956
Bill Gates thinks the super-wealthy should pay more tax – and plenty of rich people agree
(www.businessinsider.com)
Old Billy bitch tits
this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2024
956 points (97.5% liked)
News
37007 readers
1764 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Hey don’t sully Bill Burr’s name like that!
Ah yes they'll be starting anytime now, soon.. Just wait...
I wonder if those billionaires that agree do so because they feel that the time are changing and people are done with getting ripped off.
Performative, these people could write checks directly to their countries tax collection agency any time they wanted. Old Bill there could send $500,000 a day for a hundred years and not miss it.
Yes I did the math, that would work out to only 18 Billion of his 121 Billion fortune!
load more comments
(1 replies)
Just so long as it doesn't reduce their personal wealth, they're all for 'paying more taxes' as long as they can use the loophole of 'I created a charity in order to avoid paying my fair share of taxes'.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Ive been hearing Mark to Market get tossed around as a viable means to tax non liquid wealth, what I think is gonna be the big fight is how to tax items of subjective valuations like art pieces, or how even to establish a standard procedure of assessment that can't be fudged for tax purposes
They shouldn't pay less taxes if they don't exist in the first place
I'm not very smart but I do sense a catch here. If my 'suspicion' (if you can call it that) is right, could someone kindly explain it to me?
load more comments
(6 replies)