The Problem With Taxing The Rich

The myth of tax revenue and why taxing the rich is not the real solution to inequality #TaxTheRich
Check out my podcast 1Dime Radio (on all podcast platforms)

Taxes don't fund federal government spending and they don't solve the root causes of inequality

Timestamp:
0:00 Taxing The Rich as a Solution to Inequality?
1:43 Problems with Tax The Rich Narratives
4:28 Taxes Don't Fund Federal Spending
7:54 How Federal Government "Funds" Policies
10:45 Why Politicians Perpetuate the Myth
13:18 Why the "Taxpayer Money" Myth Backfires
15:34 Does Taxing The Rich Even Work?
16:21 Taxes Don't Change the Ownership
17:20 The Root Cause of Inequality
18:41 Real Solutions to Inequality

Sources and further learning:

-Debt: The First 5,000 Years by David Graeber

Short Articles:

Check out more 1Dime content:

About 1Dime (not One Dime):
1Dime is an educational channel dedicated to countering one-dimensional thought by analyzing socio-political issues through the lens of theory, history, culture, and political economy.

[Dimee]

Subscribing, clicking the bell, liking, and commenting also helps!

[jimmytimmy]

People are economically illeterate on purpose. The wealthy and politicians don't want people to know how it works.
It would be also cool if you could do a video on Corporation's "rights" as "people" and "free speech, " known as lobbying or legal bribery.

[clancywiggum]

There's a really important caveat here - the federal government does not mint or destroy currency, the Fed does (ie the Federal Reserve) - an entity that is operationally independent from the federal government. When you pay tax the IRS does collect and distribute that money, but the Fed can modify money supply to suit government needs such that money supply is entering or leaving the economy. In circumstances like the start of COVID with a rapidly contracting economy this is functionally equivalent because the Fed turns on the money printers to make line go up, but it's an important distinction because the Fed won't be willing to keep the money printers running to fund progressive policies. It *could*, but it won't.

[sugarshanea.m.]

Another excellent video. Hopefully mainstream discourse moves from 'tax the rich' to 'eat the rich'

[Gokanaru]

This is such a beautiful follow up to your previous video on the Deficit Myth, reinforces the ideas super effectively!

[themarxistproject]

"Pro-Austerity Deficit Donkeys"
Gonna use that a lot now

Thank you for making this video. The fetishization of money is an important ideological instrument that is used in a number of ways to reproduce the status quo, i.e. promoting politically-motivated taxation policies, obscuring the real structures and dynamics of the economy, etc.

[marcingolab]

Meanwhile, on youtube, other political commentators squeeze out 8+ hours of clickbait drama content from watching one 20 minute video they disagreed with. Thanks for actually contributing something, I recently finished reading David Graeber's Debt after you recommended it in the mmt video. It was easily the best non-fiction book I read in at least two years.

[stevemisewich]

So if you say taxing the rich isn’t needed to fund government programs, why are the rest of us getting taxed? Make it make sense.

[matthewlewis]

Lobbying are taxes the rich pay but that won't be spent in improving society

[OhhWelll]

Nothing will change until the public actually understands these concepts and we use the leverage we have against the people with too much power. I hope your videos catch mainstream attention soon because you explain complex topics in an easily digestable video and I believe you could actually make a difference. I've shown everyone I know these videos and I'll do everything I can to support you my guy.

[THEMithrandir]

Taxing the rich maybe makes sense when you look at inflation. Billionaires have so much money that they compete with the state for the limited resources, driving up the prices of everything, leading to inflation. If they taxed billionaires until they're millionaires, the gov has to print much less money to buy what they want, limiting the moneysupply and inflation. Does that make sense?

[tylerrice]

Holy hell! You really need at least 10x the amount of subscribers you have! Absolutely love your stuff & share it with friends/family all the time. Seriously underrated leftist content here

[shawnredbeard]

Your content is always so high quality and well explained. That's why I just became a supporter on patreon. Everyone needs to be hearing this.

[WhichDoctor]

These two videos have revolutionized my understanding of how our economies work. Like you said in your previous one, I knew there was something not right about the way politicians always talk about "austerity" and "living within our means" while happily spending billions on wars or bailing out banks and waving away the costs like it's too trivial to worry about. I kind of half got it after your first one, but after watching this and then going back to watch your first one again I actually understand! It's all about resources. Money is just an imprecise way to manage the movement of those resources around the economy. Inflation is all about running out of materials and labor in the economy, not the total amount of money created. And wealth is about who has control over the resources, not just who has what amounts of money.

[the_rubbish_bin]

I really wish the Govt would de-commodify real estate. The cost of shelter is getting way out of hand...

[JohannBBravo]

i like the idea that 'taxing the rich' should be called a moral issue more then a funding necessity.. very important message in my opinion!

[henriquecarvalho]

Wow, I guess I had the econominic comprehension of a rock, that was enlightening

[xewzdgk]

As a banker over the last 12 years, I appreciate your comments on fiat currency and it's role within banks, though I feel it is a bit oversimplified. This seems to be because of your reference to your other video dealing with deficient spending that would address the demand side manipulation.

Your supply side opinions really tackle what would create sustainable changes in the market and make for a new layer of social distribution of wealth and resources. Caps on ownership I think especially make for a good agruement that keeps the wealthy from playing 'Monopoly' with resources people need in their everyday life. I agree that labour should have quality access to the resources we need to sustain maximum productivity (health, housing, education, etc).

I would argue somewhat against the case of no landlords in general, as I feel lease contracts can have their own benefit in the market. At times, labour would benefit from the Right of Use Asset contracted within a lease to commit the minimum amount of expenditure required in limited timeframes of their efforts in a geography. I think this is especially true in CRE leases, and in nomadic needs for seasonal or temporary labor as we see in tourism or student occupations. With regards to regular long term housing, I do see your point entirely.

Thanks for the video!

[thatblerdoverthereb]

I think of "tax the rich", as if someone was saying it 200 years ago. Sure, let's use their money for progressive causes and social safety nets. But it doesn't address how they built their wealth. Although the US is far from equitable, the slavery in the "third world" is generating a lot of value for the billionaires.

[kyguypi]

I'm afraid you're also oversimplifying it. By your explanation, there's no reason to tax at all. You do say taxes create demand for currency thereby raising the value, but leave that disconnected from the entire thing. It's connected, though. The government spends in dollars, and the value of Dollars is tied to taxes. The government has to tax in order to spend, because they want the dollars they spend to have value.