Billionaires Don’t Want You to Know About This Supreme Court Case | Robert Reich
Vložit
- čas přidán 4. 12. 2023
- Today the Supreme Court will hear what could be the most important tax case in decades.
Moore v. US could permanently shield billionaires from a wealth tax.
This is why billionaires give luxury gifts to Supreme Court justices. For this exact moment.
I know that I am tired of supporting the wealthy and corporations. We need to impeach Alito and Thomas
Make no mistake this system is working exactly as the wealthiest among us intended. Welfare for the elites and raw dog eat dog austerity for the rest of us peasants
please sir can i ha 2:15 ve some more? (copperfield). its a dickensian universe now.
Show proof of welfare to the rich or you are lying democrats party of handouts that live off our children
'Peonage' was outlawed by the 'high' court. There's your 'precedent'. You're welcome.
Section 201 of Title 18 of the US code prevents bribes and gratuities. Obviously these gift-givers are in violation.
The rich pay almost all the federal taxes the poor get subsidized housing food assistance cash assistance and free healthcare the middle class draw more ss and medicare than they pay in taxes the rich pay almost all the federal taxes and get next to nothing in return Democrats party of handouts that live off our children they are the ones who will inherit a bankrupt shell of a nation because you won't pay enough taxes for the handouts Democrats want vote out handout Democrats before it's to late our childrens future depend on it
They're NOT GIFTS, THEY'RE BRIBES !
Now that the SCOTUS is openly admitting they are for sale is there any way we could get them to publish a price list for each case they hear? Maybe we could crowd fund civil rights.
This may be exactly where we are headed as insane as it sounds.
They will justy limit contributions allowable from individual donors, but allow unlimited donations from corporations and PACs. Then they are just one step away; just limit how much an individual can contribute to a PAC or make crowd funded PACs too onerous to be competitive and useful. Baddaboom! Problem solved. You know, do what they already have done to the election process post Citizens United.
Oh yeah, thanks Hillary Clinton for that Citizens United thing. That totally wasn't throwing democracy under the bus since "it's her turn now".
As if the former left wing SCOTUS wasn't for sale. We currently have a President who has been bought by China and subsidized by Russia, via his crooked idiot son, Hunter.
Love the suggestion! 😂
👍 why not they’re for sale
When republicons talk about welfare they need to be reminded that welfare for the very wealthy costs even more than welfare for the poor.
What welfare for the wealthy the top five percent pay over half the federal taxes you are not being honest
@@fritzforsthoefel8031 They pay far less in taxes than the average American. That's corporate welfare, along with the many bailouts.
Who should remind these republicons then if I may ask?
Why would you say that
It's not true never ceases to amaze me the lies democrats tell the fact is the top five percent pay over half the federal taxes and the average person draws out three dollars for every dollar paid in medicare taxes and the poor get subsidized housing food assistance cash assistance and free healthcare the rich pay almost all the federal taxes and get next to nothing in return
Close the tax loopholes for the wealthy and audit them.
Congress is wealthy. They won’t increase their own taxes
We have to have IRS agents capable of doing that.
For a long while we didn't.
Now we do and the Republicans are doing everything in their power to cut the IRS's funding so that their sugar daddies won't be audited.
And tax them mofos into the stone age!!
VOTE BLUE !!!
Why do you not pay enough taxes to pay for the social programs they want otherwise we add it to the debt our children will have to pay pay for the handouts democrats want instead of bankrupting our nation we have a debt so big it defies belief because you won't pay for democrat social programs
We are being taxed. But not represented.
And those who are being represented are making sure that they are not being taxed.
Exactly The point of this case. A direct tax on property, including your house, without proportion to representation
Representation?
Voters pick their representatives.
Even if Congress has a 5% approval rating, they have a 95% reelection rate.
Want to stop it? Stop voting them in.
Notice everyone votes for the best candidate, both sides of the aisle.
Who are the bad representatives? Apparently not 'their' candidate.
Justice Neil Gorsuch sold a $1.8M home to Brian Duffy, CEO of law firm having cases in front of the Supreme court.
And his mom tried her damndest to gut the EPA while she ran it, and now sonny boy is getting the chance to finish the job.
They need to be kicked off the court. Gorsuch, Alito and Thomas and whoever else is taking bribes. We can’t even trust our highest court.
Who pays Robert Reich to stoke class warfare? That would be a better question to ask.
@@irsmedicThe heritage foundation.
At least he didn't give it away
Problem is that the vast majority of people in congress and those hoping to be in congress someday, benefit greatly from the tax laws that now exists. And though some say they want to change the laws, there's very little real desire to make changes.
This should make us ask, what are we electing these folks to do? If it's to work for the rich, then we don't need elections, which should prompt some sort of legal action by all Americans. The Citizens of the United States vs ______________________________________.
The tax laws need a major overhaul.
@@GladysAlicea The voice of average Americans has been eroded over time in favor of PACs who are the tool of wealthy individuals and corporations. Until the outcry from people is loud enough insisting congress do something to get big money out of the political process, nothing will change including unfair tax laws. Unfortunately the majority of congress has been bought and paid for by the wealthy.
Reverse Reagonmics for a start.
@@jrconcerned6064and trumpenomics too
For a country as wealthy as the USA, having a roof over your head should be a given not a luxury. At 70 years old I knew a USA where everyone had a piece of the American Pie even if it was a small piece. I never thought in my lifetime I'd see so much poverty in the USA, and more and more working poor living in cars.
I just turned 69 and boy, do I agree. I am glad I'm at the tail end of this disgusting era.
Many Americans 65+ are the new low income unhoused living in their cars (if they have one) or become couch surfers.
While the number of people experiencing unsheltered homelessness has decreased over the last ten years, the number of older adults experiencing sheltered homelessness is on the rise, reported in Housing America’s Older Adults 2019.
Incomes for the lowest-income older adults have not risen as fast as rents, leaving a growing number of older adult renters at risk for homelessness as they struggle to cover their housing costs.
Older adult renters are a large and growing group.
According to the 2018 Household Projections, the number of renter households headed by someone age 50 and over is expected to grow from 16.0 million in 2018 (35 percent of all renters) to 21.2 million in 2038 (40 percent).
These older adults are entering retirement in worse financial shape than same-age households in 2001.
The decreasing wealth of older renters is related to the erosion of household incomes as rent increases outpaced income gains over the last 15 years.
Well, how much of an effort do Gen Xers make getting a useful degree, or skilled trade? Or even Milinials? My daughter and son-in-law are in that group, and they got useful degrees and have a nice "piece of the pie." My youngest son and his wife own a small lawn care business, with only 2 year degrees. They have a nice slice of the pie. Back when I was working, I made nice money in a factory job, with NO degree or skilled trade. My wife also made good money in our school district (also NO degree). We also have a nice piece of the pie. Where the problem lies, is in the Democrat Party. Look at all of you private property (your wages) and spend them on programs that are NOT Constitutional. Or they subsidize things, which also is not Constitutional. Look at all the government regulations. It has stolen, and is still stealing your private property for the Unconstitutional programs of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. If the government would get back to what is was intended to be, not some bloated leviathan like it is today, we would be a helluva lot better off.
What is your definition of wealthy? The U.S. debt expected to ballon to 50T within 7 years more. Some economist expect most Americans may need some form of government assistance in the near future due to rising cost of living and the dollar losing value. Are you referring to some unrealized wealth? Because the U.S. does nothing but spend exceeding more than the country brings in with taxes and no amount of taxation on the rich will keep the debt from growing.
Unlimited representation without any taxation at all--for billionaires.
How very "originalist" of them.
The top five percent pay over half the federal taxes what are you talking about stop believing in democrat lies
@@fritzforsthoefel8031 they don't, and never have. That's just lies pushed on the billionaire's behalf.
@@fritzforsthoefel8031 Same old corporate bootlicker babble we all expect from you Zachoff.
What are you talking about? The greatest tax burden has always been on the poorest Americans.
@@fritzforsthoefel8031: there’s a massive difference between the 10%ers and the 1-3%! Multi-millionaires are wannabes…billionaires are an entirely different level. But, because the millionaires aspire in their dreams to be billionaires, they seem themselves as if….and in the process, they are screwed too! BTW, those SCOTUS suckers are wannabes too 😡🥴
SCOTUS justices should live within their means. If they cannot afford a top shelf vacation, they should postpone it until they have their own money saved up to pay for it themselves.
Or they could quit their job and go be a corporate lawyer and have their *own* yacht. But so long as they are *public servants* they should have to have *at least* the same standard of conduct as a US Army private, who gets paid a lot less than them and doesn't even have a permanent home.
@@havable
It is terrible that members of the military get paid so paltry. Slap in the face. How many get paid what Santos was paid?
U.S. top tier income earners get the benefits of military security but believe it's not necessary to pay more in taxes.
How much do they get paid as a Supreme Court Justice, I’m sure it’s pretty handsome.
How about Congress? I don't think they live within their means.
@@kimberlychodur3508 Look it up, lazybones. It's a matter of public record.
We know damn well Alito and Thomas will NOT recuse themselves. How is it that all federal judges have a code of conduct but the Supreme Court doesn't?
Sad but true.
Article III of the constitution states their code clearly, that they shall retain their offices "under good behavior." While that is not very specific, it seems clear that if they are committing crimes like perjury or bribe-taking they should lose their jobs. No impeachment is required, because the standard for impeachment is "high crimes and misdemeanors" not "good behavior." Good behavior means "didn't commit crimes." Criminal justice is resolved in the regular court system. The accused must face accusers in a court of law who then prove or fail to prove a crime was committed, using evidence, not party strength, to determine the outcome.
@@havabletell that to the judge handling the political attack on Trump.
Man, these bots are really trying today.
@@yourdaddy-mq4km I will, and I'll donate to the cause as well. Dump the Trumpkopf!
Whenever a politician rants against inheritance taxes, just know that whenever they say "small family business," they mean the Walton family and Walmart, and "small family farm" means Archer, Daniel, and Midland. Those are family names, right? /s
True. They trot out a small mom-and-pop store for display in their PR material, when they really mean the "Waltons and large-scale agribusiness (Tyson, Purdue, et al.).
Exactly. "Small business" is raking in 500 million a year in profits. The real small businesses the corrupt in the pockets of the "trickle down" mafia screw over mercilessly
🫡💡 Thank you again, Robert.
It blows my mind that people feel proud about their wealth when it is built on the suffering of others.
There is nothing to be proud of there.
There's a type of person who can't enjoy their meal unless they know that someone else is starving.
There's no such thing as a moral billionaire. That kind of wealth isn't made without throwing somebody (or rather an entire nation) under the bus.
Aww, is working for a living suffering to you? That's cute 😂.
@@yourdaddy-mq4km Ummm… no. Thats not what I said at all. You’re just too busy licking the boots of your corporate overlords to understand what actual freedom is.
@@nickelbutt You need to stop with that victim mentality. Just because you're rich don't mean you are making others suffer, that is a delusional statement. Btw I'm not the one here licking boots, while you're out there ch0kin on the corporate kok I'm out there living free as a bird.
I still remember Deferment Dick Cheney going hunting with Scalia and if memory serves it was before the destructive Citizens United debacle,How frightening is it to think the GQP has deteriorated so badly that now the name Cheney is as close to integrity as they can get.🤦
What we need to do is enact an ethics code where Supreme Court justices can not accept vacations or anything coming from the richest 1%. Then expand the Court so we can have more judges that will help us pass laws that benefit Americans instead of blocking them and enact age/term limits. These suggestions are essential if we want to trust our current Supreme Court.
There is an 'Emoluments Clause', or there was.
Congress has to do that. They can barely keep the government open these days, unlikely to happen.
Just checked definition of "emolument." -A word I'd never heard of. But in reading that,, could it be that the definition is the problem?.. The definition qualifies things that could be considered appropriate compensations, such as salaries. I receive tips where I work, and that is qualified loosely as legitimate or appropriate, as part of compensation, a benefit. So one of the big problems is (most likely) in the defining process, We're likely being flimflammed by legal linguistics, "legalese" which can be easily done. When my Dad would talk about the problem with lawyers and politicians he'd throw in that strategy he thought clearly applied in those professions "Dazzle with brilliance or baffle with bullshit."@@marklee2508
@@marklee2508 There is but it never gets enforced because if it was the Court Jesters would have to resign for taking bribes.
@@havable Who else in US 'public service' enjoys 'lifetime appointments'? Not even the robots operating the printing presses have that, the dam scabs, they should program them to strike. 😊
Robert, ordinary citizens are required to take RMD (required minimum distribution) from their retirement account. This should apply to the billionaires and they should be required to take RMD from their investment and at 65 year of age.
The greedy will stop at nothing to hoard all.
It's not about getting free money, it's about taxes. What this video failed to mention is they never pay this money back during their lifetime. As a non-accountant this is the way I understand it. When the billionaire dies, their heirs can sell the stock with a "stepped up basis". Normally, a person pays the difference between what they sell a stock for and what they bought if for. However, with the " up basis rule", they pay the difference between the *current value* and what the stock then sells for (which shows zero profit so no taxes). The heirs of the billionaire pay off the debt and keep the rest of the money tax free. This is what allows them to bypass taxes. The debt is paid back after they die and no taxes are paid. The heirs then can continue the cycle. Judges should always recuse whenever they have ANY conflict of interest.
Avoid triggering capital gains and forming by-pass trusts to evade the tax man. Right?
🤦♂️ this also applies to you. Perhaps you'll prefer to have everything your parents worked for taxed away and spend on the war in Ukraine.
@@yourdaddy-mq4km Not true in the least, lying coward. or should I say comrade, after that bit of lying russian propaganda?
So if I take a line of credit against the capital of my house .. should I be taxed on the line of credit?
@@ashnader8627 No you will not be taxed on your line of credit. This is about the taxes the heirs of the uber-rich will pay after they die. And, to be clear, the strategy this video is talking about will only work for the UBER-WEATHY (think billionaires who currently pay zero taxes). For normal people (and even normal rich millionaire people), this strategy will not work because the debt service will consume your assets during your lifetime. In any case, if a wealth tax is implemented, it will almost certainly apply only to individuals over a certain net worth. For example the current estate tax only applies to people with a net worth over $12.92 million. It's okay if we aren't willing to tax the uber rich. Working class and even millionaries will just need to get used to paying more and more taxes (to make up the difference) while the uber-rich pay zero and our infrastructure crumbles. They don't care because they are using private jets.
Even as an atheist, I have to say you're doing the Lord's work. 🙂
You know as much of God as you do the tax system. Congratulations on achieving equity.
@@irsmedic "An atheist is not a person who knows too little about religion. An atheist is a person who knows too much about religion."
― David Eller
Did I mention religion? God is God. Or not. A simple decision tree. Do you see my point? My friend, our problem is that the greatest religions attract the greatest frauds. That's just the law of big organizations. But is that the fault of God? Should someone vicariously blame God for the sins of man? Of course, you can just not believe, but that is a religion of its own with its own dogmas, creation myth, devils and gods.
Now, in my religion, God is perfect and man is fallen. Could you appreciate how my faith in God has only recently increased? Consider, the licking of chops for the $14,000 tax bill for income they never received or may never receive. This was a retroactive pure confiscation.
How would you feel if the government retroactively taxed your 401(k) for income the companies you had stock in earned, yet never actually distributed to you. And all these company paid 100% of their taxes.
Complete theft of retirement accounts will be coming. Everything done overseas is a trial balloon what will be imposed stateside.
And the billionaires will get richer, everyone else poorer. Why? Because billionaires write the tax code, ffs. Who is paying Robert Reich for this long campaign that goes back to March of this year as far as I can tell... Regular people don't have money to spend on Robert Reich. Billionaires do. Billionaires who gamed the system do. This is a manufactured defense of a Republican tax bill that is 100%.
Truly, I never knew so many Democrats were huge fans of the tax policies of President Donald J. Trump until Moore. Congratulations Robert Reich for being so MAGA.
But please, it does me no good if I don't respect your position. I do. @@Aaron-ng3ef Also, taxation without consent is theft.
We don’t have the manpower to audit them. The whole system needs to be replaced with something easy to audit. Every time we change the tax laws the lawyers rework things in favor of the new laws. We must have a new system, no more insanity.
Well, then, work to promote a flat tax. Our current communist progressive or graduated tax system should never have been made law in the first place. Before I retired, fully 1/3 of my wages went to Federal, State and City income tax, Socialist Security tax, Medicare and Medicaid. Imagine how much nicer thing would have been if I was allowed to KEEP THE MONEY I MADE. NO ONE should have a right to force me to pay taxes.
AI should be used for auditing the super wealthy. Citizens United destroyed this country and needs to be abolished!
Simplifying the tax code and adding expiration dates to all breaks and deductions would go a long way at reducing the power and demand for specialists of the arcane arts of avoiding payments.
Every right winger I’ve ever known wanted a flat tax, so it sounds like a terrible idea.
@@jw77019 Right bc Flat Tax == lower taxes for wealthy
Why does a billionaire need even more money ? I don’t understand the incentive for having multiple billions 🤔
It's a competition among other billionaires, like a high score board on a video game in an arcade. Kids use their money to buy action figures and bash them together to act out their fantasies with; billionaires buy governments.
The first prerequisite for becoming a billionaire is that you have to be a psychopath. I hope that explains it.
It must be some sort of illness
It's like this...NONE OF YOUR DAMN BUSINESS. Can't you guys stop bitching, and do things to improve your lives? Now, the next is not aimed at you, BMinus0593...but how much of a person's wages are wasted on things like beer, smokes, lottery tickets, casino trips (where you seldom come out ahead)?
What, you've never heard of greed before? 🤔😉
What we need to do is null and void Orangesama’s appointments. Twice impeached presidents don’t get to make lifetime appointments.
Impeached on bullshit, bunky. Don't forget old Slick Willie was impeached.
Lol I love your comment but who exactly is orangesama?
@@trisageonamoux9100 Orangesama bin Chaos. Orange Jesus. Citrus Caligula. Mango Mussolini. Are we clear?
@@trisageonamoux9100How do you not know your future God Emperor Trump?!
@@trisageonamoux9100 Why, that "eeeevil" Bad Orange Man Trump. I love reading leftist verbal diarrhea about Trump being a dictator, when we have one in the White House.
I just retired last year. Since then, my wife and I have been fortunate to be able to travel out west twice and to the Smokies once. We’ve driven about 16,000 miles total so far! We camp and hike a lot. We’ve also seen first hand in many states (red and blue) how extreme the wealth gap has become. It’s shocking. I am thankful for Robert Reich providing a clear and long-standing voice of reason on this topic! A wealth tax makes sense - having SCOTUS JUSTICES who are bought off by the wealthy does not!
A government OF the corporation, BY the corporation and FOR the corporation is NOT what the founders had in mind!
Thank you for keeping us informed, it's important.
Done!!! We need a wealth tax.
On your house, your car. and your bank account?
@@captainjimolchs
Switzerland for example has a wealth tax. No wealth tax for net wealth of less than (converted) 100'000 USD.
Depending on place of residence (canton, district, commune) that tax for 1 million can be between 1'100 and 6'500 per year.
Half of the wealth tax is paid by the wealthiest 1% of the population.
France also has a wealth tax. Germany "suspended" the wealth tax in 1977 despite constitutional requirement.
Isn't funny how something so far reaching and important as this decision never makes it on to mainstream media...Oh wait rich people own the media.
I believe that every case before the Supreme court needs have full discloser on main stream media and all other forms of social media so that the people know what the justices have before them. The people want to know everythng that ultimately affect them and their lives. There needs to be real changes made so there is a code of ethics for all justices and politicians. Big money needs to be taken out of the system because nothing is working to improve the lives of the people.
maybe,just maybe we stop blaming the homeless and get them housed. the staggering number of homeless, insane equity growth and horrific rents only reflect runaway greed. its not ok to keep people from having shelter.
If you are not in the financial market space right now, you are making a huge mistake. I understand that it could be due to ignorance,but if you want to make your money work for you...prevent inflation
I'm really confused, especially in market analysis,how are people using trading with them?
Jane Roy is the woman I've been trading my coins with for the past few months I started with her last year
You don't have to be shocked, Mrs Jane Roy has helped so many newbies become millionaires through crypto trading
Yes I am a living testimony of Jane Roy. Jane has changed my financial status for the best. All thanks to my aunty who introduced me to her last year
I have also experienced her great work, she’s good in trading
I have to wonder if anyone close to Sandra Day O'Connor knows what she was thinking about the state of the SCOTUS before she died? I would love to know what she thought should be done to keep the Justices accountable, other than demanding that they recuse themselves from this case like you are bringing to our attention?
Just leaving a comment for the algorithm. Thank you for your continued service to this country, sir!
Justice Thomas: "I asked myself if I had a conflict of interest, and I told myself no, I do not have a conflict."
If a wealth tax is unconstitutional, how are property taxes constitutional?
That would be their next step. But the constitution itself grants the congress to levy any type of tax the congress dreams up. Like any other law, all it requires is the majority of both houses and a potus signature. By the way, that whole "majority of both houses" thing is actual language in the constitution. It says "all votes shall be by majority" which to me means the filibuster is unconstitutional. Under the filibuster the minority always wins the vote.
Property taxes are on unconstitutional but the people have bought into the lies that we need more taxes.
Some property taxes are constitutional because federal government restrictions that the constitution levies do not apply to states.
For the reasons you stated, there is NO federal property tax.
Of the rich, by the rich and for the rich. Best government money can buy.
It is this love of money that is the root of all evil. And which exposes the evil doers.
Normalize cooperatives and strong radical unions from the bottom up.
Bust unions.
@@johntiggleman4686 you are propagandized to continue the decline of the middle class. Why do you think you could work a factory job and take care of a family? Even if you were a non union worker, union pay and benefits helped you. In 1980, about 63% of workers were in the middle class. Now it’s about 42%. The middle class is shrinking because of the decline in union jobs and the myth of trickle down economics. In the 60’s, the wealthy paid 70% income tax, unions were strong, and the minimum wage was a living wage. Most jobs paid for healthcare and offered pensions. Where are the pensions today? My kids never had one. We did, but my husband was a union worker. We benefitted from that. Too many elderly today don’t have pensions either. But CEO’s have increased the difference between their pay and the worker’s pay from 8 times to 350 times. Republicans love people like you. You are easy to fool and then vote against your best interests and your children’s and grandchildren’s best interests. Then you vote to give the wealthiest among us tax breaks that create deficits and put what used to be middle class workers on Medicaid and SNAP. How is it that you don’t see that as corporate welfare? We, the taxpayers, are subsidizing the pay and benefits of their non union workers. Apparently you love that. Those of us who are not sheep don’t.
So crooked union representatives can become more powerful and wealthy. Ignorant.
@@johntiggleman4686absolutely
The part that makes me shake my head the most:
How many people are defending this move....
People who have 0 chance of benefitting from these loopholes.
The US Constitution is not a loophole!
Reich is one of my favorite people. Awesome guy.
Reich is a propagandist. When you listen to an idiot you become an idiot.
Corruption is the goper middle name ! People keep voting for these crooks at their own expense . Knowledge is power, thanks for the information .
i think its congress not 'people who vote on supreme court. of course people elect the prez who nominates and thus a semblance of fair and just is met. perhaps an addendum to prevent outgoing prez getting to nominate in one 4 yr cycle and then anothet prez not being allowed to do the same? come on people arent stupid.
Yup, the sheep will vote for corrupt politicians like Joe biden because the corporate media told them to and then wonder why the government is failing the people.
And the Democrats are pure as the driven snow? Hahahahahahahahah *gasp* hahahahahahahaha. Let's be reasonable: ALL politicians are corrupt.
Yeah, they just haven't found out about Robert's yet. And the 3 noobs who clearly lied through their teeth cannot be clean. No way.
We should get Gorsuch drunk and see if he'll spill the beans.
Thanks Robert Reich
After serving in combat and leaving me disabled for life.....the more and more I see of America and Americans....the more I'm disgusted and disappointed
“Remember, write to your Congressman. Even if he can't read, write to him.” -Will Rogers, May 1935
Robert, have you ever delved into the 401K system? That's a much bigger factor when it comes in inequality than taxes. Look at the 2 balances that get the American with small finances in trouble:
1. Under $1K they can cash you out and send you a check. Most Americans do not roll this over to an IRA. They go and spend it. $900 in 1969 for a 22 year old can turn into $23K in March of 2009.
2. Balances under $5K can get sold into cash whether that's in a Safe Harbor IRA or rolled over to a rollover IRA.
There's an organization the Retirement Clearninghouse relied on that said these 2 rules cost $1.5 trillion in account balances.
Ok, that is the BIGGEST income loophole I've heard of. Those loans are income, but not. They never pay taxes, the money they already have never goes back into the system. Same thing happens with properties. They pay off the loans with interest earned from all those investments. Need to squash this tax loophole.
Until Alito and Thomas are gone the SCOTUS will do the bidding of the Robber Baron's. This is a reverse of 100 years ago. We are in another Gilded Age, and if not careful we will end up in another Depression (like 100 years ago). My father was a Depression era kid, I don't want to be like him in my late years of life.
AND ALL, AT OUR EXPENSE, OF COURSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If this passes does that mean it will be illegal to force homeowners to pay for "adjusted" value of their homes rather than the purchase value?
Put those judges on notice!
It is rotten enough when billionnaires buy politicians, but when judges are bought it is a sign of terminal decay in the legal system.
They won’t recuse! It sucks.
if they don't have to pay increases on the value of investments, then why do I have to claim dividends on the one stock that I have on my income tax return?🤔
They had lobbyists write special carve-outs which only affect the types of investments only they can invest in.
probly cuz that dime per stock is just too far over the top for ordinary folks.
Because when you receive a dividend payment you are realizing that wealth as income.
This is not the time to sit on the sidelines. Just repeating the critical truth. Thanks much Bob.
How can Americans have faith in a Supreme Court who should be setting an example of professionalism !
RS.
"We have the best government money can buy." Mark Twain
"I, and I alone can fix it".? Donald John Drumpf. And that's why the debt is worse than when they started. 😊
The debt came from the trillions in COVID stimulus $ that was mostly given to already obscenely wealthy corporations
@@mathias8627 That tax scam for the rich we got instead of the desperately needed infrastructure bill Diaper Don promised certainly didn't help.
@@mathias8627 A full $2 trillion of it went straight to the upper class in that massive tax giveaway that was supposed to boost our economy, but, like every time it was tried before, all it did was transfer middle class wealth to the billionaire class. That's the entire point of the GOP.
@@mathias8627yes because of the democrats that who threatened to hold up the peoples stimulus if Trump chose to decline the spending bill they wrote up.
@@mathias8627 6 trillion spent BEFORE covid
The justices better vote for the people on this, then the people should begin a financial REVOLUTION.
My only tweak to this would be to not call it a wealth tax, but instead a property tax. Most American's don't like the phrase wealth tax, as most aspire to be wealthy and dislike feeling as if they're being penalized for that. We're already used to paying property tax for our houses and cars, this would just add investment holdings under the definition of property. Sometimes the semantics matters. Thanks Dr. Reich for all you do to educate us!
The US Constitution Article 1 Section 8
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Sixteenth Amendment
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, "from whatever source derived," without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
Both parts of the constitution seem pretty straightforward to me. Congress has the power to levy and collect taxes. It seems to me the 16th amendment came about through legal jargon claiming that congress did not have the power to tax income, when article 1 clearly gives them the ability to "lay and collect taxes", the sixteenth amendment gives congress the power to tax income from whatever source derived. There is no stipulations as to whether it is investment income or income from overseas, income is income.
Those "originalists" have never even read the constitution, I swear.
You are missing an important taxing clause to the Constitution, which is the Direct Taxing clause in Article 1, section 2 of the Constitution. What is a direct tax? According to the Supreme Court in Pollock vs Farmes Loan and Trust Company in 1895, "Ordinarily, all taxes paid primarily by persons who can shift the burden upon someone else, or who are under no legal compulsion to pay them, are considered indirect taxes; but a tax upon property holders in respect of their estates, whether real or personal, or of the income yielded by such estates, and the payment of which cannot be avoided, are direct taxes."
So a tax on real property, such as your land or house, is a direct tax. Also, a tax on your personal property, such as your compensation for your labor, i.e. Income, is ALSO a direct tax.
In 1894, Congress did attempt to tax the income of all Americans making over $4,000 a year. This tax was tested and brought before the Supreme Court in Pollock vs Farmers Loan and Trust. The Supreme Court ruled that this tax was UNCONSTITUTIONAL because it was a Direct tax that was not Apportioned to the States as required by Article 1, section 2 of the Constitution. Congress was surely disappointed and tried to work around the Pollock ruling by drafting the 16th Amendment. The original draft of the Amendment included the word "Direct Tax." The final draft of the 16th Amendment did not include the word direct tax. If the final draft of the 16th Amendment did include the word Direct Tax, it would have clearly been ruled Unconstitutional. You cannot have the Constitution conflicting with itself.
The 16th Amendment refers to a tax that does not require apportionment. Well, the Direct taxing clause has never been repealed, so Direct taxes still must be apportioned. Therefore, since the 16th Amendment refers to a tax that does NOT require apportionment, the tax is referring to an indirect tax. But Congress already had the power to lay indirect taxes in the form of "duties, imposts, and excises" per Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution. Imposts and duties are taxes on imports and the shipping of imports. Excise taxes are, according the Supreme Court in Flint vs Stone Tracy, taxes on commodities. Examples of excise taxes are the taxes on gasoline, alcohol, tobacco, firearms, electricity, phones, etc. Your income, or your compensation for your labor, is NOT an excise tax. So the 16th Amendment is referring to an indirect tax, which has NOTHING to do with taxing your compensation, and a Congress ALREADY had the power to lay indirect taxes per Article 1, section 8.
The 16th Amendment was Constitutional window dressing and may as well never have been written! That is why the Supreme Court ruled in Brushaber vs Union Pacific Railroad that the 16th Amendment was Constitutional because it declared the tax to be an indirect excise tax, not a direct tax. And in 1916, the Supreme Court ruled in Stanton vs Baltic Mining that the 16th Amendment provided NO NEW TAXING POWER!
If Congress didn't have the power to tax your personal income BEFORE the 16th Amendment, which they obviously didn't because Congress tried and failed already in 1894 which the Supreme Court denied as Unconstitutional in 1895, then Congress surely doesn't have the power to tax your income AFTER the 16th Amendment, because the 16th Amendment did not give Congress any new taxing power!
The Supreme Court in this Moore vs US case should absolutely rule in favor of the Moores. If Congress is allowed to force Americans to pay a tax before they even receive any income, then there really are no limits on Congress's taxing power, and we might as well not have a Constitution anymore since its not be used.
Robert, can anything be done about the "investment" scams that plague this channel? The ones where a bot posts a comment about investing and the other bots respond, promoting some "expert" who gives unbelievable returns. Sometimes they use the name of a real person, but give false contact information for them. I call out these scammers when they appear AND report them to CZcams, but they keep coming back. Sometimes CZcams doesn't even do anything. 😡😡
Report them as ,"Unwanted commercial content or spam". I have a hunch that You Tube will catch those reports and ban those accounts very quickly, because they don't generate any ad $ for themselves on those accounts.
@@kellykat8057that's exactly what I do, every time. Sometimes the bots delete their own comments, if you catch them early enough. If it's a long-running thread that's been up for a while, CZcams usually just leaves it there. Maybe it'll take more people reporting them to get CZcams to act.
Meanwhile as a small business owner I'm getting raked over the coals.
And of course the Supreme Court will vote against the tax.
Tax the rich!!!!!!
Is Clarence Thomas still an employee of Harlan Crow and Is Samuel Alito still a fishing guide for Leonard Leo
The Extreme Court is seriously compromised. Their decisions are based on personal preference, not the constitution, the law or precedent. Of course the personal preference of their benefactors.
Increases in stock portfolios should be considered as taxable income under the law.
hay Robert Whats your opinion on Project 2025 Do A Video About That Please
Don't we all know it's depraved and vile??!
@@andreah6379oh yeah is so vile to oppose the corrupt government and their new world order. The sheep are unbelievable.
Democrats need to expand the Supreme Court and appoint justices that actually work for the people and not on expanding their own personal wealth. Although I am not surprised conservative justices accept gifts from billionaire donors, it is still a disgrace and unworthy of a party that included people like Lincoln. The Republican party is the total opposite of what it was back then
It only took 40 years before the GOP sold out to Wall Street (1890s). By 1965 they were the party of rich white people.
@@TheRatsintheWallsthe democrats can't afford to lose any more judges 😂.
@@yourdaddy-mq4km Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch who both got bribed with expensive gifts, vacations, and a vacation property, are both Republicans. I know conservatives are confused because Clerance Thomas is black and they probably feel he should be a democrat, but he is in fact a republican. So how would the democrats lose more judges if those two republican traitors were removed? None of the democratic justices betrayed their oath for money, or do you have any sources claiming otherwise?
@@TheRatsintheWalls You do know that republicans don't convict criminals as long as they are fellow republicans. How does an impeachment work without republicans if they fear they will lose the conservative majority in the Supreme Court?
Justices with conflicts of interest on either side needs to recuse themselves. These extremes are destroying the American Dream and that of any other nation in the democratically inclined world.
This is just sickening. I mean how much better can these guys eat?
In 1780 life expectancy was 38 years old. Any "Originalist" would insist on mandatory retirement for all Federal appointees no later than the age of 40.
What "originalist" really means is "came up with something original to get around what the constitution actually says"
It's so funny that Bobby talks about wealthy Republican donors he says absolutely no fear about the wealthy Democratic donors, which just so that everyone knows is not on your side either.
Your whataboutism is what's funny. Robert has spoken about Democratic donors, in fact all donors, especially with regard to Congress, but in the case of SCOTUS, there has not been this "bribery" amongst democratic appointed justices as there has been with the Republican appointed ones, like Thomas & Alito.
If they had any integrity, personal or professional, they would recuse themselves.
Anyway, why are you passively defending these Republicans? They don't care about you. Unless you are a mega donor too? Everyone should be paying their fair share of taxes in this country for the services we all use, and the wealthy get away with paying nothing while getting corporate welfare & tax breaks (pushed for & passed by Republicans).
If you have great wealth, you should be paying more in taxes, not paying zero taxes, regardless of the source of the money. They'll still be wealthy afterwards.
I'm no fan of the rich but wealthy dem donors haven't stripped over half of the population of a right to be sovereign over their own body and never will so your bothsidering is not going to work here.
"he says absolutely no fear about the wealthy Democratic donors"
Are you trying to imply that Reich is saying only the wealthy GOP donors should be subject to a wealth tax? I'm no fan of Warren Buffet, but he is at the very least willing to pay the taxes he's required to pay and wants his class to be required to pay more. That cannot be said of *any* GOP donor. GOP donors bribed the Court to write that new law Citizens United even tho the constitution says laws are to be written in the congress and signed by a potus not to be dictates handed down from on high by unelected politicians cosplaying justice with their silly robes.
Term limits for public officials
We all know they will definitely rule in favor of the rich regardless of what anyone does.
Has a judge ever been sued for conflict of interest?
Carried interest and other financial gifts to the wealthy should be changed. When is enough enough? Why is enough too little for rich people?
Trump basically closed the carried interest loophole by extending the amount of time before it can be utilized so it can't be taken advantage of.
I won't be holding my breath for any real progress
I mean, if they want to pretend that their unrealized gains aren't income until they're cashed out, then fine. From now on, they can't calculate their net worth using the unrealized value of their stocks, they can't borrow money against the value of their stock/it can't be used for collateral or creditworthiness calculations, etc etc etc.
Make it absolutely worthless for them to have the stocks if they're not going to cash them out.
That's already a thing. You can't get a loan at the bank off the value of stocks.
Time to get a sales tax on stocks each time they are sold
These donations should be made public
Thank you Robert.
We can discuss this in the trenches next year.
Laws are meaningless with this court.
When has a conflict of interest ever factored into SC decisions?
I like it when he says "contact your representative".
We don't have a representative form of government.
It's a monetized form of government.
It will never change.
Tax unimproved land too. All of it, except for land of environmental value.
So if a wealth tax is illegal. Why not just end unrealized capital capital gains? Make stock gains be realized every year.
Redefine all money that comes into your possession and control as income. Reclassify all the protectionist “financial instruments” then tax them fairly.
This man speaks so much truth.
Why are the judges in charge of refusing themselves? Shouldn't there be a separate unbiased entity that makes that decision?
Alito & Thomas MUST be subpoenaed
Wealthy became wealthier during pandemic
Love the cake. ❤❤ "Cake a la Supremo".
Yes, that is a big tax loophole that needs to be closed!😮
Article 9 of the Constitution clearly says any tax enacted by the Congress on the States must apply to all the citizens therein. Thus " wealth taxes " are already unconstitutional.
Bullshit. Americans who live and work overseas still have to pay income taxes.
I like these videos which cater to the deaf also. ❤👍Congress must do their job for the regular citizens or vote them out.
Thank you!