to Iran (at least it would be his to give and not the taxpayers).

Rem acu tetigisti. I am not so concerned with Mr. Bezos having earned a staggering fortune, provided he is paying his fair share in taxes (which is highly unlikely but we will set that aside for the moment). >:D Broadly speaking though he earned the money and once he's paid his taxes what he does with it is his business. What alarms me is what happens to his fortune, and other similar ones, after he dies. The great threat to democracy and society doesn't come from people like Bezos who work hard, build a better mousetrap, and reap the rewards. It comes from the succeeding generations, that in most cases do little or nothing to earn the money but become staggeringly wealthy by virtue of winning the genealogical lottery. Vast inherited dynastic fortunes that simply accumulate and snowball generation after generation are the great threat. Sanders is wrong in his desire for a wealth tax which in addition to be grossly unfair, is also unconstitutional on its face. But I have no sympathy for the children of plutocrats. The traditional policy to prevent these obscene hereditary fortunes has been the death tax, which is both eminently fair and constitutional. Alas, anti-tax fanatics have succeeded in demonizing it.

IMO the estate tax should be left as is up to $100 million. Every dollar above that should be taxed at 50% and every dollar above $1 billion should be taxed at 75%. Even then my guess is Bezos' kids will not wind up on public relief.
What if what he does with it is use it buy political persuasion to further personal gain...perhaps rewrite sections of tax code to own benefit? Laws limiting workers unions, labor laws, anti trust legislation, corporate liability, etc. Etc....if money is speech and 3 individuals hold the same wealth as bottom 50 percent of our society I am concerned what he spends his money on.

My general attitude towards money and politics is that every citizen who has the franchise should be allowed to give what they want, to candidates they want, subject to the following conditions...

* The recipient is a candidate in an election where the donor has the right to vote in the election for that specific candidate.
* The PAC is only involved in elections where the donor has the right to vote in those specific elections.

So no person or entity can donate a single dime unless they have the right to vote in the specific election they are donating money to influence. That would exclude corporations, special interest groups and unions. And no person could donate any money to influence an election where they don't have the right to vote. So while I could donate as much as I want in the presidential election and the election for my local congressman and or senator here in Florida, I could not donate a dime to any political campaign or PACs in California or Texas.

It's imperfect, but it is probably as fair as one can get.
O0
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
User avatar
Ad Orientem
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3483
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 2:47 pm
Location: Florida USA
Contact:

Re: Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

Post by Ad Orientem » Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:42 pm

Xan wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:27 pm
Ad Orientem wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:05 pm
Mountaineer wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 12:47 pm
Re. the thread title - good for him. He won't be taking it with him when he croaks, so what do you think will become of his money/investments/assets then? Plowed back into the economy or coverted to gold and hoarded? Or something else? Or maybe given to Iran (at least it would be his to give and not the taxpayers).

Rem acu tetigisti. I am not so concerned with Mr. Bezos having earned a staggering fortune, provided he is paying his fair share in taxes (which is highly unlikely but we will set that aside for the moment). Broadly speaking though he earned the money and once he's paid his taxes what he does with it is his business. What alarms me is what happens to his fortune, and other similar ones, after he dies. The great threat to democracy and society doesn't come from people like Bezos who work hard, build a better mousetrap, and reap the rewards. It comes from the succeeding generations, that in most cases do little or nothing to earn the money but become staggeringly wealthy by virtue of winning the genealogical lottery. Vast inherited dynastic fortunes that simply accumulate and snowball generation after generation are the great threat. Sanders is wrong in his desire for a wealth tax which in addition to be grossly unfair, is also unconstitutional on its face. But I have no sympathy for the children of plutocrats. The traditional policy to prevent these obscene hereditary fortunes has been the death tax, which is both eminently fair and constitutional. Alas, anti-tax fanatics have succeeded in demonizing it.

IMO the estate tax should be left as is up to $100 million. Every dollar above that should be taxed at 50% and every dollar above $1 billion should be taxed at 75%. Even then my guess is Bezos' kids will not wind up on public relief.
I certainly have some sympathy for what you're saying, although I don't see how this opinion can come from a monarchist. Would the royal lineage be exempt from your death tax?

In any case: maybe you can make a point that society would be better off if ne'er-do-wells could not inherit vast fortunes. But here's the big problem as I see it: who DOES get to inherit the vast fortune? Is the government a better heir than a child? I don't know that it is. Or maybe the point of your confiscatory death tax is to drive people to give their wealth to charity?
* In a monarchy the sovereign is not a citizen but the physical embodiment of the state. He doesn't pay taxes. He receives them.
* Other members of the royal family do not inherit very much, except for the heir.
* Members of the royal family not expected to succeed to the throne either join the military or church, or perform some other service to the crown and people agreeable to the sovereign. For which they would receive a stipend from the royal purse at the sovereign's pleasure. Alternatively, they can get a job.
* "Is the government a better heir than a child? " Assuming they are not being deprived of the means to live, yes. There are legitimate functions of government for the public good that require money. The state does not operate on voluntary donations. That means taxes. So all that remains is figuring out who benefitted the most from living in the country and enjoying all the privilege's, rights and benefits of the same, and who can bear the taxes with the least amount pain. My answer is the children of a man who died leaving $200 billion will probably still be Ok if they end up with a mere $50 billion.
Last edited by Ad Orientem on Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply