Is Steve Bannon's agenda to raise taxes on the rich a good

>>136179448
I don't think raising taxes on any group of people is a good idea. If a country can't function on the massive amounts already being stolen from it's people, then it should not be a country.

>>136179448
Good, fuck rich people

>>136179448
Its not a good thing, but you need it to keep your country from going bankrupt.

It is a logical compromise that shows the WH is capable of listening to the other side while still making sure the startup small business owners are not punished for being a risk.

File: WHY YOU ARE POOR.jpg (194KB, 2166x1410px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 2166x1410px

>>136179448

>>136179448
No one who voted for Trump cared about it one way or the other.

File: Historical Income.jpg (297KB, 786x554px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 786x554px

>>136179448
<-- See also this

File: U.S._Federal_Income_Tax_Rates_2013.png (54KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 960x720px

>>136179448
marginal rate means nothing. the deductions from that determine what you pay and everyone gets deductions. also, every rich person who says the government takes 50% is a fucking liar.

>>136179448

its a good thing.

next step: deport all blacks.

>>136179448
>consensus
>/pol/

this isn't reddit you fag, if you want a hivemind to do your thinking for you then go back

it's a bad thing

t.1%

>>136179448
Steve bannon is trying to implement the plans of valiant Thor after the US intelligence agencies abandoned them.

He is a good guy.

>>136179448
You're going to need a fucking source until I take this thread seriously. Until then I'm saging.

>>136179448
More pointless than anything

Very few people have a real income of 5+ million
At that point it's in the form of a business to shield risk
Or its in the form of capital gains

But yeah overall I'm fine with the "rich" paying more in taxes be it Roth fewer writeoffs or whatever, as long as business taxes are reduced
I could see that helping the economy

I don't see a tax reduction directly for the rich as something that would spur the economy

>>136182153
Common knowledge, britbro.

>>136182153
>>136182153
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-26/bannon-is-said-to-call-for-44-tax-on-incomes-above-5-million
http://time.com/money/4876263/steve-bannon-44-percent-tax-rich/
https://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=https://www.forbes.com/sites/taxanalysts/2017/08/02/bannons-44-rate-would-undo-decades-of-republican-policy/&refURL=https://www.google.com/search?q=steve+bannon+tax+44%25&oq=steve+bannon+tax+44%25&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i61l2j69i60l3j69i61&sourceid=silk&ie=UTF-8&referrer=https://www.google.com/search?q=steve+bannon+tax+44%25&oq=steve+bannon+tax+44%25&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i61l2j69i60l3j69i61&sourceid=silk&ie=UTF-8
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-27/bannon-s-plan-to-tax-top-earners-is-said-to-be-considered-by-gop
http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/26/report-steve-bannon-wants-44-tax-rate-for-the-very-rich/
https://theintercept.com/2017/07/26/steve-bannon-pushing-for-44-percent-marginal-tax-rate-on-the-very-rich/
http://fortune.com/2017/07/31/steve-bannon-tax-cuts-paul-ryan/

>>136182673


>http://time com/money/4876263/steve-bannon-44-percent-tax-rich
https://archive.is/TgaLT
>https://forbes com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=https://forbes com/sites/taxanalysts/2017/08/02/bannons-44-rate-would-undo-decades-of-republican-policy/&refURL=https://google.com/search?q=steve+bannon+tax+44%25&oq=steve+bannon+tax+44%25&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i61l2j69i60l3j69i61&sourceid=silk&ie=UTF-8&referrer=https://google.com/search?q=steve+bannon+tax+44%25&oq=steve+bannon+tax+44%25&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i61l2j69i60l3j69i61&sourceid=silk&ie=UTF-8
https://archive.is/JrXxM

>>136180746
And women were opened up to the workforce

>>136180709
This, all of this, and nothing but this.

>>136182349
>Very few people have a real income of 5+ million
>At that point it's in the form of a business to shield risk
>Or its in the form of capital gains
exactly. it is a tactical political move to force the dems to either vote for tax reform or defend why they voted against raising taxes on the rich in the mid terms. so yes, it is a great idea. if the republicans don't do it they are fucktards.

>>136182853
this and it mostly affect kikes so good, they ruined our media, least they can do.

>>136179448
Tax actors, Hollywood producers, professional athletes, media personalities, and the rest of the cultural elite punitively. These people are guilty of pozzing America and they must pay for it.

I don't believe taxing anyone with higher taxes is good, but I frankly don't give a shit because it's only taxing the rich more, and most of the rich are either smug faggy neoliberal elitists or greedy soulless neocon kikes.

>>136179448
in order to cut taxes for the middle class raising childrne, they have to make up for it somewhere, so taxing the rich is the only option left. most of those faggots vote for democrats anyway. they should be taxing the hell out of the jews

>>136183626
>in order to cut taxes for the middle class raising childrne, they have to make up for it somewhere
the real solution is to move from taxing income to taxing assets. all assets should be taxed including stocks, bonds, land, intellectual property, etc. this tax rate could be very low (1-2%) and flat but would be naturally distributed across the population so that those with the most assets paid the most taxes. that and we should tax income from interest at 90%.