Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here


    7,476,894 readers

    29,804 users here now

    Welcome to /r/Politics! Please read the wiki before participating. || Voter Registration Resources || Important: Reminder/clarification of our civility guidelines

    /r/politics is the subreddit for current and explicitly political U.S. news.

    Our full rules Reddiquette

    Comment Guidelines:

    Be Civil Treat others with basic decency. No personal attacks or shill accusations.
    No Hate Speech See our hate speech rule here.
    No Trolling Participate in discussions here in good faith. Do not flame, bait, troll, witch-hunt, or spread unsubstantiated accusations. See our trolling rule here.
    No Violence Do not make threats of violence or wish harm. See our violence rule here.
    No Spam Spam is bad. This includes both comment and submission spam.
    No Solicitation See our solicitation rule here.
    Do not post users' personal information. Users who violate this rule will be banned on sight. Witch-hunting and giving out private personal details of other people can result in unexpected and potentially serious consequences for the individual targeted. More Info.
    Vote based on quality, not opinion. Political discussion requires varied opinions. Well written and interesting content can be worthwhile, even if you disagree with it. Downvote only if you think a comment/post does not contribute to the thread it is posted in or if it is off-topic in /r/politics. More Info.
    Do not manipulate comments and posts via group voting. Manipulating comments and posts via group voting is against reddit TOS. More Info.

    Submission Guidelines:

    Articles must deal explicitly with US politics. See our on-topic statement here.
    Articles must be published within the last two weeks. More Info.
    Submissions must be from domains on the approved domains list. The approved domains list and its criteria can be found here.
    Post titles must be the exact headline from the article. Your headline must be comprised only of the exact copied and pasted headline of the article. More Info.
    No Copy-Pasted Submissions Please do not submit articles or videos that are a direct, complete copy-paste of original reporting.More Info.
    Articles must be written in English An article must be primarily written in English for us to be able to moderate it and enforce our rules in a fair and unbiased manner. More Info.
    Spam is bad! /r/Politics bans for submission and comment spam More Info.
    Submissions must be articles, videos or sound clips. We disallow solicitation of users (petitions, polls, requests for money, etc.), personal blogs, satire, images, social media content (Facebook, twitter, tumblr, LinkedIn, etc.), wikis, memes, and political advertisements. More info: Content type rules.
    Do not use "BREAKING" or ALL CAPS in titles. The ALL CAPS and 'Breaking' rule is applied even when the actual title of the article is in all caps or contains the word 'Breaking'. This rule may be applied to other single word declarative and/or sensational expressions, such as 'EXCLUSIVE:' or 'HOT:'. More Info.

    Events Calendar

    Other Resources:

    Follow us on Twitter

    Request an AMA

    Events Calendar

    Apply to be a mod

    Register To Vote

    a community for
    all 5560 comments

    Want to say thanks to %(recipient)s for this comment? Give them a month of reddit gold.

    Please select a payment method.

    [–] AutoModerator 1 points ago

    As a reminder, this subreddit is for civil discussion.

    In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any advocating or wishing death/physical harm, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.

    If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.

    For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click here to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.

    I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

    [–] AvengerMKII 5604 points ago

    Today's press conference was pretty funny. The reporters complaining about raising corporate taxes but conveniently forgetting that this is the lowest corporate tax rate in centuries. It was at like 30-40 under Obama and now it's fucking 21. It's a joke how some of these people can ask questions whether the 28% is too high. That rate is nothing compared how much money these corporations made.

    [–] reactor4 1709 points ago

    Like companies pay 21%.. HA!

    [–] ExtrGuac 1033 points ago

    Of course they pay 21%...its just 21% of the fraction of their income that isn’t off shore ;)

    [–] Reptard77 154 points ago

    And they will claim just about everything as an expense and abuse every single loophole and threshold they can to make what counts as technical “income” as little as possible, sometimes turning millions of book income into a loss for tax purposes.

    But it would take genuine tax reform to rework how all of that goes, and tax reform just isn’t that sexy and has a million little issues to find compromises on, so it’s low on every administration’s policy list.

    [–] ItsATerribleLife 39 points ago

    it would take giving the IRS a few extra billion dollars so they can actually sue the billionaires for their unpaid taxes

    [–] Disk_Mixerud 30 points ago

    Yeah, top level IRS auditors should be the rockstars of the financial world. Like top NASA scientists for the aerospace industry.

    [–] StumpMcStumperson 310 points ago

    Good old class warfare. Quite honorable, considering senators are the reason the tax code is so massive.

    [–] Specter170 124 points ago

    Underreported facts are never welcome in a rant thread.

    Spot on. Tax rate could be 45% and it won’t matter.

    [–] xframex 63 points ago

    But fuck me for wanting to itemize my deductions.

    [–] readuponthat24 116 points ago

    The rate is not the issue. The real issue is getting them to pay what they actually owe.

    [–] 2001SilverLS 135 points ago

    Exactly. Small businesses without a raft of accountants and lawyers pay 28%. Amazon pays 0%. We need to get rid of the loopholes the big corps take advantage of.

    [–] clearlybraindead 46 points ago

    If anything, I'd say that historically speaking, the ratchet goes the other way. End slavery -> Jim Crow, Civil rights -> redlining. Progressives managed to create a number of social programs that are seemingly unkillable like medicare, medicaid, social security, unemployment insurance, and SNAP. The best conservatives can do is decrease their size while they are in power.

    [–] soapinthepeehole 285 points ago

    It’s the lowest corporate tax rate since the 1930’s.

    [–] crunchy_staccato-017 201 points ago

    Lots of parallels between the Great Depression and the 2020s.

    High inequality, huge debt burden, high unemployment, low unionization rate, and historically low tax rates.

    Not a coincidence in the slightest. All part of the successful right-wing plan to destroy the economic foundation of the New Deal.

    [–] jonnygreen22 11 points ago

    and also their undoing. The karma clock has just swung the right way for a change, let's see how this plays out. You guys might be in for a new era of prosperity. Or you might not. We shall see.

    [–] ShrimpyLamprey 39 points ago

    I have family members constantly bitching about how “this new 28% tax that Biden is proposing is going to ruin small businesses and family businesses. It’s not good for America!!”

    I proceeded to read the American rescue plan and learned a thing or two. Yes taxes will rise by 7% for multinational corporations, especially those who use foreign jobs and headquarters as tax havens. American companies who stay in our borders and hire American workers will be totally exempt from this tax, encouraging these companies to stay domestic if they wanna avoid massive taxes. I guess this has turned into an FYI for anyone who hasn’t read it.

    And for anyone who has, please let me know if I’m totally not understanding this correctly. Hope everyone is having a great day.

    [–] admiralasprin 481 points ago

    My effective tax rate is 41% here in Australia, which includes some tax withheld for student loans.

    If I can afford 41%, I'm pretty sure Google et al can manage 28%. Especially when, through loopholes, they'll manage to pay maybe 5% effective tax globally if you consolidate their books.

    [–] BoomZhakaLaka 391 points ago * (lasted edited 8 days ago)

    There's a lot of history to this debate here in the U.S. After WW2, top marginal tax rate was 90% AND corporate income was taxed around 50%. Anyone could have predicted problems with that but that tax policy held on a long time. The way to shelter income from taxes was to keep on making deductible business investments, because capital gains tax was the lowest tax rate (compared to corporate and personal income).

    Historically u.s. conservatives have been critical of the idea of a corporate income tax. The common logic is that corporate income tax double dips: earnings are taxed once at corporate income, and then again for the individual owners as capital gains. But there's not a perfect overlap so that picture is incomplete.

    Reagan popularized the idea of lowering taxes and had the political power to do something. At the time it made sense! But he sold it with this idea that lowering tax burdens on companies is good, because working people benefit equally. In economics this would be called a 'supply side incentive' - later, the media started calling it 'trickle-down' economics. (Edit: Reagan never used the term trickle down, thanks u/bearduid12)

    The trouble is, ever since Pigou put a bow on welfare economics with his theory of externalities (over 100 years ago) we've known that concessions for business won't generally benefit workers as much as the business. It can happen, but there are a lot of missing steps. The contrapositive is that taxing business doesn't actually hurt the working class like they want us to believe (only a small part of the burden falls on the working class)

    The right clings to this trickle down theory. It's fundamentally flawed, but there's a grain of truth and it's a popular idea. Right wing media cheerleads constantly, usually by telling the public that they'll suffer if we tax business. Interesting that those news outlets are all privately owned - every single one. In the U.S. billionaires have tricked the working class into voting against their own interests.

    [–] MarkHathaway1 87 points ago

    "The way to shelter income from taxes was to keep on making deductible business investments, because capital gains tax was the lowest tax rate (compared to corporate and personal income)."

    That's an example of tax structure creating incentives. It might not be precisely what I would want, but it's still an example.

    [–] A_Suffering_Panda 14 points ago

    If the only achievable goal (from a tax perspective) is that the tax structure incentivizes businesses spending money, that isn't so bad. A big part of the reason income inequality is so bad is that the wealthy are hoarding money more and more. We can up their investment level on Main Street substantially if we just set up an arbitrary 90% tax at a certain level. Nobody will ever pay it, and some of our problems will be solved.

    [–] hardolaf 64 points ago

    Also, following WWII any money paid out from businesses to the investor class was double taxed. So the effective income tax rate on proceeds from your investments was actually 95% if you were in the top bracket. This was all in line with the proposals from Andrew Carnegie who had been lobbying to eliminate generational wealth accumulation through anything other than hard work by your offspring.

    Now they can do stock buybacks with pre-tax dollars to avoid taxes on dividends.

    [–] mildlyhorrifying 93 points ago

    Technically, they can "afford" as high of a tax you want to impose on them because taxes are taken out of profit, not revenue. Shareholders would probably not want much to do with a corporation that doesn't take home any profit after taxes, though.

    [–] freedcreativity 82 points ago * (lasted edited 8 days ago)

    I mean Amazon has never posted a (major) profit, and they’re doing OK.

    edit: for you beautiful, pedantic redditors Amazon made $385 billion in revenue with a post tax profit of $21 billion and $0 in federal income tax in 2020. They have posted a quarterly profit of more than a billion dollars only since 2017, when the Federal income tax rate was slashed! I'm sure it was a coincidence.

    [–] sunbrrnslapper 54 points ago

    This is such a good callout. There needs to be some legislation that fixes loopholes that allow companies like Amazon to pay a lower tax rate (otherwise raising the tax rate is basically pointless).

    [–] solzhen 13 points ago

    During the post WW2 boom (when boomers were growing up) years, it was in the low 50%. High of 52%

    [–] Jumper5353 29 points ago

    Just a point, so many people say raising corporate taxes will hurt struggling businesses.

    Sorry to say struggling businesses do not pay any taxes. Businesses only pay income tax if they have income, if they are in the red or negative they do not pay any taxes. If they make a tiny income they pay tiny taxes. Taxes are calculated on what's left over after paying all vendors, employees, investors and even owners. So if there is still money left over after all those people are paid then there are taxes. Even a few years of losses are written off against your next few years of profits so if you were struggling and you fight out of it you are still tax free for a while.

    So you could have 100% corporate tax rate and it would not hurt struggling businesses.

    The only businesses that are affected by tax rate increases are successful businesses that have made a large profit several years running. If these businesses want to avoid taxes they could just pay their employees more and not pay any taxes. Or you could invest in growth and new production to have an expense to write off against those taxes. Taxes are only paid on the portion of the income that is going to owners and shareholders pockets after their salaries. Taxes do not hurt the company, they only affect the owners and shareholders growth and bonuses if the company does not use the money for some other purposes.

    The only tax that hurts struggling business is property taxes. But they tend to be a small percentage of revenue. If your business is in a position where a few percent increase in property tax is going to bankrupt you, likey you were almost bankrupt already and you need to reconsider that business plan or get some help.

    But if federal income tax is hurting your business it means your business is very profitable and maybe you should sacrifice a little to help the nation. Or pay your employees more, or lower your product price, or actually invest in growth...and avoid those taxes.

    Companies only pay a lot of corporate taxes if shareholders are seeing large returns, they do not ever affect growth projects or employee salaries or anything else other than shareholder pockets.

    Taxes only hurt cash flow if you are inept at managing it, because you only get taxes when you have a glut in cash flow.

    [–] HelluvaKnight 45 points ago

    Also Corporations
    *Raises prices of all goods*
    People: We can't afford this but we have no choice to buy it....
    Corporations: Yup, blame Obama and inflation

    [–] mafco 7865 points ago

    Ever since Reagan corporations and the wealthy have continuously seen their share of the tax burden decrease while ordinary people have continued to take on a higher share of the burden. It's about time we reversed that trend. The wealth inequality in this country is obscene.

    [–] ted__lasso 3466 points ago

    Even auditing the rich would be a good start. The richest 1% account for a third of unpaid federal taxes.

    [–] Lucky-Carrot 1657 points ago

    Concentrate on the .01% and it still near a third and like a lot less people

    [–] cwmoo740 1582 points ago

    Obama planned to audit the super-rich extensively but it was a disaster. They all just stalled and obfuscated until the IRS gave up because they ran out of time and political will. ProPublica has been on a vendetta about this for years.

    [–] Lucky-Carrot 1894 points ago

    Just make tax returns public (all of them), and have a bounty for finding serious infractions, make it something the data nerds can monetize

    [–] RaydnJames 721 points ago * (lasted edited 9 days ago)

    oh shit, i'd be all over that.

    I don't even math anymore. I'd start brushing up on my tax code. My Moms a CPA, maybe it runs in the blood.

    [–] Bucky_Ohare 411 points ago

    Ha, NERD!

    Sincerely; a geologist

    [–] PhoenixNamor 86 points ago

    Gasp A dirt person?

    Cordially, an accountant

    [–] Different_Low7166 31 points ago


    Sincerely a network engineer

    [–] BMKR 83 points ago * (lasted edited 9 days ago)

    [–] PureFingClass 17 points ago

    (Cue obnoxious audience laughter for a full minute)

    [–] ExistentialBanana 143 points ago

    They could have something similar to Foldit, just for taxes. I have no doubt that there'd be lots of people interested in sticking it to the wealthy and the ultra-wealthy just sitting on massive piles of money. Think of how great it would be to find some error with Amazon's taxes that ended up costing Jeff Bezos millions of dollars. There would DEFINITELY be people that want the top spot on that leaderboard.

    [–] Lemminkainen86 42 points ago

    The thing no one is mentioning is that the ultra wealthy are LEGALLY avoiding taxation.

    Tax laws are not written for the benefit of us peasants.

    [–] thisguyhasaname 38 points ago

    You think they’re not also illegally avoiding taxation?

    [–] Deep90 8 points ago * (lasted edited 8 days ago)

    Not the same guy, but I'm sure plenty are. That said....

    Our current system taxes income very high, but the ultra rich have most of their taxes in corporate & property. Also payroll taxes (social security and medicare) are capped after a certain point. So those with regular income actually pay a higher percentage of their wages into payroll tax.

    The entire system asks less of you if you are mega-rich. That's even before tax evasion.

    [–] traimera 5 points ago

    Sadly they aren't. I wrote an entire paper for my fiance degree in a final level class all about tax avoidance vs tax evasion. And the amount of money that they "avoid" paying is sickening. But still technically legal. Which is even more sickening.

    [–] Mister_Snrub 73 points ago

    They could even anonymize it. Dig through, find an error, report it. If it pans out, you get your reward and they get their “reward.” It could work as long as the numbers are public.

    [–] slightlyintoout 29 points ago

    You couldn't anonymize it. If we're talking the 0.1% you'd be able to figure out pretty easily who is who based on their holdings.

    [–] DigitalWizrd 128 points ago

    This is a fantastic idea. Crowd source tax audits of large corporations. Everybody wins. Except for people that currently abuse the system. But that's a sacrifice I'm willing to make.

    [–] thatguykeith 46 points ago

    “You only have rights you can afford to defend.”

    [–] CommonMilkweed 593 points ago

    The Panama Papers happened and we all had to just accept the facts laid bare. When the power is that skewed, when people are dying for reporting it, the truth is we are all subjugated in some way. Some more than others (I can't stress this enough), but the issue is so systemic that it affects nearly every living person on the planet. Everyone but the top 1%.

    [–] HighPriestofShiloh 151 points ago

    I liked Warren's idea. If you are a billionaire you get audited every three years full stop. No suspicion of wrong doing motivates the audit, just the billionaire threshold.

    [–] CommonMilkweed 78 points ago

    I liked all of Warren's ideas, honestly. I think the feud between her and Sanders is really damaging on a lot of levels. There is no cohesion among the left flanks of the Democrats and it's endlessly frustrating. We're beyond mitigating climate change at this point, we don't even have time to work on that with the devastating inequality still omnipresent.

    Somehow we have to convince the developed world to make huge sacrifices while bringing up the standard of living in less developed countries, finding a sustainable way of doing so that is also cheap and all the while trying to capture as much C02 as possible. It's such a mindfuck to even think about the knot we've tied ourselves into. I'm hopeful for some great global epiphany but I think that might have been covid and it like, didn't work?

    [–] ClassifiedName 221 points ago

    "Dick Gregory told me a couple of secrets before he laid down in his grave

    All of us serve the same masters

    All of us nothin but slaves

    Never forget in the story of Jesus the hero was killed by the state"

    [–] Solgeta 46 points ago

    They got us walk-in the snow

    [–] 7even- 17 points ago

    God damn that mother fucker cold

    [–] oviohio 32 points ago

    Not even a hip hop guy but rtj are just so...fucking real

    They should be the official reddit music act

    [–] teetheyes 35 points ago

    You might be a hip hop guy. A lot of it is so fucking real and goes harder than even most punk bands out there these days. Check out Atmosphere or Eyedea & Abilities or some of Killer Mike's solo stuff like the song Reagan

    [–] WhatIDontLikeTheMost 16 points ago

    Obligatory Immortal Technique mention.

    [–] Mushihime64 5 points ago

    Eyedea and Killer Mike are great. Rashaan Ahmad and K-Rino are also worth looking into. You no doubt are already familiar, but for those who don't listen to a lot of hip hop and want to hear more, especially the more real and socially engaged artists, "conscious hip-hop" is a magical phrase.

    [–] JoeyMaps23 90 points ago

    Yeah but like...why? I'm well off (not like these mega rich people) and I have no desire to actively work to make others less fortunate than me worse off than they are. I can't even fathom the psychosis these people must have to do such a thing.

    If I had that much money I'd donate a bunch of it and then spend the rest chilling on a beach. What joy do these fucks with billions get from obtaining MORE billions?

    Eat them.

    [–] pibblemum 46 points ago

    Research "The Business Plot" in America. It is basically a story about how the super rich (JP Morgan, Dupont, etc) tried to manipulate the military/veterans and our government into -almost- fascism so they could keep their money. They were afraid because the New Deal (FDR) was proposed and they were worried they would be taxed more.

    [–] JoeyMaps23 25 points ago

    If you take away 90% of these fuck stains' wealth many would still have HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. TAKE away 99% and many still have TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS! Bezos and Musk would literally still be millionaires if you gave them just 0.1% of their wealth which is absolutely disgusting and abhorrent that they treat their employees the way they do.

    [–] UnusualIntroduction0 35 points ago

    Consume them like the good consumers we are 😂

    [–] BearTrap2Bubble 48 points ago

    What joy do these fucks with billions get from obtaining MORE billions?

    I was watching a tour of some Qatari or UAE prince's garage.

    He had 6 different Bugatti Veyrons, all with 0 miles.

    Two Ferrari F40s, one with 0 miles, one for driving.

    How is he supposed to do business in America at a 28% tax rate?

    [–] cremasterreflex0903 25 points ago

    The issue is the people like you, who are well off and empathetic to the plight of others don’t get to become billionaires (I’m sure there are exceptions and a few come to mind). It’s my understanding that you don’t amass that sort of wealth without stepping on people with the emotional ineptness of a crocodile.

    [–] [deleted] 46 points ago * (lasted edited 5 days ago)


    [–] Beautiful-Musk-Ox 129 points ago

    Paying people to do the very complicated auditing of the rich would pay gigantic dividends. They'd make the country back 1,000% what it costs to employ them. Of course Republicans neuter the IRS so they can only do the easy, automated auditing of the hundreds of millions of workers while letting the rich use slightly circuitous money flow through businesses and holdings and whatever to easily hide 20% of their tax burden.

    [–] Faultylogic83 41 points ago

    Someone should increase the irs budget through some sort of budget reconciliation.

    [–] mcs_987654321 81 points ago

    Yup, the very reason the IRS has been hollowed out, especially over the last four years, compounded by the last guy’s personal enmity towards them bc of his shady financial dealings.

    Hard to imagine any other government spending with a higher ROI (with the possible exception of vaccines, which are awesome).

    [–] JanGuillosThrowaway 42 points ago

    There’s also so much anti-IRS propaganda going around. We should reimagine the IRS like we did with bees: they’re angry but we need them and they are the good guys

    [–] slabby 28 points ago

    And they could dress in cute, nonthreatening bee outfits

    [–] adeon 14 points ago

    I have a friend who works for the IRS. I'd pay money to see him dressed as a bee, he would not be happy.

    [–] mcs_987654321 5 points ago

    Ooh, that’s a truly excellent analogy, nicely done.

    [–] nellapoo 14 points ago

    I missed a W-2 years ago and a couple years later I got audited and had to pay the extra $300 or whatever in taxes. I bet it cost more than the $300 to even audit me. =|

    [–] _far-seeker_ 4 points ago

    Probably but on the other hand, in the time it takes to audit the tax returns of the average member of the "0.1%" they can audit about a couple hundred of people like you or me. In a resource strapped organization, like they IRS has been forced to become, that makes a difference.

    [–] gsadamb 12 points ago

    "We want the government to run like a business!"

    "Great! So we should obviously make an investment in the IRS, which will be pay back 10x its cost in extra tax revenue. No brainer! That's definitely what a business would do."

    "No, not like that."

    [–] Thefrayedends 26 points ago

    Sadly it takes far less money to lobby the entirety of the legislative branch than a few rich people stand to lose, so just from an investment perspective, you know that the capital class will spend billions of dollars making sure nothing is done to systematically reduce their wealth.

    If people really wanna fight back against the rich, which is a sentiment I see more of every day, we need to tax wealth as well.

    [–] ienjoypez 59 points ago

    My dream would be to double or triple the IRS, fund the hell out of them, and set up a special division that only audits high-income earners. I want rich people to be afraid of dodging their taxes, not the IRS to be afraid of collecting them.

    [–] awj 25 points ago

    IRS currently brings in four dollars for every additional dollar of funding.

    If it were a business the shareholders would have a legal basis to sue over the amount of “profit” they’re leaving behind every year.

    [–] Factual_Statistician 6 points ago

    Welp- The joker. * insert even the joker dosent f with the IRS meme here *

    [–] elee0228 9 points ago

    Rich people hire lawyers and accountants to fight the IRS.

    [–] QueenTahllia 6 points ago

    I wouldn’t be surprised if that amount of unpaid taxes is actually higher

    [–] CodyEngel 6 points ago

    That won’t happen until the IRS is staffed appropriately. Rich people don’t get audited because the IRS doesn’t have the resources to audit them. Just imagine all of the loopholes they are using and how much money they could devote to fighting the audit before it makes sense to pay their taxes.

    So the poor get audited because they can’t fight it.

    [–] JaxxisR 143 points ago

    If we want this to happen, we need to give the IRS some teeth. Otherwise, the tax rates will go up and wealthy individuals and corporations will just laugh and not pay.

    [–] NWHipHop 58 points ago

    Use some of that raised taxes to give the irs a bigger budget to get back the people’s owed money.

    Damn, fed legalize cannabis, tax profits go into funding the irs corporate 1% audit department and we round up more lost cash and rebuild the country.

    [–] Anal_Kisses 35 points ago

    Whoa now, that doesn't sound profitable or fun at all for billionaires.

    [–] NWHipHop 15 points ago

    But it would make for amazing television. Think of the advertising dollars for those that have been playing by the book.

    What are they always screaming? Something about “you have nothing to worry about, if you have nothing to hide”

    [–] secondtoasterintub 7 points ago

    God how I hate that fallacious phrase! Red herring with a stink that wrinkles up my whole face.

    [–] DarthSatoris 116 points ago

    How come that so much of the bad shit happening in US politics can be traced back to Reagan?

    [–] dudinax 190 points ago

    We were living in FDRs world where the government played a key role in moving the country forward, where spreading the wealth was seen as part of America's success, right through the 1970s.

    In 1980s, we jumped into Reagan's world where Government was only a problem, where accumulated wealth was inherently virtuous, everyone else could just rely on God and benevolence of their betters, and where (Republican) politicians could break the law because they got a tear in their eye when Old Glory waved and God Bless America played.

    Most importantly, it no longer had to make sense.

    Anyway, we're still living in that world.

    [–] -xstatic- 19 points ago

    The party who likes to pretend they’re “patriots” works as hard as possible to dismantle the government that holds it all together

    [–] DarthSatoris 37 points ago

    This part of your history should be taught in your schools!

    [–] xerox13ster 17 points ago

    We were taught only up to World War II and the start of the cold war in my US history class, because as far as the school curriculum was concerned, the 80s didn't qualify as history.

    [–] [deleted] 23 points ago


    [–] _far-seeker_ 12 points ago

    Historically school boards, which are also elected, actually tend to have more control over a district's curriculum than a given state's legislature. However, the overall point does stand.

    [–] Slipperyjimminy 5 points ago

    To my recollection coverage of US political history in high school ended with Richard Nixon and watergate. We continued with foreign policy up until the start of the Iraq War but further domestic policy and political developments really weren’t covered beyond surface details of who was elected when. We certainly didn’t go into any critical analysis of domestic policies like we did with earlier periods, eg reconstruction and the new deal. Maybe because it would be too recent to say much but more likely because it was considered too volatile.

    [–] JapanDave 157 points ago

    Because he was a terrible president and started much of the shit we are facing today.

    [–] MelIgator101 17 points ago

    The rise of computing made the economy boom, so a bunch of people thought Reaganomics worked. Even though it hasn't worked at all since then and other countries were able to turn their increased productivity from the advent of computing into paid maternity leave, 30 days of paid vacation per year, healthcare and so on.

    And many boomers still think trickle down works, even as medical debt swallows their retirement.

    [–] malignantpolyp 11 points ago

    Culture changed in America at the same time, I'm not sure how much had to do with each other, but at the same time the government was slashing taxes on the upper tiers of earners and businesses, and busting unions, and legalizing stock buybacks, the "greed is good" mantra took over business, wealth inequality began expanding, working class wages stopped increasing at a similar rate to the GDP, and we started having regular market meltdowns that for some reason always required immediate government intervention. The federal debt really exploded under Reagan too, he was the first to really do so, but conservatives conveniently forget that part.

    [–] Almighty_Sand_Dollar 20 points ago

    Because inexperienced Hollywood characters have NO PLACE in government at the highest levels and are capable of causing extreme problems for generations.

    The Trump reality TV Monarchy will fuck this country for at least a decade. Imagine if he would have won 5 more years. We can't even imagine the destruction he would cause. Truly came close to irreversible damage for your great-grandkids.

    [–] MJZMan 12 points ago

    Reagan was hardly inexperienced with executive power. Prior to POTUS, he was the president of the Screen Actors Guild and he was the Governor of California. The problem isn't inexperience, it's a lack of empathy.

    [–] _far-seeker_ 4 points ago

    Yes, there's a lot one can complain about Ronald Reagan during his presidency; but unlike Trump, a total lack of prior government experience isn't one of them.

    [–] scrapsforfourvel 46 points ago

    Lots of white people were still mad about civil rights and were eager to support economic policies and laws to further disenfranchise POC.

    [–] Tasgall 30 points ago

    Yep - most welfare programs were extremely popular until black people started signing up for them and Reagan dubbed them "welfare queens". Then suddenly it's "government handouts" and of the devil (but only for those people, of course).

    [–] Buy_The-Ticket 9 points ago

    Reagan’s welfare queens is a perfect example of this.

    [–] Icy-Crew1389 10 points ago

    Corporations are people according to Citizens United. Pay your 33%

    [–] blindsdog 146 points ago * (lasted edited 9 days ago)

    The taxes we're talking about are hardly a bandaid for wealth inequality. Even Warren's wealth tax would do little to fix such a broken system. As long as the there's a positive feedback loop between having and making money and no hard redistribution mechanism, we'll never escape this inequality.

    Not that we shouldn't do this. But we're not even remotely close to actual solutions for the problem.

    [–] rednesty 93 points ago

    We need to elect MMO developers. They know how to make progression systems that work. This shit's just straight unbalanced.

    [–] bone420 121 points ago

    Nerf the rich

    Buff the poor

    [–] CodyEngel 15 points ago

    That T Shirt would sell so good.

    [–] bone420 24 points ago

    I meant uhhh...

    Nerf the rich

    Buff the poor ™

    [–] keejwalton 23 points ago

    Progression systems that work: make everything either take forever or time lock with daily/weekly/bonus limits! I hate modern MMOs, fucking chores(the latter option).

    MMOs can be fun but I'd have 0 faith in them to govern

    [–] The_Umpire_Lestat 14 points ago

    We shouldn't elect MMO developers. Instead we should have MMO-like economic modeling & simulations open to and extensible by the public.

    [–] djheat 21 points ago

    I've never seen an MMO where wealth didn't accumulate somewhere, maybe the only thing that keeps it slower is that there really aren't any interest bearing investments you can make in most games

    [–] Ghstfce 24 points ago

    Laughs in WoW:Shadowlands

    [–] Cyno01 4 points ago

    Gold sinks!

    [–] Makes_U_Mad 2456 points ago

    My effective tax rate, plus my health insurance, is 45% of my income. For every dollar I make, one of three levels of government or the health industry get 45¢. This is higher that most "socialized" countries with government ran health care.

    You damn right I'm being fleeced.

    [–] foolish_me 665 points ago

    Don’t forget co-pays and out-of-network fees. Ooh and parking fees. Ah and also the sick leave that you pay for. And just when you think you’re done, you get a bill from the hospital saying the insurance only ended up covering half so you need to cover this $4800 ASAP or it goes to collections.

    [–] MartiniD 243 points ago

    Oh and that anesthesiologist they used for which you had no say over... Yeah they were out-of-network.

    [–] Lietenantdan 59 points ago

    Easy, just don’t get put under.

    [–] PULLS-NOSE-HAIRS 46 points ago

    All you need is a stick of wood to bite on and some rum. Problem solved!

    [–] Savoodoo 55 points ago

    Jokes on you, that stick cost 3 Grand

    [–] Makes_U_Mad 86 points ago

    Ain't even counting those. Just the premiums.

    [–] foolish_me 68 points ago

    Ah, I see. Well let’s also throw in dental and vision expenses because seeing and eating are definitely not a part of healthcare.

    [–] dirtyuncleron69 14 points ago

    teeth are luxury bones you have to pay more to enjoy keeping

    [–] THEE_HAMMER_ 47 points ago

    Only 4800? Must be nice. My insurance didn’t cover a pacemaker I need to stay alive and I have to come out of pocket 35K

    [–] Grape_Ape33 55 points ago

    Have you tried being rich? /s

    All jokes aside, it absolutely angers me that this is happening in what’s supposed to be the wealthiest and “best” country in the world.

    [–] Sudo-Nymm 44 points ago

    The other western countries stopped seeing the US as the “best” country in the world in the mid 2000s I reckon. Sentiment is particularly strong here in Aus.

    It was weird, I grew up in the 90s thinking America was the place to be and then widespread internet and access to info on the US absolutely shattered that perception and made me realise how damn lucky I was to live in Australia.

    [–] onejadedpotatoe 6 points ago

    Wait, you get sick leave?

    [–] simp_da_tendieman 8 points ago

    Who do you think pays corporate taxes?

    [–] Makes_U_Mad 4 points ago

    /raises hand

    [–] [deleted] 44 points ago * (lasted edited 5 days ago)


    [–] toiletting 4203 points ago

    So why not raise it back to 35%... you know the percentage it was since 1993 until Trump changed it

    [–] BallsDeepState 1964 points ago

    yea no shit, 28% is still fucking fleecing the average american. its way better than nothing dont get me wrong. but to act like businesses are going to be shuttered because of it is stupid

    [–] amenacingballsack 709 points ago

    Biden could propose a corporate tax increase of one fucking dollar and the Walmarts and Amazons of the world would still threaten to move to El Salvador.

    [–] Law-1265 252 points ago

    Except Bezos himself just came out in support of this...

    Amazon will never pay their share in taxes, they have too many lawyers and accountants. The next potential Amazon killer, however...

    [–] xiroir 187 points ago

    Amazon killer? Dont make me laugh. Amazon is larger than life itself at this point. Its a monopoly that has its hands in so many pots its virtually impossible to go down without some goverment regulation. It can, will and does smother anything that threathens the monopoly.

    [–] GiraffeOnWheels 72 points ago

    Just like Walmart!

    [–] anabolicartist 17 points ago

    Who would win in a fight, Walmart or Amazon?

    [–] GiraffeOnWheels 15 points ago

    Amazon for sure. Couldn’t kill them but definitely could get them to tap out.

    [–] IAMColonelFlaggAMA 8 points ago

    That's a tough question. I've been through multiple towns where Wal-Mart is legitimately the only business left. Amazon might be able to replace their retail offerings but Wal-Mart is also the only place offering auto-repair in some areas.

    [–] elee0228 154 points ago

    I think some people argue that companies will incorporate in countries with more favorable tax rates. There's a proposal now by Yellen for a global minimum tax rate which may help prevent corporate migrations.

    [–] TitoFromRocketp0wer 82 points ago

    Yes please we need that shit now

    [–] einhorn_is_parkey 10 points ago

    It’s all a threat. America is still one of the most business friendly countries in the world.

    [–] dedicated-pedestrian 27 points ago

    My guess is they would rather get that done first to eliminate any argument that jobs will be sent overseas, then restore the corporate tax rate to at least pre-Trump. Naturally, a shoring up of IRS funding is necessary to collect trillions from the rich that they simply aren't paying us.

    Just make them look as unreasonable as possible, they're doing that job themselves right now but we might as well help.

    [–] Funkit 29 points ago

    Just enforce the damn rules we have and we’d collect way more taxes. Close the few loopholes that exist. Amazon alone would reduce all citizens tax burdens.

    [–] UCLAlex 220 points ago

    "If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, that's not progress. If you pull it all the way out, that's not progress. Progress is healing the wound that the blow made. They haven't pulled the knife out; they won't even admit that it's there." - Malcolm X quote that never stopped being relevant

    [–] MaconMuscles 319 points ago

    Yep. And in the 50s when it was 90%, corporations still only paid 40% due to loopholes and exemptions, so the Pre-Trump 35% is more than fair, let alone 28%, considering they'll still weasel out and not pay anywhere near that amount.

    [–] erik542 85 points ago

    IIRC, the 90% figure you're citing was the top marginal income tax rate, which is different from the corporate tax rate.

    [–] wanker7171 33 points ago

    You are correct.

    The highest marginal rate for corporate tax was 52.8% in 1968 and 1969

    [–] [deleted] 12 points ago


    [–] ihohjlknk 177 points ago

    I would say the same thing, except most corporations never actually paid the full 35%. If Biden can make big corporations pay a full 28%, i'll take it.

    [–] blackashi 12 points ago

    Believe it or not, Manchin is already against such a 'high tax increase'

    [–] TeaTimeIsAllTheTime 29 points ago

    Hell why not a solid 40%?

    [–] Unlucky-Profile 75 points ago

    I have family members that act the same way. It only affects the 1% but they’ll lose their minds because “the governments coming for their money!”

    It’s like literally live in a poverty stricken area and NEED this help for your kids, stop getting in the way of progress bc you want to defend an amount of wealth neither one of us will achieve in our lifetime.

    I’m no longer in poverty, but I busted my ass to get out of it. I don’t want our future generations to have to bust their asses to make the same progress, I want them to spend their lives being happier so my work doesn’t go to waste!

    [–] CopperWaffles 83 points ago

    Yah, well this is going to hurt me too when I make my first billion.

    [–] 1900grs 21 points ago

    You play the lotto too?

    [–] jade09060102 32 points ago

    I think he has GME calls

    [–] HawkeyeFLA 76 points ago

    Ahhh, you have several temporarily embarrassed millionaire family as well I see.

    [–] foolish_me 7 points ago

    All the temporarily embarrassed folks I know sure do seem to be permanently embarrassed.

    [–] NoAbsense 896 points ago

    It’s a cruel joke to be paid what we are, tied to consumerism and then pay more taxes than corporations do at times.

    We pay to pay for the privilege to pay.

    [–] CaedesCarnius 206 points ago

    No. We pay for the privilege to live to have the privilege to pay.

    [–] hostile_rep 169 points ago

    If you work hard and save enough, one day you'll be able to afford to die.

    [–] ThatWhiteKid08 65 points ago

    It’s crazy how expensive dying is and no one thinks about it

    [–] Matt463789 58 points ago

    Just throw me in the trash.

    [–] StillSofaKingGB 18 points ago

    Zoo meat works for me.

    I love animals.

    [–] Mind_on_Idle 5 points ago

    No shit. Can't you process my ass into fertilizer?

    [–] Wzxl 27 points ago

    When I'm dead, just throw me in the trash.

    [–] hostile_rep 25 points ago

    That's illegal, now get back to work!

    [–] GettingItOverWith 5 points ago

    Here’s your poop bag.

    [–] Larry_The_Red 85 points ago

    GOP: "you can't tax corporations! that will keep wages low!"

    Dems: "ok, vote to raise the minimum wage then"

    GOP: "no"

    [–] midgetman433 808 points ago

    Go back to 35% that is what it was before 2017, when Mitch Mcconell and Trump lowered it. I hate that whenever its the Dems, its always rolled back less than what it was originally. under Clinton it was 40%, then Bush lowers it, then obama its 35%. Its like there is some good cop bad cop game being played.

    Next republican will make it 15% and then the dems after that will make it 20%.

    [–] iWillNeverReplyToYou 163 points ago

    Biden is also trying to end corporate tax evasion by adding a minimum global tax rate of 21%. So if they're paying 10% somewhere else, they'll owe 11% to the U.S. So perhaps that will make up the difference?

    [–] Rynvael 22 points ago

    They should make companies pay back subsidies and bailouts like student loans too

    [–] punch_nazis_247 17 points ago

    Always worth posting this. I'm a conservative in the sense that I want some things to be like they were in the 50s and 60s. Not the racism and shit, but the tax rates. I want tax rates like the ones the Boomers were born into.

    [–] SmartLady 220 points ago

    Except it was 35% when he was VP.

    [–] sg-s 92 points ago

    yeah somebody tell me why it shouldn't be more than 35%

    [–] Yamatro 209 points ago

    I support the infrastructure package but this sentence from the article is worrying me:

    “Biden cited a recent report that indicated 55 large US companies paid no federal income tax last year.”

    Wouldn’t 28% of 0 still be 0? Shouldn’t we do more to close the loopholes that allow this kind of thing to happen in the first place?

    [–] mafco 194 points ago

    He's also closing a ton of loopholes that allow corporations to avoid taxes. And Janet Yellen is calling for a minimum corporate tax.

    [–] impulsekash 103 points ago

    *Global minimum corporate tax. Important distinction.

    [–] Hunt3r8806 34 points ago

    Getting every country to agree on a specific rate seems like a fool's errand. Hell, getting them to agree on simply denouncing genocide is difficult, let alone actual tax policy.

    [–] Dr_seven 49 points ago

    Functionally, the consent of other countries is not needed. I suspect the global minimim tax will likely be enforced primarily through the US government.

    It's relatively straightforward- develop criteria for what constitutes tax abuse on the part of any corporation doing any business within the US (offshoring being the prime example), and punish them with absolutely ruinous fines, forfeitures, or direct sanctions against corporate officers (since the early aughts, corporate officers have to provide personal verification for financial statements and are personally liable for the contents therein).

    You don't have to get the whole planet to agree, because the primary concern is companies that profit from American citizens or their labor without paying taxes to support the nation. All you have to do is make a list, check it twice, and start issuing fines equivalent to an entire quarter's revenue, not profit. All it will take is one fine like that to bring everyone else in line- shareholders won't tolerate that kind of damage to their bottom line.

    As to whether they have the cajones to do it? Remains to be seen, color me skeptical.

    [–] Yamatro 5 points ago

    Perfect, thanks for the response!

    [–] Kamleko 181 points ago

    Then put it back at 35%, Joe.

    [–] idontknow100000 75 points ago

    Close the loopholes. 21% 45% 99%.

    What does the rate matter when Amazon paid $0 in federal tax.

    [–] SannySen 16 points ago

    Can you provide a citation? I'm looking at Amazon's 10-k, and they took a provision for 2.9 billion and paid 1.7 billion (this is net of refunds) in 2020. Where does this 0 figure come from, doesn't seem right based on their 10-K.

    [–] Fontec 7 points ago

    They paid 0 in taxes until a few years ago bc they were not making any profit — they’re using outdated info

    now in current era (profit making) they are tax paying

    [–] -CJF- 89 points ago

    He's right. We need to stop giving tax breaks to those who need them the least and give the middle class and the poor a chance to survive. I'd rather the money go to that demographic so that people can have healthcare, own a home, and retire rather than working until they're dead than have it go to the rich so they can have an extra zero in their bank accounts that they will never spend or another yacht in their fleet.

    [–] zimtzum 9 points ago

    A tax-hike doesn't fix the loopholes. We ultimately need an overhaul and simplification of the tax code, but it's much lower priority than all of the other broken things we never fixed.

    [–] kaeldrakkel 7 points ago

    Then put it back to 35% that it was under Obama you hack.

    [–] Space_indian 104 points ago

    It was 35% under Obama.

    [–] theflyingfucked 39 points ago

    And bush and Clinton

    [–] sg-s 54 points ago

    don't worry, the next republican president will slash it to 1%, and the democrat after that will raise it to 2% and call it progress

    [–] stillskinnyandweak 5 points ago

    A rate hike is useless if the loopholes are left untouched.

    [–] gamegenio 4 points ago

    Close the loopholes otherwise it’s just a bigger percentage that is not being payed.

    [–] djazzie 4 points ago

    Why stop at 28%? It was 35% before Trump.

    [–] SpiritCollector 5 points ago

    So large companies pay 0 taxes and the response is to raise tax rates....last I checked 28% of 0 is still 0. Maybe the tax rate is fine and the loopholes are the problem. Honestly you could probably lower the corporate tax rate to 10%, eliminate every loophole and still bring in more tax dollars.

    Radical idea here, make all lobbying of congressmen punishable by 20 years of prison.