Elon Musk explaining why “billionaires should not be taxed”

[Bob Seeker]

https://youtube.com/shorts/2CvtZoTTXeE?feature=share
 

very short clip, couldn’t embed it.

 

Edited January 1, 2022 by Bob Seeker

[Tim R]

Wether it's money for personal expenditure or not makes no difference whatsoever, lol.

And yes, Jeff Bezos has recently demonstrated very well how it can be used for personal expenditure and building penis shaped rockets to fly into space for absolutely no good f*cking reason.

Not to mention that poor people and the middle class get the shit taxed out of them, and that is also "capital allocation". 

His argument that the government wastes money doesn't only apply to billionaires, it also applies to the lower and middle class, but of course he skews it into making it look like it's worse to waste a billionaire's money than the money from the lower and middle class...

Actually it's even worse to waste Joe Schmoe's money because it is so much less but in relative terms, so much more for Joe Schmoe.

It's so pathetic how billionaires whine about getting taxed, it's the most insane thing.

[vizual]

Yeah, this was a stupid argument from Elon. He's basically saying the government shouldn't be given any money, because the government sucks. Even though he may be right, the alternative of total anarchy is worse.

[Bob Seeker]

He really has that sort of logic that lacks the human element of sense of fairness, equality and care, which could be described as “Psychopathic”. 
and it will refute any complaint against it using a sort of Darwinian logic.

I think in the end, the society tends to have the last word.

yet so many people look at him like he is a god- cuz society’s sense making still sucks.

Edited January 1, 2022 by Bob Seeker

[PurpleTree]

i wonder if things continue this way if trillionaires will have their own armies and states in a few decades

[Scholar]

To be clear, his argument is that he will be able to allocate the money in a more efficient and socially benefitial way than the government because he already established his ability to create jobs and so forth for the people by creating a large business.

 

It is basically a dictator mindset, that he will use power in a more efficient way than a government elected by the people.

[Leo Gura]

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary wealth depends on his not understanding it." -- Upton Sinclair

Here's why billionaires should be taxed more: Because a society with huge wealth inequality becomes fundamentally undemocratic, unhealthy, and eats itself alive

Billionaires should be taxed more for the same reason cancer cells should be checked by the immune system.

A billionaire saying to tax him less is like a cancer cell saying, "Control my reproduction less, I will do great things."

[Consept]

You guys should watch succession if you haven't already. Watching it you get the sense that billionaires today are basically what Kings were previously, instead of a kingdom they have a corporation. Unlike Kings they don't have ultimate rule  the government prevents it but even that line can be pushed. At the moment the government is the only thing protecting us from the United States of Elon. 

[Raptorsin7]

@Scholar What do you think about what he said?

[captainamerica]

Elon Musk did not say that "Billionaires should not be taxed". The title of the video is misleading. 

You can watch the whole interview by WSJ on YT.  

In the past, he has said that his taxes are 53 percent, and this year it would be about 60 percent. The point was that the "progressive" ideas are not only fairy tales and unrealistic but have a cost to people as a whole and the fundamentals regarding that need to be understood well. In this fight only these politicians win in long term, even the people they claim to stand for will only lose, not gain. 

And Wealth Inequality in the US is because of reckless money printing, the need for sound economic policy cannot be replaced by taxation. That's foolishness. 

Edited January 2, 2022 by captainamerica

[captainamerica]

7 hours ago, Consept said:

You guys should watch succession if you haven't already

[Roy]

9 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

A billionaire saying to tax him less is like a cancer cell saying, "Control my reproduction less, I will do great things."

Idk why I immediately read the quoted part in Trump's voice and not my own and burst out laughing 

[captainamerica]

36 minutes ago, captainamerica said:

Elon Musk did not say that "Billionaires should not be taxed". The title of the video is misleading. 

You can watch the whole interview by WSJ on YT.  

In the past, he has said that his taxes are 53 percent, and next year it would be about 60 percent. The point was that the "progressive" ideas are not only fairy tales and unrealistic but have a cost to people as a whole and the fundamentals regarding that need to be understood well. In this fight only the politicians win in long term, even the people they claim to stand for will only lose, not gain. 

And Wealth Inequality in the US is because of reckless money printing, the need for sound economic policy cannot be replaced by taxation. That's foolishness. 

For starters on understanding the Wealth Inequality in the US you may see this:

 

[Raptorsin7]

His argument is that he would spend the money in a more productive and efficient manner than how the government would spend it.

You can't just equate Elon Musk and the spoiled children of billionare families and say they are both billionaires so lets tax the shit out of them.

As a society you want more money in the hands of people/groups who spend efficiently and make progress. 

It's also also a strawman to say he doesn't want billionares taxed. In the video he is not saying he should pay 0 taxes.

Edited January 2, 2022 by Raptorsin7

[captainamerica]

46 minutes ago, Raptorsin7 said:

His argument is that he would spend the money in a more productive and efficient manner than how the government would spend it.

You can't just equate Elon Musk and the spoiled children of billionare families and say they are both billionaires so lets tax the shit out of them.

As a society you want more money in the hands of people/groups who spend efficiently and make progress. 

It's also also a strawman to say he doesn't want billionares taxed. In the video he is not saying he should pay 0 taxes.

It is also a strawman to say that it makes no difference if the money is a personal expenditure or not. 

It is also a strawman to say Bezo's company is a personal expenditure when it created 100 million dollars in revenue in the first year alone by serving its customers and when this industry will create a new set of trillions of dollars for all of us. But now good luck explaining to them who don't really understand how trillions of dollars are created for all because self-proclaimed progressives have straw manned wealth creation into a zero-sum game.

It is also a strawman to say that Billionaires with a combined net worth 4 trillion dollars can be taxed 100 percent and the financial problems of all the people will be solved when in reality 4 trillion dollars is a trifle amount for the US govt which it spends in just 1 year. I saw another progressive "economist" in the USA who counted all the Billioniers in the world to make calculations in order to inflate the numbers, even then the calculations failed to give a meaningful result for the people. 

It is also a strawman .... x100. 

But good luck explaining that to the pawns of self-proclaimed progressive politicians and their propagandists.

This is not the first time progressives have manipulated their way and straw manned the other side of the reasoning. Recently I learned how through decades it was wisdom to control immigration to the US for the sake of Workers who are making minimum wage as it affects them negatively.The likes of Barack Obama agreed with this view. Now, progressives with their propaganda straw manned that into "this idea is by white supremacists, at least the group of right-wing if not far-right, who hate you, hate progress, etc.  ". You talk to a person of far-left about it they perceive you as a white supremacist or "just a conservative". This is just one occasion, it has become a recurring theme for the progressives to just strawman the other side's reasoning and fulfill their own agenda. They don't get if taxes are increased without fixing the fundamentals how it will backfire so much for the middle class and the workers. They would be the ones paying most of the costs, not Billionaires as they are strawmanning again. There are proper and realistic frameworks for tax increases that the Progressive voters ignore because of pure sentimental ad nauseam brainwashing.

Edited January 2, 2022 by captainamerica

[captainamerica]

24 minutes ago, captainamerica said:

It is also a strawman to say that Billionaires with a combined net worth 4 trillion dollars can be taxed 100 percent and the financial problems of all the people will be solved when in reality 4 trillion dollars is a trifle amount for the US govt which it spends in just 1 year. I saw another progressive "economist" in the USA who counted all the Billioniers in the world to make calculations in order to inflate the numbers, even then the calculations failed to give a meaningful result for the people. 

 

In the year 2021 alone the govt. spent 6.8 Trillion dollars.

https://datalab.usaspending.gov/americas-finance-guide/spending/#:~:text=In Fiscal Year 2021%2C federal,that year (%2422.39 trillion).

In their selfishness to survive, they don't get that with their narrative the middle-class and the workers will be hurt the most. Tell that to so-called progressives and see the different creative ways they will strawman this. 

Edited January 2, 2022 by captainamerica

[Eph75]

He's just pointing towards there being a difference in capital use efficiency between corporations and government where capitalists or corporations "that have proven great responsibility [towards the bettering of the world]" are better off using the capital that otherwise would be taken by the government, and instead reinvest towards meeting the desired outcomes connected to that envisioned better world. 

This makes sense. 

Are there many corporate leaders that are so future world benefits focused as Elon Musk so that it would be wise to exempt all corporations from that reinvesting possibility?

Probably not.

The administration would be tedious and risk of corruption or taking advantage of such a system would be enormous as its hughly profitable for anyone favored by it. 

The lack of practicality doesn't take away from what he is saying though.

Capital in the hands of someone like Elon Musk [seems to be] is likely to be reinvested time and again towards pioneering making a better world for all, while government is more preoccupied with maintaining the world and keeping to from falling apart, survival. And for each self-sustained project raising more capital a new project could be born, accelerating the overall process of creating a better tomorrow.

[captainamerica]

19 minutes ago, Eph75 said:

He's just pointing towards there being a difference in capital use efficiency between corporations and government where capitalists or corporations "that have proven great responsibility [towards the bettering of the world]" are better off using the capital that otherwise would be taken by the government, and instead reinvest towards meeting the desired outcomes connected to that envisioned better world. 

This makes sense. 

Are there many corporate leaders that are so future world benefits focused as Elon Musk so that it would be wise to exempt all corporations from that reinvesting possibility?

Probably not.

The administration would be tedious and risk of corruption or taking advantage of such a system would be enormous as its hughly profitable for anyone favored by it. 

The lack of practicality doesn't take away from what he is saying though.

Capital in the hands of someone like Elon Musk [seems to be] is likely to be reinvested time and again towards pioneering making a better world for all, while government is more preoccupied with maintaining the world and keeping to from falling apart, survival. And for each self-sustained project raising more capital a new project could be born, accelerating the overall process of creating a better tomorrow.

There are many others like Elon Musk who are not popular with the general public. You would have to make an in-depth study to understand this. At least a majority of them have information publicly accessible.  

In fact, such people are a majority in the wealthier sections of society. If you are an insider you will find that majority of them are working in some or other positive and harmonious manner.

This is another strawman of the progressives to say all rich people are evil or they don't care or something along those lines. Some will consider me an "insider" on these trends. I can tell with confidence that in most industries people are not like this. The majority of the rich people are not like this.

Very few people know this but most of the evil and corrupted things people talk about are done by a small group of people on in Management Consultancy and Wall St.  Most people don't know a single thing about them, and they are not tech entrepreneurs or some other revolutionary in some other field. I am almost an insider on this trend and can confirm that majority of such people are millionaires not even Billionaires. And you know what practically all of these things are enabled by systemic loopholes and mismanagement. Not wealth. Banning Billionaires will create a minuscule difference in corruption for those who truly understand this. You would have to ban most millionaires too if go by such an unnuanced approach, but that will hurt people again. So there are two options now. You have to ban any wealth at all and hurt many people or make proper systemic changes. The latter seems much more reasonable. 

 

 

 

The real evil people are so smart you cannot even know their names even if you tried with the common approaches, let alone anything else about them. The information is not publicly accessbile. You would have to be in the field basically. Naive people here fighting with the public figures because of propaganda, I almost smile at times it is so naive. 

Edited January 2, 2022 by captainamerica

[Eph75]

Ah yes, my "probably not" is 100% assumption 

[Apparition of Jack]

1 hour ago, Eph75 said:

He's just pointing towards there being a difference in capital use efficiency between corporations and government where capitalists or corporations "that have proven great responsibility [towards the bettering of the world]" are better off using the capital that otherwise would be taken by the government, and instead reinvest towards meeting the desired outcomes connected to that envisioned better world. 

This makes sense. 

Are there many corporate leaders that are so future world benefits focused as Elon Musk so that it would be wise to exempt all corporations from that reinvesting possibility?

Probably not.

The administration would be tedious and risk of corruption or taking advantage of such a system would be enormous as its hughly profitable for anyone favored by it. 

The lack of practicality doesn't take away from what he is saying though.

Capital in the hands of someone like Elon Musk [seems to be] is likely to be reinvested time and again towards pioneering making a better world for all, while government is more preoccupied with maintaining the world and keeping to from falling apart, survival. And for each self-sustained project raising more capital a new project could be born, accelerating the overall process of creating a better tomorrow.

Lol