>oi bruv let me tell ya 'ow I went from eating crisp sandwiches and beans on toast on the estate wiv me mates to rakin it in, yeah?>unlike you melts, I was well good at maths, innit, so I got hired at big bank and went and made loads of dosh, yeah? >I was lucky innit, coz I was born a whizz kid, a genius, no way none of you melts working at Nando's could hack it, no way>so now I've come back to tell ya, we've gotta tax the rich, coz udderwise, man like you yeah -- melts, in short -- ain't going to be able to afford an 'ouse, yeah
>>25271884Pretty much, yeah.
British tag ‘yeah’ is so disgusting.
>>25271884Make fun of him all you want but he's right. Trickle down economics only works when the rich are forced to spend their money either on their own consumption (which provides employment to those in the service industry) or in productive investments (which provides employment to those in the industries invested in). What happens today is rich people buy useless assets like gold, bitcoin, stocks, property, art, as an investment, bidding up the prices of these assets. If we ruthlessly taxed investment in assets and only allowed investment in productive enterprises we would be an intergalactic species by now.
>>25272639>we would be an intergalactic species by nowand that wouldn't be a good thing
>>25272639It’s inflation causing non productive assets to increase in value, so jews once again.
>>25272699But it's a problem of distribution. Inflation by itself would cause asset prices to go up in nominal terms, sure, but if the money were evenly distributed asset prices would stay the same in real terms, since everything would go up at the same rate, roughly. However asset prices are far outpacing inflation, because the benefits of inflation go to the rich, who invest in assets. That's Gary's point.
>>25272726You can’t distribute properly without the free market pricing mechanism, otherwise it will go to the jews and shabbos goys. Taxation and redistribution is communism and kills millions (jews love this)
>>25272731I believe in the free market but the economy is an engine that needs to be tweaked and manipulated to produce the most efficient output of energy. The only thing that matters is production. Taxes and incentives are just a way of redirecting that energy towards production. It's an engineering problem, not a moral one. CEOs should be paid not in capital gains from stock prices but in untaxed income. Rather than stocks companies should be only sell bonds with repayment with interest when certain targets are met. This way you could only invest in a company when they need the money to actually do something, not like now when we have so much capital invested in the stock market that isn't actually used for productive ends.
>>25272745Humans are too dumb to organise an economy, regulation strangles. If you regulate and tax you centralise economic power in gov which makes a centralised target the jews can attack and infiltrate / harder with distributed market system where power is dispersed. At the moment the money printing is so obscene none of this matters, the ship is going down prepare for collapse and violence
>>25272751Well it shouldn't be a democratic process based on moralism it should be a team of autistic technocrats who only care about the engineering problem of making the engine of the economy more efficient. If humans invented the steam engine I'm pretty sure we have the ability to do this.Some of it won't even be that hard.Property tax for example is a great idea because it forces people to sell when they have multiple properties, or downsize if their property is too large, thus freeing up a more efficient allocation of space for the whole population.It gets harder when you get to things like gold. We want gold to be used only for commercial applications, not as an investment, because it's an utter waste of energy and capital. So an aggressive capital gains tax on gold/bitcoin would be good. (Bitcoin, in fact, ought to be banned outright).Income tax ought to be completely abolished, since work is almost always productive, and the unproductive professions (like prostitutes) can just be banned on a case-by-case basis.Then we need a massive restructuring of the way companies are traded. The issue is outside of IPO and dilution stocks are a completely inefficient way for a company to raise money. When you buy Apple's stock you're not giving the company your money, you're buying it down the chain from a guy who bought Apple before, and he gets your money. So again you have this utterly useless asset that, yeah, can theoretically be used by Apple to raise money down the line by dilution, stock-based compensation, or borrowing against the stock, but this is very inefficient. What would be better is if companies only sold bonds when they needed to raise capital.Compensation for entrepreneurs should take the form of untaxed income. Rather than getting rich from stocks, Zuckerberg should pay himself millions or billions per year out of the company's profits, not $1 per year like he currently does. This would then be untaxed income.I'm just spitballing a few ideas here, obviously could use some refinement.
>>25272764I think people need to be able to own things and stock is a good way to do that, it lets the plebs have a share in the means of production and raises all boats. The problems begin with regulatory duckery from ideologues and (((bad actors))) who “try and help prevent injustices”
