Rep. Ocasio-Cortez Debunks Myths About A 70% Marginal Tax
Вставка
- Опубліковано 21 січ 2019
- Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wants to debunk misleading representations of her proposed 70% marginal tax rate.
Subscribe To "The Late Show" Channel HERE: bit.ly/ColbertUA-cam
For more content from "The Late Show with Stephen Colbert", click HERE: bit.ly/1AKISnR
Watch full episodes of "The Late Show" HERE: bit.ly/1Puei40
Like "The Late Show" on Facebook HERE: on. 1df139Y
Follow "The Late Show" on Twitter HERE: bit.ly/1dMzZzG
Follow "The Late Show" on Google+ HERE: bit.ly/1JlGgzw
Follow "The Late Show" on Instagram HERE: bit.ly/29wfREj
Follow "The Late Show" on Tumblr HERE: bit.ly/29DVvtR
Watch The Late Show with Stephen Colbert weeknights at 11:35 PM ET/10:35 PM CT. Only on CBS.
Get the CBS app for iPhone & iPad! Click HERE:
Get new episodes of shows you love across devices the next day, stream live TV, and watch full seasons of CBS fan favorites anytime, anywhere with CBS All Access. Try it free! bit.ly/1OQA29B
---
The Late Show with Stephen Colbert is the premier late night talk show on CBS, airing at 11:35pm EST, streaming online via CBS All Access, and delivered to the International Space Station on a USB drive taped to a weather balloon. Every night, viewers can expect: Comedy, humor, funny moments, witty interviews, celebrities, famous people, movie stars, bits, humorous celebrities doing bits, funny celebs, big group photos of every star from Hollywood, even the reclusive ones, plus also jokes. - Розваги
Not only did Eisenhower have a 90% marginal tax rate, it was also the last time a republican balanced the national budget. He also famously spoke about how runaway military spending would destroy our nation from the inside by denying our people necessary services in lieu of contractor profits. We won't add $65 bill./yr for tuition but we'll add $80bill/yr. for military?
oggyreidmore Yah she’s a brilliant economist. Evidence of this in her strong interviews so far. Really? If you knew anything about economics you would say she’s a moron. 70% tax on over $10 million means I make $10 million in a year and I quit. Thats economics. People are lazy and don’t care, take away the large sums of money and people stop producing. This can be seen in every socialist country that inevitably ends up failing. Just because you put democratic in front of it means nothing..... see as evidence “democratic nazi” you are all fools!
@@Joshua-vf3bm That's microeconomics dipshit.
Okay. Then quit after making $10 million! Forgive me for not shedding a tear that you can't figure out how to budget your life with over $1000 per minute for one year. The only reason I don't cry is because someone else will gladly step in and take over your job for you and fall over themselves with euphoria to make 1/10th of what you made to do the same job - and the economy and production will continue to function just as it did before, but without your greedy ass! the good news is, you still will be okay. That $10 mill should last you 65 years, assuming you only live on 75 grand a year for the rest of your life (well above median income) - and that includes annual raises for inflation!
Okay, now put that into context. The 42% is their effective tax rate with a 91% marginal tax rate. Today they pay about 17% effective tax rate with a 39% marginal tax rate. They pay 60% less than what they did before (17 is 60% less than 42, 39 is about 60% less than 91).
Not only that, but corporate tax rates have gone from 33% of the total tax revenue down to 10%, while payroll taxes have gone from 11% to 33% of total revenue. In other words, the rich pay less and corporations shifted the tax burden to you. They keep the profits of your production and you get the losses.
High taxes force companies and the rich to reinvest their money into worker pay and business development in order to get tax deductions. If they have low taxes, it encourages them to cash out and keep the money for themselves. It also encourages them to cash out stocks and real estate holdings - which is why tax cuts are always followed by crashes and bailouts.
back in an era where, sure, you might disagree with the other party, but you could still have a rational discussion.
I love that she frames everything in terms of societal philosophy. What do we really want for our society? Important questions to ask and build policy around.
No you build policy around is it feasible. If you don't it's a fairy tale
Yash Patil the rich we speak of their intrinsic value to society and what they deserve. Speaking to who what wants based on what they make is a gross simplification and what society wants doesn’t change what works but society can work in many different ways. It isn’t a math problem, there isn’t only one answer and human nature isn’t immutable.
Yash Patil but by seeing socialism as a number you fail to see the shades of grey where it is always present in our society. The fire department, police, roads, and every other shared resource is socialism. It probably can’t be sustained but neither can capitalism or our current understanding of the nature of man. They are always shifting and we do the best we can with what we have knowing that it is never perfect and never enough.
Yash Patil it’s free for many because they don’t pay taxes. The homeless use emergency services and never pay taxes, among many other examples. Socialism is happening all the time.
Yash Patil they 5 options, they can go into debt and they can create more money. Your opinion that the schemes are worthless is merely your opinion. Many are comfortable spending the money on the military, another socialist concept because it promotes our shared national security. There is no perfect answer, but don’t act like you have it right and she is just deluded. She and many other Americans have different priorities and they want the governments spending and tax policy to reflect those priorities.
So, basically she just explained what tax brackets are. How is this not basic knowledge...?
Even college students arent required to take a basic economics class. So nobody is taught the basics, even college grads.
Also maybe because the right wing pundits think TAX=BAD and don't much care for any actual knowledge of taxes
Lol for real
Yah she’s a brilliant economist. Evidence of this in her strong interviews so far. Really? If you knew anything about economics you would say she’s a moron. 70% tax on over $10 million means I make $10 million in a year and I quit. Thats economics. People are lazy and don’t care, take away the large sums of money and people stop producing. This can be seen in every socialist country that inevitably ends up failing. Just because you put democratic in front of it means nothing..... see as evidence “democratic nazi” you are all fools!
@@Joshua-vf3bm, How many people are making over $10 million a year? I think even the majority of people making $10 million are making well over that amount of money.
If they corrupt her, I'm giving up on the earth.
Check out her Netflix deal she’s been bought sucker
She is bought since she is in this program... Stop being so naive
@@chrissantos5580 3 questions that I expect an honest and respectful answer to:
1 How was she bought by Netflix?
2 What political interest does Netflix have in this?
3 Why would you call a random person on the internet "sucker"?
Greetings from someone who doesn't even live in a country that's "socialist" and still doesn't consider most of what AOC's demanding as "extreme" but very normal, common sense almost :)
Have a nice day either answering, ignoring or ranting about my reply ✌️
@Yash Patil Dude, AOC and RaGa are very different. I can't speak about RaGa but AOC knows what she's talking about
She already is. Her ideology is corrupt
And Eisenhower had the funds to build the Interstate Highway System and lead the Space Race. Just saying'
yeah well we all know Eisenhower ... like and Nixon and ford were commies :P .. wai... what? lol
@@firefox5926 yeah yeah everyones a commie.
Time for your moring medication "Mr. Firefox".
@@humanrights7086 im just going to assume you didn't see the humor in the paradox that all the people i listed .. were vehement anti communist and yet all of them had higher marginal tax rates and that maybe high tax rates arent all that socialist if all these vehemently anti communist people were also for them... my point was that high taxes isn't socialistic .. its just common sense... or put another way .. its the price you pay for a civilized society .. and also you know ...you get what you pay for ...
p.s so as i was writing thing it struck me as being long and boring .. but at the same time i couldn't be arsed to find a better way to say it so i apologies for that .. what also while typing this i had i thought of starting again and writing something else .. so for you're enjoyment the following is what could have been
response one .. you do realize it is a joke right?
reponce two.. that's Mr. FirefoxIII .SR .Phd .MD .CID .MIA .CIA .BSS .BS .SSC .BSc .ADHD .BBC .GOVT .LMNOP .IM RUNNING OUT OF IDEAS . HELP . STOP. to you ya young whippersnapper :P
Well, we didn't "lead" in the space race, as Russia both launched the first satellite around the earth, and the first manned orbit around the moon. It was LBJ who oversaw the first moon landing.
wasn't it 91%. To pay for WWII and the interstate highway. To bring down the debt to GDP overtime. I believe it was well over 100% at the time.
The idea of how a 70% marginal tax rate works definitely gets inaccurately represented when covered by most media outlets.
Yeah the Fox coverage I saw was borderline "AOC WILL COME TO YOUR HOUSE AND STEAL EVERYTHING FROM UNDER YOUR MATTRESS!"
Hannity said he wont be able to take his family to eat out in a restaurant lol
yes, because they all have a stake in it. if megyn kelly who's getting fired is apparently getting a $30 million severance paycheck. These news anchors are making bread
Teni Salisu yes, the poor woman would only get to keep 6 million from everything above that first 10. And all earned from doing all that hard nothing.
Hosts of those media outlets are the ones earning that much......
I still remember when i first learned about marginal tax in economics in college and thought, "huh, this tool could actually stablise overall socioeconomic disparities and potentially solve poverty"
Then my brain went "cool story bro, but we need to cram whats in this whole book for exams tomorrow. Chop chop"
Lol this comment isn’t appreciated enough
Dude there are marginal tax rates in almost every country on earth including the US. What are you on about?
@@armingleiner5292 Obviously, Mohd is talking about raising the highest tax-rate - are you really this stupid, or are you just pretending?
Just checking. KKKaren...
Am I the only one who thinks that stopping the never ending wars might help with our economy and stuff like that in the long run???
Nope. Bernie, too.
@Yash Patil "SoCialisM DoEsN't WoRk"
What? Almost all countries in the world apply socialism but only with varying degrees, which includes the US. Also, if you think that way, don't get your pension, because pension is socialized. There are more things that are socialized, don't fucking get them also.
Also, no. MIC is very different from the Homefront. The Homefront enriched the people because almost all of the population was employed by them, while MIC just enriches the company and the people behind them.
@@joshuakevinserdan9331 well said👍
@Yash Patil socialism is working in differnet countries right now. Denmark are the most socialist country and guess which coutry has the happiest citizens... DENMARK!
This is why we always find a reason to go to war. They can't allow the economy to even out.
People forget the period that this country prospered the most was exactly when those marginal tax rates were that high.
Remember Bush tax cut? Remember the crash after?
Retardicans don't.
And higher. It was 90%+ at one point.
When it was at 90% few people actually paid that thanks to numerous loopholes.
Correlation and causation differs
Companies already use tax havens to pay very low effective tax. Do you think their owners/managers wont find a way to not pay tax? This includes expatriate
I think if you are making 10 million a year you are going to be okay....
The tax she's proposing would only affect 16000 people, out of 350 million. You're going to be more than okay...
@@alexmipego So basically her tax idea will hardly make enough money to do anything. LOL, what a dumb idea.
@@jimbrown341 If a tax cut of a few percent increased the deficit by trillions, imagine doubling that rate but as revenue. Make no mistake about the math, just 3 people have more money than the poorest 50% of the USA.
@@jimbrown341 when you consider how much more than 10 million the ultra rich make, it becomes a huge number. If someone's getting a salary of one billion, then the government would then get 70% of 990 million because they really don't need 990 million anyway.
@@jecr8623 But do you know what would happen, right? They would just push their money into tax haven countries or just simply leave the United States entirely/move their business to another country to have prosperity, which would leave our country in shambles. What happened when Trump become President? He lowered taxes for businesses and they all started to bring their money back into the United States in order to be taxed! lol, that was Apple, Microsoft, etc that were doing that. They simply said, "screw Obama's high tax rates for businesses, we will simply keep our money overseas until a new President lowers taxes". That's exactly what they did. These rich business owners know how to navigate the system. They are smarter than these dumb government officials. Ocasio Cortez is an idiot. Just listen to her speak about policy. She can't. If you ask her a specific question on how she would implement policy she has no idea how to answer it because she has no real plan. She's just a parrot who repeats what others are saying. She's not a free thinker.
“ wait your turn”? This is the why we NEED term limits
No one says "wait your turn" in Congress. They don't want to listen to a child who was elected because diversity.
@Jakonate so she represents it well because of her skin color? Wow I guess colored people are just as racist as everyone else. She must be good at understanding the colored people because shes colored too? Jesus christ, you people have introspective ability.
@Jakonate have you been paying attention? You seriously think she was picked up by the Justice Democrats to run because of her intellectual prowess and extensive economics experience? She was picked because she was brown person with a cunt that was really good at memorizing lines. No helping me? Please. The regressive movement needs the introspection.
@@dantheman669 How rude and awfully hateful of you to say that this intelligent, articulate woman was only elected because she is that and a person of color. Shame on you. She has worked behind Bernie Sanders, and she has a degree in economics. She was elected through a grassroots campaign without any corporate funding. She was elected because she is the heart and soul of her district, and she was and still is definitely capable for the job. Disgusting that you would diminish her accomplishments simply because you don’t like her policy. Have some respect. You may not like her politics but at least have some respect for a hard working woman who was the underdog in her election.
@@dantheman669 You're only mad BECAUSE she's a woman of color, so stfu and mind your own business.
Do you really believe a white man in a hispanic/black neighborhood would be a better fit? You're as delusional as your president.
A few decades ago the typical CEO was paid 4 or 5 times the average salary/wage of his company's employees. Today that factor is 50 or more. That is just one metric that illustrates the gross disparity of wealth that currently exists in America. And that disparity is the result of Republican "trickle down" policies that do nothing but make the rich richer while decimating the middle class. And without a large, thriving middle class, capitalism will collapse.
Firstly, owning a business is much more impressive than being an employee (most of the time). I think its sensible that someone who has worked hard for years creating recipes, trying to stand out, and putting sweat and blood into a company's success should be played way way way more than someone with no degree or education becoming a casheer. Also a lot of that money is given to the employees. That is how they are paid. Capitalism works because it makes it easier to start a business and start working. It also makes employees want to work harder, and be more competitive, because of how they're pay checks will differ. Differ as intellectual individuals.
Thats because the companies are now larger, larger than ever before
One can argue, perhaps that that means the company valued higher makes more and can thus give more to employees but for one thing, larger companies also means more employees at more levels, and also more tech (thanks to scientific advancements), so everyone only gets so much
Even if the CEO earns a ridiculous amount in comparison to the average employee, not only have they also done that amount of work (unless it was inherited, which again, most huge companies are not, ex : bezos, gates), but have also usually come up with evolutionary ideas and managed it with honed business acumen
And again
Capitalism is about the market
And the market is about profit
Messing with those rich people (usually deserving people)
Not a good idea
What incentive does that leave them? If ridiculous amounts of their income is taxed like that?
Why wouldn't they just move headquarters abroad?
That will take away jobs and be ultimately damaging to the middle class
Skibat 64 Agreed
@@SkiBat64 moochers,leaches and parasites will disagree with you.
This means nothing. What matters is weather or not there is still wealth mobility which you have not addressed with data or facts. You're the accuser, the burden is on you to prove your charge
She is just fantastic. A breath of fresh air in a stale Congress. She has an incredibly successful career ahead of her
She is the b.i.r.d in the air.
Agreed. I'm usually not agist, buuut... I think we all know what the real issue is with congress
@@angelic8632002 that's the same logic as "I am not racist, but..." Bernie Sanders is as old as many in Congress and he is also "fresh air." Don't be ageist, "little girl "
@joseph you understand, that she is for system like in Netherlands? So, you are against system what is one of the best in the world?
joseph I am currently studying Politics in the Netherlands after 19 years of living in the US. The Netherlands has many, many socialist policies that have done wonders. Universal health care, nearly-free education, etc... we need more of those socialist programs in the US (I believe that capitalism works, but socialist programs also work). How can you say you are “rational and normal” and then express your blatantly sexist feelings toward this person. At NO point, is she “screaming” or doing anything else than being extremely polite, charming, and level-headed about smart policy that would make America a better country, especially for its most vulnerable population.
I'm glad she cleared up the 70% marginal tax rate questions. A lot of media outlets are misrepresenting the tax as ALL income.
and they are morons trying to feed this fake news to the dumb Trumpsters, a few of them who may think Joseph Stalin is a brand of whiskey.
@@RCmack Not even Wodka? Shessh, damn are they dumb
@@Jalgorn Wodka! They may think vodka is wodka and therfore, they may feel Putin is a brand of wodka. The next time Putin visits the White House, he can have some wodka to drink along with his hamberders, LOLl!!!!
It doesnt matter if it's all income or not. Why should you take 70% because the person makes more than you think they should?
Of course they are
AOC 2024 (She'll be 35 by then)
no
you're soo funnyy LMAOOOO ROFFFLL LOLLLLL
"Being factually correct is not as important as being morally right" AOC 2020
she won’t be old enough to run sadly.
@@dechen3432 What do you mean? She was born in October 1989, which means she'll be 35 by October 2024, well before inauguration day. Is the math wrong?
Finally someone who is smart and in touch with reality of most of the people in the U.S.
Is this sarcasm... this HAS to be sarcasm.
You must not know many people.
Are you brain dead?
Alina Bano Youre kidding, right?
She's awesome and so not like drumpf! AOC for president!
In addition to providing" twitter classes", Alexandria should be teaching present Democrats how to be real Democrats. What a beautiful spokesperson she is for the party which desperately needs to regain its footing. She knows history, a rarity which is being eliminated from public school curriculums all over the country. It is only through those like Ocasio-Cortez that the country has a chance to regain ground lost as a result of inept, irresponsible, and just plain ignorant Republican leadership.
Amen
Yas Betty!
Just goes to prove that you can grow up in a place like the Bronx and still learn a thing or two. IF you pay attention!
I'm from New Zealand, AOC is just what you good folks of the USA need 👏🏼💓👏🏼
@Ucallit 71 don't be too harsh on yourself!
After you make 10 million dollars, each dollar after that may be taxed at 70% which is still less than the 90% rate it would have been taxed during "the good ole days" Republicans keep idealizing as the best time in American history (the 1950s-1970's) where we had tremendous economic growth and you could support a family of four on just one income and with booming infrastructure, etc. Republicans say they want to go back to this time, well, it's wasn't cheap and it wasn't free.
Thank you for putting that so well. :)
@FroggerM3 Funny thing is, it's just a lovely little argument.. but why then haven't employment increased since taxes were slashed? Why have wages stagnated while corporate profits have soared? You point at 70 year old history and ignore 30 year old history, and use a "what if" scenario to excuse a hard example of what's actually happened.
@FroggerM3 The thing is we need to start talking about it now. Not keep the current system and continue to wonder what could be. We know our current system DO NOT WORK so why continue the crap. People with the "what if it doesn't workout" attitude never progress.
ever hear of deductions?
@FroggerM3 So do nothing...
We need to protect her life at all costs
hefftatious, she might die from her own stupidity.
@@awesomet8388 what dont you like about her?
hefftatious, she is clueless when it comes to the economy and how the world works. I think she has the right intentions to try and better peoples lives, however..nothing in life is free. Her plans on paying for stuff will ruin this country and it will turn into a third world socialist nation if she had her way. America is great because of capitalism, not socialism. Socialism takes away all human ambition and free will and leaves nations ruined with death and poverty. Try and research her policies on conservative sites and not just left wing sites and you will have her nonsense explained a little better.
Marginal taxation= free stuff? Isnt that just the opposite of free?
Slayer 666 she graduated Suma Cum Laude from Boston university in economics! What do you know?
this is the first time ive ever been excited and enthusiastic about a politician
Don't get too excited...she'll be gone in 2020
Why? Everything she proposed so far has been totally unfeasible. Oh and the Amazon deal she tanked.
Honestly, at least Hillary knew how to Stfu and wait her turn. Wether or not her opinions were her own
Skibat 64 don't get me wrong I have *plenty* of issues with Hillary Clinton, but the sentence "know how to stfu" is kinda gross
i guess you were too young for naders presidential campaign, that was pretty cool.
It was actually funny the way Stephen asked the tax question. WHat's even funnier is that a 70% top marginal rate is still 23% LESS than the highest rate we've ever had, which was under Eisenhower. It's is worth noting because that was during a time of unprecedented economic expansion in the USA. Remember that when corporate shills try to tell you that increasing taxes on the wealthy will hurt the economy. The truth is exactly the opposite. Pushing more wealth DOWN the economic chain actually stimulates economic activity, while pushing wealth UP the chain stagnates economic activity. Concentrating wealth at the top will NEVER stimulate economic growth. Trickle down theory is the most sinister lie the right wing has ever sold to working class people.
Letting the rich hoard wealth only stagnates and kills the economy.
"Trickle down theory is the most sinister lie the right wing has ever sold to working class people." - this right here exactly. Thank you. What is confounding is that, years on with verifiable proof it does not work, people still buy into it and vote against their own interests. The right-wing propaganda machine that created Fox News, and all that came after abolishing the Fairness Doctrine, work to keep them ignorant. Let's not even talk about how they've tried to cripple and twist education in furtherance of the same goal.
True it seems paradoxical but actually only lvls up the plainfiled for better plublic endorsed economic expansion via taxes
@FarmerMiyagi
The wealthy and corporations have been hiding money in tax havens for decades, so why should anyone fear what is already happening? Legislators simply need to penalize those who engage in that shell game. It's not that difficult to track large amounts of money moving through the banking system, especially corporate profits, but most of our law makers are owned by the corporate interests they are supposed to be regulating. Hiding corporate profits is a problem because of the vast failure of American leadership to institute accountability. In any case, the USA is the most attractive market in the world and every corporation wants access to it. That's called leverage. The kind of ignorance and irrational fear you are harboring is why working class people, like yourself, vote against their own interests. You are wrong about everything.
@@dlg5485 What's the point of having a 91% marginal rate when there use to be more deductions and loopholes the wealthy used to avoid paying that high rate back in the day?
In The Netherlands we have a tax system like that. The more you make, the more taxes you pay. That money is spent on social security, health care and education.
sweinberger and my friends in the Netherlands aren’t scrambling to move here. I’m talking Ricoh executives.
And your popluation is like 10
What's the purpose of making more money if people feel entitled to steal it just because the person makes more than you think they should?
But you trust your government. Americans do not. That's the fundamental issue.
Nope. What this guy from the Netherlands is not telling you is that at the same time i you have many chances to avoid to pay the max taxation. So actually you nevet pay max taxation not as a private citizen nor as corporation. Many loopholes. This guys story from the netherlands is just fairy tales.
Oh, do interject a dumb joke when AOC is explaining something important.
Reaganomics really screwed us over. I hope we get back on track when it comes to marginal tax rates, among other investments in growing the middle class and creating healthier, vibrant communities.
@Anthony Nazaradeh it’s unsurprising this person wouldn’t know how considering Reagan reversed the awful economic policies of Carter. Reagan raise rates to curb inflation which lead to high rise in real median income per capita. It’s nice to use fancy words like OP to avoid the data that’s easy to find
@@umdfan87 Jog-on, Christine - muchas gracias, amiga, y ir con el Diablo...
@@richardpierpoint3006 need a tissue, Dick? 🤣
@@umdfan87 Need English lessons, Christine?
@@richardpierpoint3006 LOL Christine? Really? I can only imagine how pathetic your life is. Be better Dick
It's been 39 years since Reagan, we tried trickle down economics, what did we get? A small super rich, super greedy class and everyone else working harder for longer for less money.
Ok not going to lie that’s not the best example since our economy has gotten stronger and we’ve built our way to the definitive superpower. And please, please don’t bring up the 20’s through 50’s. The only reason America could afford Socialism was because everyone else got bombed to hell in the war and we were the only people with factories left.
@@Monk-Gaming The people who have generated that productivity aren't seeing their fair share of the benefits. That is the entirety of the problem. US GDP is currently high. Worker productivity is high. It is true that the US economy was strong in the post war period, but the US economy is likewise strong today and has been for decades. The United States is in as good a position to "afford socialism" as it ever has been.
Not only that it created a big bubble in the economy. Reagan wasn't perfect but with his economic plan it became a big gap between wealthy and poor. That doesn't mean alot since the poor didn't get poorer but stayed steadily and the rich got richer. Bill Clinton term is when everyone prospered ( poor got richer) because of his economic plan
striatic the problem is that the reason why the us economy is strong is because of their right winged economic policies
@Ruthlessnoodle it was amazing because the effects didn't take place until the end of his presidency and into the 90s you moron. Sounds like you're braindead. Since Bush 41, America's working class has been struggling
Fox has to lie about what she says because if they were honest, people would see how legit she is
To be fair, they are doing a terrible job at smearing her. One of their first big ones was when they talked about her "horrible" ideas, and then went on to actually list them. Medicare for all, free college, raising the minimum wage, etc. I think they had one guy recently that managed to say "who would vote for someone who promises good minimal wage jobs that pays 15 dollars an hour?" or something dumb like that. How about everyone who has a minimum wage job, or are unemployed?
Some of their viewers are too far gone and put party over policy, but far from all. If I didn't know better, I would have said Fox had progressives working behind the scenes. Fox is also making it harder for the establishment Dems to silence her.
The government should give everyone 50K dollars and would end poverty tomorrow !
@@mackplymale342 Thats a quick way to devalue the dollar and cause inflation.
@@mikeyap5082 Not likely you should review MMT
@@yutyuiiu yeah so that's government and printing money devalues money for us. Aka purchasing power. Look at what happened after ww1 Germany printed money and it was worthless. The same thing would happen here.
AOC points to the future, which is where we're going, and she has a sound moral compass to lead us there, politically speaking.
None of this matters, because according to AOC, "the world is going to end in, like, 12 years."
She needs to me move to Venezuela.
@@@hope_michaela Really? oh... that sucks... the last thing I need is for the world to end.
Sound moral compass, "takes other people's money for her own plans." Back to morality.
Yah she’s a brilliant economist. Evidence of this in her strong interviews so far. Really? If you knew anything about economics you would say she’s a moron. 70% tax on over $10 million means I make $10 million in a year and I quit. Thats economics. People are lazy and don’t care, take away the large sums of money and people stop producing. This can be seen in every socialist country that inevitably ends up failing. Just because you put democratic in front of it means nothing..... see as evidence “democratic nazi” you are all fools!
so sad that she had to very loudly point out that shes a *_democratic_* socialist because socialist on its own has such a negative connotation in this country, mostly among people who have no idea what socialism actually is
actually, democratic socialist is a thing
What's more frightening is that people think they understand socialism and still believe it's a good idea.
@@ronandacruz9588 nobody wants pure socialism, i dont see any commie partys being popular around anymore. Democratic socialism is where the goodies are.
@@Tobias_Schoenwald goodies? Like what? "equity"?
@@ashishvatsavai6982 please go read up on what democratic socialism is, i dont have time to explain it over and over again, all i can say is that socialism and democratic socialism are 2 completly different things
She's right. By the time you are earning $10,000,000 a year, your salary is just a way of keeping score. Every additional $1000 makes no difference to your life at all. But every extra $1000 to someone on minimum wage is like night and day.
No one earning more than $10,000,000 a year is suddenly going to stop working because the tax rate on dollars after $10,000,000 is higher. This has been proven by decades of economics. Inequality right now is as bad as in the 1920s. It's grotesque and it is wrecking the country.
Damn right man!
Look, most these people who earn this money have already said they would cap it... do you understand it? No. You don't. What that means is investment becomes crippled... job losses, businesses packing up and move and all kinds of restructuring... listen to those actually making the money instead of those looking at spending other people's money!
Again, until you actually earn that kind of money, in such a position to employ many, invest in communities and businesses alike... don't comment on it.
I see what you you are saying but the country Did prosper more than it ever did under similar progressive tax rates so how did that happen if what you say is true? They are spending most of our taxes on weapons.. @@JosephGibson
@@JosephGibson You're wrong on a couple of points. 1.) It would make more sense to invest your excess money rather than hide it since as an investment it won't count as income and not subject to the higher tax. 2.) the tax is on individuals not corporations or businesses and clearly you have no clue as to what it would take to pack up a business and relocate or even just restructure. such decisions take years to develop and implement and often cost more than just staying put. Contrary to popular belief companies don't flee the country because of taxes they flee because of the cost of labor in the U.S. is significantly higher than most countries. Payroll is often the largest annual expenditure for most companies.
@@Jonatone If you're talking of the years of higher tax, no one paid those higher tax rates... anyone, especially those that were affected, would tell you that. This sort of thing is a disaster waiting to happen, if it were ever to be pass as legislation. Oh, and it wouldn't end there would it... these people like to tax, tax tax.
Bernie's prodigy and a Justice Democrat. She is the future of the party!
Yes123 oooh yes
*protege?
Can't wait till have to line up for bread.
@@vigilant_2731 Yep, just like America did from the 50s through to the early 80s. Oh wait...
@@vigilant_2731 aren't ppl lining up right now?
When she smiles, my brain falls out my ears😍.
Dude, me too! lol
Not me, her stupidity overshadows her looks
Wow simp 100
She's got ya. Just remember, she's a politician. I agree with you, she's absolutely adorable looking, but she's a smart one as well. Keep that guard up to read between the lines of speech with a politician.
@@samhall7133 Not really - she's not, remotely, hypocritical, unlike every member of the Gang Of Perverts.
Just saying...
I was pleasantly surprised at how reasonable and well formed her ideas were. The way they are preaented in headlines is wildly different than what I see here.
She is very articulate and actually seeks to educate the audience because her policies and ideas are good. I'm sick of the yelling and name-calling that distracts from real ideas and issues.
@@BRegan-sx7sl “real” and “good” ideas are hardly what I’d call them. You can well articulate nonsense but it’s still nonsense at the end of the day
Perfect solution to the poverty issue: 70% tax on any tax bracket above 10million dollars a year is not unreasonable. Senator Ocasio-Cortez is making a very good point about living in excess in our society, and how it has become toxic to the fabric of the ecology. What's absolutely beautiful about her approach to social media, is that she's endorsing authenticity for her fellow Democrats.
As people have pointed out, her figure is scaled to be more acceptable for the views of today - under FDR and Truman the top marginal rate was 90% and the top bracket was equivalent to $3 million. I think she's done a good job with those rates. And to think, in a country with so many billionaires, top marginal rate is somewhere around $600K at the moment!
... she's not a Senator... she's a Congresswoman. Geesh, people are soooooo dumbed down. They can't spell or even speak without "like" and voice fry...AOC is the future...get your facts straight...she does...and she knows the difference between the House and Senate...
Sure tax that high because someone makes more than you think they should. Why should you steal 70% just because they have more. If you make more than me, am I entitled to 70% of what you have after a certain point?
I know some people in America think her views are completely über over the top crazy, but really there are parts of the world where her discourse sounds like just the ordinary amount of normal and sensible.
Amélie Carré here in Scandinavia her thoughts sound right wing. Even the right wing of our most capitalist party in Finland believe in free health care and education.
Shhe sounds normal to my canadian ears
The pathetic thing is that her ideas, as well as Bernie's, are essentially the way the US economy was run pre-Reagan.
@@anttikalpio4577 Not really true though, Finland isn't in Scandinavia. Marginal tax rate of employees in Norway is 46% without insurance and 53% with insurance.
@@stevenbrock528 Nah, it just means that many outsiders are often inaccurate. Finnish isn't even in the same language group as Swedish, Danish and Norwegian (although Icelandic is).
At $10 million?
That's crazy talk!!!
How will they live?
true its there money leave them alone da,mn it
Theyre not arguing that rich people cant live with 10 mill its that this tax policy will ruin produce and commerce
Read a book
Who will gi e you a job when they leave the country? Hmm..90% of nothing will be nothing...and they will take their company and jobs with them .
@@datruth7038 no it would not. We had 90% marginal tax rates in the 50's and our GDP grew at 10%, highest growth rate we've had during trump has been 4%
Stephen Colbert makes 12.5 millions a year...
And?
I hope he's doing the right thing and giving 70% of his income away..
@@Josh-kd8mb you dont know tax brackets work.... do you?.....
@@Josh-kd8mb my man she literally explained it in the video. you cant be that stupid
After 10 million that's when he'll start being taxed 70%
They should also start taxing the millionaire pastors.
Religions in general should have to open up their books to the IRS like any other nonprofit organization seeking tax-free status.
Like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson!
@@alexocasio-gomez5267 Al Sharpton is worth 1/2 million dollars compare to Kenneth Copeland who's nett worth is $760M but I can see what agenda you pushing...
All I'm saying is whoever makes millions in the name of the Lord should be taxed accordingly because this has become a business instead of a church in many cases.
@@leel69540 It's not my fault he can't manage his money. Bill Clinton makes more than that for one "speaking fee".
@@alexocasio-gomez5267 I think you missing the point but keep pushing your agenda if it makes you sleep better at night...
This totally works. After the great depression in 1930 the super rich were taxed at 90% and the economy was booming... Untill Reagan gave giant taxcuts to the super rich.
Actually the economy boomed after the Great Depression once America got involved with WW2.. more jobs were created to support the military.. more jobs=more money flowing=better economy
@@aljay2955 They are nuts. There is no reasoning in them.
But we were spending borrowed money - debt to GDP went through the roof. The primary reason the economy did well after that was that everyone's else's production capacity was destroyed. But by Carter's time, the economy was in a shambles - other countries had caught up and our high tax and liberal welfare policies along with wage and price controls created a large welfare class and a lot of self-entitled workers were producing shoddy goods in American factories (compare Honda to GM at the time). That is why Reagan was elected. His breaking of unions, privatization of industries and lower tax rates set the ground work the economic success under Clinton. Then his return to American military strength led to the collapse of the Soviet Union and our reduction in need for Military spending plus new trade opportunities in a cold-war-less world solidified the economic boom under Clinton.
Vincent Krommenhoek - 1.) Nobody paid the 90% tax rate because there were tons of loopholes. (2.) There were no state income taxes back then. (3) Property taxes were 10% of what they are now. (4) State sales taxes were a fraction what they are today.
I guess you and Occasional Cortex are also too stupid to realize that if she ever implemented her confiscatory 70% tax rate, that the IRS would collect even LESS tax revenue. Why? Because history (and common sense) has shown us that when you amend the tax laws to soak the super-rich, that they, in turn, change their behaviors and use some loophole in the tax laws to get out of it. Rich people have the ability to consult with financial experts and lawyers to do precisely that.
For example, bigmouth pro tax-hike billionaire Warren Buffet talks a big game on TV about how he wants people like himself taxed at a higher rate than his secretary. But then Buffet himself fails to disclose that he only takes a salary of $500,000/year from Berkshire Hathaway.... and chooses to take most of his compensation through stock options which is taxed at the much lower marginal gains rate (20%). He specifically does that to get around paying the higher taxes that salaries are subjected to. Only stupid people playing checkers instead of chess - people like bartender Occasional Cortex - don't know that. And Colbert, turns out, is a Koolaid drinking sycophant with the interviewing skills of an aardvark.
@@aljay2955 Read some of the other comments below if you dare.
Just made a calculation. There are 205 people in US who make >$50M a year in salary. If we use 70% marginal tax rule, using $50 M as the number to calculate, $40M times 70% times 205 people, we get $5.7B tax dollars just from these 205 people. And this is a heck of a lot of money for the government to spend on healthcare and education and bridges and roads, etc. Correct me if my calculation is wrong.
Being Fooled are you stupid. People have stocks bonds and other investment. There are way more than 205 people who make more than 50$m a year
Being Fooled that isn’t a lot of money, US annual revenue is 3.44 TRILLION, universal Medicare is estimated at 1.25 TRILLION. I’m all for taxing at 70% at over $10 million but people need to understand if they want universal healthcare and college everyone making over $60 THOUSAND is going to have to pay more in taxes
Just enough to build the wall
@@jamesdavis660 It is a start.
@bolitian The wall money should come from whoever wants it. Tax them extra.
She's the type of person I would vote to be president. And she wouldn't need to say she's a woman every 2 seconds like others *cof cof*. She's just an honest, serious person.
João Campelos Ferreira : #Bernie2020❤️✊🏾🌎✌🏾💯 He told everyone to run because we need a gutsy and fearless team. If he wins, she can be speaker of the house, or Senator, and we can make it happen. Get involved...we need you, come in because the water’s warm.
To really get her point across, she should have also added that because the 90% marginal tax rate no longer applies and because of all the tax loopholes that exist today, the tax burden was shifted to the working class.
yes, but a 6 minute Colbert chat is not exactly the best forum for a detailed policy conversation
Since that's the segment of the population that is demanding programs, why shouldn't they pay for it? "I want free everything!" Then it will cost you everything.
K F It really has never been much of a burden to the wealthy. Even when the marginal tax rate was 90% they only paid around a 42% effective rate because pretty much everything was allowed as a deduction back then.
I think one thing that would be loophole-proof that would help us to ammend the latest corporate tax cuts so someone has to provide proof of a certain percent of reinvestment to qualify for the cuts. Without making it mandatory you see things like 1.1 trillion spent on stock buybacks
Z.F.A. I know but it would have really helped people understand and would have taken 2 additional seconds.
You are woke mate. Go spread the message everywhere about how working class power was eroded by Capitalists.
Funny they are telling her “to wait.” No one said the same about Ted Cruz, who stormed Congress like Darth Vader. This young lady is a refreshing change - very smart and dedicated. I predict great things for her.
@@stevenbrock528 I think it's less about not doing her job and more about the idea that there are a bunch of moderate voters that aren't (yet?) ready to vote for a socialist democrat agenda. If your choice is losing elections with an agenda of drastic change vs. winning an election with smaller, more moderate changes and thereby moving the goal posts for what is "acceptable" social policy, it probably doesn't hurt to ease up a little. With the electoral college, it's hard to win without the support of those moderates.
That being said, it's refreshing to see that people with a more drastically progressive agenda are being elected as representatives. As someone who grew up in Denmark and now live in the US, I have lived under both models and am pretty sure which one I prefer. It's funny, because living at home my parents always thought I was a conservative and right-leaning. Yet here, my father-in-law thinks I am a borderline communist. Gotta love that cold war propaganda crap still sticking around.
The problem with conservatives is that they're narrow sighted. It's true that investing heavily in renewable energy, preventing climate change, healthcare, education, etc are going to have an immediate impact on the USA but those are all things that will pay dividends in the long run for society while the alternative is not going to just "keep it as it is" the alternative is a slow collapse.
Just imagine a completely energy indipendent US how little interest it would have in wasting lives in the middle east, chasing trade deals with Russia and Europe...but that happens tomorrow, that's why people are skeptical, people want everything now and by doing so are slowly draining the country
Ah, but think of all the money lost by the war industrial complex! Won't you think of the corporations?!
@@mduckernz What makes even less sense is that the fossil fuels are not the stated goal of these wars, the real problem is that less fund go to the military in an energy independent US
Why doesn’t this comment have more upvotes?
Edit: Likes
@Yash Patil you are conflating market power with actual needs. If to you making a ton of useless shit is more important than having a livable planet have fun
@Yash Patil who said nuclear is useless, it may be by extension, I was talking about the fact fuel/nuclear is only needed when you have a huge market that demands overproduction of shit. Your argument is conflating the wealth of the market with the necessity of the world. The world doesn't NEED to mass produce shit, it does only because we have a market driven economy. If to you that's a fine excuse to throw humanity in the garbage then you're an idiot but don't pretend you NEED fossil fuel.
If they told you your whole country catches fire in 5 days unless you give up fossil fuels are you going on tv to argue "everyone just accept death it's impossible to give up fossil lol get rekt"
She is both lovely and intelligent. And she has great demeanor.
Shes bat shit crazy and has no idea what she is talking about and lies about her upbringing to fool her constituency. If all someone has is that they are a politician then they are full of it.
Intelligent? Too funny. Educated maybe but not intelligent. And a liar, yes. And she is regurgitating old, failed policy. Finally, put any one of the following: Candace Owens, Kayleigh McEnany, Nikki Haley, Scherie Murray or Kim Klacik alone with AOC and four of AOC's best supporters, and AOC and team won't have a chance.
Yes, one against AOC and team.
Do the 70% tax rate... and cut the defense budget by a 1/3.
Jon Porter omg you are crazy
@@cupofcofefe152 just crazy enough...
Yup
yeah, do the 70% tax rate and watch the millionnaires leave in droves.
@@simonb4689 ok, good luck, they already are. But, I would tax them when they want to come back and do business with the American economy.
I love you AOC!!
AOC 2020
she legally can't run for POTUS until 2028. but I get it.
AOC has brought a new light of hope, and this is only the beginning. “You can’t stop the change, any more than you can stop the suns from setting.” - Shmi Skywalker
if too many follow her...America will be lost in debt and poverty
pity the masses that get fooled by her feel good speeches
and crazy unattainable ideas
@@Logan-py8we Exactly what they said about MLKJ. We can't be afraid of change, especially when it's in our best interest.
i think you need to take a course or two in economics. spending money like drunken sailors isn't in the long run in our best interest.
@@Logan-py8we Spending money like drunken sailors? Who's proposing that? The Green New Deal would take decades to reach its eventual cost, spending 3.1% of our entire GDP on the military is ridiculous. I need to take a class on economics? Literally any businessman that is more interested in the people than himself will tell you otherwise. It is 100% in our best interest, and if you aren't making 10 million a year then it would benefit you immensely overtime, so why are you complaining?
Hope? Socialism doesn't work, it's been proven time and time again.
If u r working 80 hours a week and still cant feed ur kids, may be, just may be, u shouldnt have had kids ...
Americans are so funny, thinking that a 70% marginal tax rate after 10 million is a left-wing idea. Adorable.
Yeah, we need to pay more taxes so our country is successful like Venezuela.
@@MrHazyDayz Come on. Troll harder, little troll. How about Germany? How about northern Europe? How about America, when America was actually successful?
Giby86 no one actually paid that rate.
@@Giby86 Germany? Northern Europe? They are falling to Islamic law, they will be under Sharia within our lifetimes. What are you even talking about? America was successful before 1965 when the country was 90%+ white. Diversity has nearly wrecked our nation.
Giby86: Well, many Americans ONLY watch Fox News and when Fox News implies if you make $30,000 a year, AOC wants 70% of THAT (or 21,000) to go to Taxes, leaving you with only 9,000, you can see how that would be a problem.
Fox "News" people like Sean Hannitty only know how to LIE - like when they said Germany has more Solar Power than the U.S. because it's SUNNIER in Germany! An easily disproved LIE than serves the interests of Big Oil!
Yes please. Back to the sane old days when corporations didn't buy our politicians.
We gotta get rid of Citizens United. That is the law that allows corporations to be considered people when making political contributions.
kam, both.
When was that? The selfish spirit of commerce knows no country and feels no passion of principle but that of gain. -T. Jefferson
Tell that to Obama and Hillary Clinton 😂😂😂😂
@KamekoBruns False. On average, very rich individuals (both red and blue) outspend trade unions by a very large margin. In the 2016 elections, trade unions spent a total of $132 million. Contrast that with $757 million by the extremely wealthy. A single corporation/multibillionaire can outspend any single trade union easily.
Furthermore, trade unions represent the actual workers. Their members are the lower and middle class. They don't own yachts or private islands. Their power comes from numbers, not from wealth. It's funny how you see them as enemies. Unless your family is filthy rich, trade unions represent us. Trade unions are basically our pathetic attempt at trying to match the overwhelming political influence of the elites.
As for blue or red money, it matters WHICH companies they are. The ones most likely to fund red are the ones who have the most to gain from regulation cuts. Oil, gas, timber, chemical, coal, medical. They're the ones most likely to harm the public if allowed to. Of course some fund blue, but unless Democrats start pushing for tax cuts or allowing them to dump toxic waste into rivers, it's a non-issue. I'd rather NONE of them had any political influence whatsoever.
Corporations are not people. They don't have the same motivations as people, neither are they affected the same way as people. Treating them as people is absurd. They don't worry about drinking water, or whether they can pay the bills, or whether there's enough food to eat. They're driven by one thing and one thing only: profit.
She has political super star written all over her. What a refreshing breath of fresh air! Intelligent, honest, young, energetic, savvy, clever and all with a great look. Eat your heart out, Republicans!
oh god man she is crazy, you idiots have zero idea how economics works. she is a fraud you dumbasses.
@@ankitvarma1652 She knows her history. You seem to only know ad hominem attacks.
@@marshwetland3808 ya thats why she answers every question with " i am not a professional on the subject". You morons can get impressed by anyone.
@@ankitvarma1652 You are a shitty guesser. Your adhom sticks to you, not me.
On my presidential voting ballet I will write Alexandria ocasio Cortez this election
A person who makes 10 million dollars a year could theoretically spend $1,000 dollars per hour, twenty-four hours a day, 7 days a week, every week for an entire year and still have well over a million dollars to spare.
Take this one step further a billionaire could do this same thing for a hundred years and still have more that 120 million dollars leftover. No one needs to be that rich. It's sickening.
tackless They deserve it. They earned it. It is theirs and you have absolutely no right to claim as much as a penny. Because bottom line is you don’t deserve it.
@@Monk-Gaming haha taxes don't go directly to him.(are you trying to make misleading statements) we all owe taxes to the government(for infrastucture and so many more things). I think 70& on everything over 10 million is a great starting point for some real negotiations.
@@Monk-Gaming
Greed my friend. And most of them earned it On The Backs of their laborers who it would take a lifetime for them to earn what some of these people make in a month or less . Greed there is no bigger sin no matter what Gordon Gekko says.
tackless a person making $10 million a year currently pays between $3 and $4 million in federal income tax a year if its all earned income (wages). There is also social security( 6.2% which only applies to your first $117k of income), Medicare (1.45%), and state income taxes (0-13%) which they have to pay. So someone who makes $10 million a year is super rich (only ~10,000 people made more in 2017) but we have to concede that those people are paying ~40% of there income in taxes currently and don’t just have it all to spend if we want to be credible in advocating for an increase.
@@jamesdavis660 in theory, yeah. But they don't. Studies have shown the ultra rich, when all their tax shelters have been utilized, pay a tax rate of around 13%. Too many loopholes for the rich.
She's radical only in the skater sense. All of her policy ideas are practical. Her explanations are common-sense. I love her to the moon and back.
"Radical only in the skater sense" that's hilarious
She made it sound like the 1% can keep the first 10 mil for themselves, and then the $ after that gets taxed 70%. In my common sensical understanding the $ (say 7 - 10 mil) also gets taxed a certain %, and then the bracket below that (say 2-5 mil) gets taxed a certain %. Am I correct. If so, fuck yeah I'd be pissed off getting taxed 70% when I had already paid like 50% on my 7-10 mil, and 35% on 2-5 million.
@@ogyen7 Yes, this is not as easy as she makes it sound. Not all multi millionaires made their money stealing from the middle and lower class. That is a fantasy. Some actually deserve the wealth they accumulate
@@ogyen7 The top marginal rates are less meaningful in terms of net income after taxes than the effective tax rate. Using your hypothetical marginal rates, a person making $10 million would pay an effective rate of 42.5% on their entire income, with a take home of $5.75 million. A person making $20 million would pay an effective rate of 56.25% on their entire income, with a take home of $8.75 million. So you're saying if you were able to make an income of almost nine million dollars a year... you'd be pissed?
Aaron Zook I would be pissed about keeping 9 million... when I made 20 million. Plus who are you to decide how much someone can rightfully keep
I’m astounded at how many people in the comments still don’t understand the 70% marginal tax rate that she’s proposing. Billions of dollars spent on the American educational system and it has failed all of you. 🤦🏻♀️
@just some ninja shit So, to be clear, you think (taxation aside) that it is reasonable and fair that CEOs of companies in America earn $30, $40, even $100m a year. What possible justification is there for that sort of pay? Is Brendan Kennedy (Tilray) worth $256m a year? Is Bob Iger (Disney) worth £146m, is Tim Cook worth $141m? Is Sean Hannity worth $40m, in addition to the massive income he gets from his property portfolio?
Well, they may or may not be "worth" that amount, but it does not seem totally crazy to tax them at higher rates than you or I.
@@tn_onyoutube8436 I see where youre getting at but do we really need their money? or since we live in a capitalist society cant we just work hard enough to be financially independent? I personally believe America gives you all the tools to be successful you just have to want it.
da truth - I in turn see what you are saying. But not everyone can be king, not everyone can be the boss, not everyone can get all the good jobs. Sure, if you are lucky enough or determined enough to get a good education you can get a good job, and if you work hard and get lucky from there you can earn huge money, or even just great money. But the point is, by definition it is impossible for everyone to be in that situation, and also it is an insult to millions to conflate “hard work” to financial riches. I pretty much guarantee you that in terms of real hard work many people at the lower end work way harder than many of those people you would cite as hard workers. As AOC mentions briefly in this very interview, people who have to work two or three jobs, as maybe cleaners, packers in a warehouse, workers in a fast food shop - all jobs needed by society - get paid so poorly they have to work 80, 100 hours a week just to survive.
Education, especially in America, is unbelievably costly. If you come from a family that for generations has never had anyone to go to a decent college or even any college at all, they will look at the costs of school and just not even try. And they probably go to a high school that does not get enough funds, or has so many underprivileged kids that the pupils have almost no change of getting to college anyway, even cheaper or free community colleges, from which a degree is almost worthless if you expect to. Get really rich off it. And another point is the simple fact that 4 more years not earning any money, even if poor money, might not be an option.
And, as I said, economies don’t just need leaders and executives- McDonalds management earn 10s of millions, but they would not even have a business if hundreds of thousands of workers did not work at minimum wage in their stores.
I actually think the better answer than higher taxes is to not need them in the first place. And that means sharing some of the ridiculously high remuneration for the top management of these companies with their workers, and when I say sharing, I mean paying them more, and the management less. I repeat my point from above, how can any single management individual, with the possible exception of a founder key visionary like Musk, Jobs, Gates, be worth the pay of 3000 of his workers, or more in some cases, how can the lady who runs the Apple shops for a couple years be worth 50m dollars.
Better education, more education opportunities, fairer minimum wages, more rewards for good work for the little guy, that is fair, and it is not socialism. Yet.
But if the gap between rich and poor stays this big and gets bigger, and the ridiculous notion that everyone who is not a wealthy as the very wealthy are lazy good for nothing spongers (British term), then ultimately socialism may have to be the answer, and we all know that is not good either.
I guess if folks don't understand the 70% marginal tax rate due to our educational system, then maybe it's time we moved on from socialist funded schools (the state) to private schools (capitalism), what say you now?
@@dragonore2009 aye
Her comment about helipads for billionaires and 80 hour work weeks for the starving masses, accurately describes the current conditions I saw in Bangalore India. I totally support the idea of working hard, being innovative and hopefully getting rich. What we have in the US is so far beyond that, billionaires making back-end deals to preserve their monopolies, $600 Epi pens, etc... Unlimited political bribery is legal at the federal level. It needs to stop. With the exception of Bill Gates, most billionaires help no one but themselves. They're like financial black holes swallowing all resources at faster and faster rates leaving as little as possible for the rest of us.
I hope AOC doesn't give up nor gets corrupted by the system.
Donate to her. Donate to justice democrats. Being people-funded lets them stick it to the lobbyists and oligarchs
She has too much public support. That's good for her to remain clean.
That's why she needs the people to be on her side, to cheer on her right choices, and hold her feet to the fire if she starts to listen to the establishment.
I cannot believe the Establishment can offer her anything at all that is more valuable than what she has today. And her fortunes will only grow.
@@Falconite1970 That's why she should exercise caution - she is now knee-deep in the swamp.
Countdown to fox news having a meltdown with the clip where she agrees to being a socialist
Especially that the majority of US citizens cant make a difference between communism and socialism. And that her ideas are tame compared to what was done in the 30's or post war periods (even by Republican standards).
she is a breath of fresh air.
Really hope nothing bad happens to her
am I the only who just learned something? Like, I forgot what it's like to have someone articulate their platform and cite historical precedence. I'm not even sure if I agree with it, cause I literally just learned it, but this was... refreshing.
When politico isn't calling her a liar and when washing4on post isn't co nstantly giving her 4 pinocchios.
No one ever paid a 70% or 90% marginal rate. The rich paid an average of 42% even back when the rates were high, because of deductibles.
Yeah you might want to do your own research, she is far from fact, her numbers don't add up, not even close.
@@crossroads670 Er, yeah. Duh. That's why you have such a high marginal tax rate, to obviate some of the deductibles from the super rich.
@ECOMHICKS Well, please explain to us what numbers don't add up? Seems to me there is no number to add up - plain and simple, if you earn over 10 million a year, in taxable income, you pay 70% tax on that portion above $10m. What in that does not add up?
Oh Stephen, she's not gonna have a lot of time once they finally find Mitch McConnell.
Have we checked the acquarium or the pet shop yet?
you made my day lol
That turtle might be out there!
Mitch McConnell is hiding in the sewers with his nephews Leonardo, Donatello, Michelangelo and Raphael. They didn't invite him, he just showed up one day and hasn't left.
Personally, I think the mistake is looking for Mitch during daylight hours. I mean, during that time of the day he's probably still resting in his coffin, exhausted from having exsanguinated the lost and missing refugee children so that their blood plasma may sustain his unholy existence for just a little while longer...
Who is working 80 hours a week and cant feed their kids? That's a bit of a stretch. Actually a huuuuuge stretch
Dwight Eisenhower in the 1950's taxed the rich the highest ever in US history. 90%, i think or recall. Then from a Sociology class I do recall 1957 was the the peak of quality of life in America, urban & rural, generally, I believe. It was termed differently, but there's the gist -- now to make it the geist!
Hey I hate to break it to you but that tax rate was only meant for people making $2000000 or more at that point of time which only was about 2% of the American population so about 10,000 households and they didn't even pay it in the first place they only paid about 45%
logan king I didn’t say it was a flat tax - shouldn’t be/shouldn’t‘ve been. Only to say there’s a historical precedent for a progressive tax (taxing the rich higher than the poor). This is needed for a shift to sustainable infrastructure, for a shift to a non motor oil/non-militaristic (attack-based) medical model. Don’t worry, it’ll be far more fun living a dream than this imposed nightmare
@@reforest4fertility no once again you're wrong. According to the World Bank only 2% of Americans which is about 10,000 households we're apparently supposed to pay the 90% tax but they only paid 45%. I'm sorry this is a fact from the World Bank you are wrong
@@reforest4fertility I am sorry to tell you but the WORLD BANK SAYS OTHERWISE. When the marginal tax rate was 90% nobody paid it all they paid about 45%. That comes from the World Bank and there's no ands ifs or buts about it
@@reforest4fertility I'm sorry but facts don't care about your feelings. Because what I'm saying is the truth.
Alexandria Cortez, you are an American hero my girl!
She doesn’t take shit from anyone! I love her!
now ..if we could just get idk 80 or 90 more just like her in the senate and the house... and in the state legers too ... btw what are you doing this Saturday ? and dont get cold feet just be cause you would have no idea what you're doing .. neither did or does trump and he's the president so obviously knowing what you're doing isnt a prerequisite for the job... also its on of the few jobs left that requires not formal training or qualification :) .. hell half the time you dont even need to get 50% of the vote and you can still win :)
and lets face it .. you couldn't do a worse job could you lol also ficus for president 2020
@@BNakaFurious who?
She said that illegal immigrants are more American than Americans.
My Girl Cortez Gots My Vote For Life 😎👍🏽👍🏽
Eight years of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is coming, from 2025-33, after she wins in 2024!
If she won the presidency we'd be absolutely royally fucked, that one thing I'm certain of. We don't need a radical, we need a centrist to hopefully bring everyone back to the middle. The gap between the two sides is already nearing something that cannot be bridged.
@@RCmack shell still be too young to run for president by that point
@Jake V.
AOC doesn't have funding to open a local office because the government is shut down.
Governor villa, wow, you are easily swayed...please for the rest of us...don't reproduce.
She has the same likability as Jacinda Ardern, and the same sharp mind.
A bartender who doesn't know how money works will dictate America's financial policies and tax. Meedia is asking her "what are your financial/tax plans for the country?" .. Really ?
Did i mention already that I love Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. First Congress person I've ever loved.
@gabriella lopez how do you know ? and what are you smoking ? because it ain't helping you a bit.
Person? Not even a single man? All of them to you, were just okay or bad
I love her too, I think she's as dumb as a box of rocks but I still love her.
@@terrylunsford352 She's smarter than you'll ever be. Including your progeny because, well, they will be afflicted with the same mental disorder as you.
@@Kostly You don't know me or her, sometimes it's better to keep quiet and appear to be a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt.
I’m in love with her positive energy and ideals.
Same here! I believe the American people is (are?) lucky to have her as a Representent. An honest, eloquent and passionate politician is a rare thing in our world.
The government should give everyone 50K dollars and would end poverty tomorrow !
That 90% tax rate was set in place by FDR, a democrat. And there were so many tax loop holes for everyone that practically no one paid those tax rates. Her lack of knowledge of how taxes work and the history of taxes is shocking for a politician.
Its like she gets her info from the back of cereal boxes.
Jog-on, arsehole - blagodaryu vas, KKKretin...
WE NEED LESS REGULATION!
FDR would have did the same today but instead if 70% he would of done 80% even 90%.
FDR was a danger to the US.
@@arkansaslibertarian688 Yeah spooky socialistic policies so scary
@@arkansaslibertarian688 FDR also dragged the US out of its greatest economic depression in history through social policies and infrastructure building. Plenty of people spoke as you do now, and history proved them wrong in that respect.
Cole Turner No they aren’t they just make countries go bankrupt. They are like cocaine, really appealing, really fun but they leave you broke and damaged in no time. When has a socialist country ever lasted?
Lord Beerus Also In FDRs time things were different, it was the Great Depression and the war. America was in crisis.
Did that get passed? I don't see anything wrong with taxing 70% if a person already earned more that 10 Million and 1 dollar in a year.
It it gets passed people of immense wealth will flee that country so fast U won't even have time to blink
So all those hard working people who worked for their money 70% of their money is taxed and gone. I’d like to see everyone be so happy about giving away their money.
did you not watch the video? She explained that she wants to tax the money you make after you reach over 10 dollars. If you make over 10 million dollars a year you going to be fine.
There are two types of Republicans: The Rich and The Stupid. Check your wallet, which one are you?
@Jim Curram many Hollywood celebrities may be Republicans, but they despise Trump. Especially the women, who feel Trump has no true respect for them.
Please read Broken Government - Author John W. Dean, Legal Adviser of the Republican President Richard Nixon …”The Republican agenda has proven itself to be an agenda of special interests rather than of the public interests, the scheme of a party whose primary aim is to maintain its power whatever the cost …” Washington Post remarked, “At its core, the book argues that the growing power of social and neo-conservatives within the Republican Party has created an army of guileless followers…”
Why does it have to either/or. I think you’ll find many Rich are also stupid as well. Just look at Trump’s children.
@George Miller--There are many rich Democrats too. They are called good Americans in and out of USA. You rat..
Rich Grant don’t categorize people in their political party to two types. It’s disrespectful, stupid, wrong, and continues to divide our nation. I am a republican. I’m not rich. I’m not dumb. I just believe in republican beliefs. That doesn’t make me one of those two things. I say this with respect and dignity for your political beliefs. As they are your opinions just as I have mine. Always respect others and don’t judge people so easily and disrespectfully.
For around 45 years, wages have stagnated, corporate profits are at record highs despite the world economy.
All this unfettered free market capitalism in the US and you're like 19 trillion in debt.
Id suggest you go look at the GDP and stock market graphs over the last 45 years.
The 19 trillion debt in the USA is federal debt, and not private.
Anything else stupid you want to state?
@@jabberwolf7348 The GDP and stock market is a weak assessment of how the average person is doing in the USA
@@imNotYourDad8000 Its an average assessment and seeing as wage growth , employment growth, and employment participation growth have grown.... WTF are you assessing as a person as doing? Yours own pathetic loser life? That isnt a well recognized measurement you fucktard!
Wages have stagnated because in the last 45 years the supply of workers have doubled, with women entering the workforce. This has also lead to an increase in 2 income earners per household, which means you now have a husband and a wife who are both working together to earn the median household income.
Wages have stagnated because the owners/bosses/corporations have captured All of US workers' gains in productivity in the last 45 years.. Nothing to do with the number of workers. As workers aren't earning enough to compensate them fairly for their labor, they don't have enough to spend and thus make the real economy work. All their confiscated productivity gains are squandered on a few luxury items for the elites and even more, in financial get-even-richer deals that turn in the void, and are unproductively squirreled away in tax havens.
She's speaking to her constituents...telling them things they want to hear...young and naive...the majority of the extraordinarily wealthy people in this country worked very hard to get there...and they are the most philanthropic...
Alexandria is such a cutie and she's super fierce. Shes gonna go places and we need her to go places.
And I just got smarter watching a late night show 👍
Watching this is killing my brain cells
@Stanisław Śmierćyk yeh, I was a fairly smart guy til I started supporting democrats. Now i just want to dig holes for a living.
I like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's 70% tax on all rich folks with incomes starting at beyond $10 million a year. Nobody needs to be making that much money. Folks like Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers, Roger Goodell, Ryan Seacrest, and Mary Barra will be affected. And The Donald, with incomes from sources other than his Presidency, will really be affected. It's time for The Donald to pay his fair share of taxes. Nobody NEEDS their own helipad, which is an unnecessary luxury.
Exactly.
It should be repeatedly described as the "70% ABOVE 10 MILLION DOLLARS" idea.
The real billionaire still have their helicopter. 30% of a billion is still 300 million....
This policy would only affect 0.05% of the US population.
People need money to be able to innovate and create businesses or products, which in turn creates more money for everyone. A billionaire with a helicopter can save time and use that time to help create corporations that employ thousands.
Cutting rich folks money = no motivation for them to work
Giving the benefits to everyone else = no reason for them to work either.
Will that not happen?
@@mcuembedded apparently this tax rate was in effect during the time where US was growing the most, tho
I say just leave her alone and let her do her thing. We'll all be much better off because of it.
i love this woman with every fibre of my being.
Why she hates the country.
I was just thinking how much i despise her
@@filthycade2399 You're projecting. You despise yourself. Now look in the mirror and say, "I'm good enough. I'm smart enough and gosh darnit people like me". You'll feel better, eventually.
stephen k you are too smart. Do you think i project my communistic views onto her also?
2024.
AOC 2024, with ALG(Alison Lundergran Grimes) as her running mate! The two will turn this country around and have rich Republicans reeling!
Wouldn't she still be too young to run?
2028 after two terms Bernie ;)
You only have to be 35 by the time you take the oath, not to run. I believe she would just make it under the wire, but I've not confirmed that.
@@stefan3388 Bernie's not going to win, my dude
More politicians should be like this in interviews - whatever you think of her politics, she explained clearly what her proposed policy actually means instead of just rattling off a sound bite.
Omg... the fact she got voted in scares people.
Watching this on Martin Luther King day in 2021-
tbh i thought 70% tax was too high but after she explained it isn't bad at all.
yes. The only people who are against it are the ones who don't understand it or those who want to misinterpret it on purpose
Or those who un like dear @Alejandro Z - don't stop to listen to a position before swearing they are against it.
Alejandro Z Also, back in the 50’s, when the tax rate for the rich was 90%, the only way avoid it was to reinvest in American business. THAT’S why back in the 50’s and 60’s the American Dream of a house, 2 cars, and 2.5 kids was attainable on minimum wage. Because CEO’s had to take the money they earned and put it back in, either building new factories, wage increases, or improving existing facilities. It was in the 1980’s, under Reagan that this tax went away under the Trickle Down Economics theory. Once the rich were allowed to keep their money, that’s when businesses began closing factories and moving them. Wages stopped going up unless Washington or your State forced them to rise. Then the middle class began to vanish.
@@Ashtari Reagan and Thatcher = Neoliberalism. On certain issues today, go back to him.
@@Fals3Agent People can pay 70% right now. If everybody is for a 70% tax why doesn't anybody pay it now?
What a breath of fresh air . Well spoken and charismatic.
Good ol' take from the rich. No one actually paid that 90% tax from eisenhower in the fifties lol
* Googles Uber Helipad *
I love this girl.
How could you not? 😁✌
Cause you're uneducated and she makes you feel better about yourself.
@@OceanSprayX you're thinking of trump
Ocean Spray fail. Try harder troll.
Here is how marginal tax rates worked in 2010. Each "chunk" of your income is taxed at a different rate.
If you earned $100,000 in 2010:
First chunk: 10% x $8,350 = $835
Second chunk: 15% x $25,600 = $3,840
Third chunk: 25% x $48,300 = $12,075
Fourth chunk: 28% x $17,750 = $4,970
Total taxes = $21,720 which is 21.72% of $100,000
I presume this is also before deductions so that 21.72% was actually lower.
Which state? Double that on the west coast.
@@dusty6345 Are you kidding?? ...This is Federal, not state!!
@@olan1190 either people out here are getting fucked, or these numbers are wrong. Folks who make over $100,000 are getting taxed at over 40% federal.
What if I made negative dollars last year? Lol 😅
I think that safely falls within the limit of "less than 10 mill," area. You goochie
Jonathon Gallo thanks pham! 😂
@@Unitos_ it's spelled "Gucci" like the brand, lol
I would think you are an irresponsible Democrat who votes for the Candidate who promised you the most free stuff.
So let’s wave Martin Luther King in one hand so u don’t pay attention that whatever she is talking about she has no clue -typical politician!
God bless her
No God needed. She blessed herself with confidence and brain power.
She worships Jesu Christo, not God.
Wait a minute young lady. How dare you bring facts, history, logic, and reason into politics!
This is outrageous indeed
No one paid those rates, buddy. You probably never paid a lick of federal income taxes in your life so you probably don't understand the implications of a tax structure.
@@stevenbrock528 My parents were born in the 50's and worked during those years. They were allowed to deduct expenses for every little thing. Ate out? That could be deducted. So practically every wealthy or smart person was deducting all their income. It's not a claim - it's a fact.
@@OceanSprayX WOW! Did your parents make $200,000 or $1.8 million adjusted to today's prices from 1953 because that's when eisenhower's marginal tax rate took into effect. If wealthy individuals decide to spend to spend into the economy through deduction to avoid the marginal rate it only grows the economy helping businesses and small restaurant owners along the way.
JESUS CHRIST.
*That's because after WWII there's was NO ONE TO MANUFACTURE THINGS*
*WE WERE THE ONLY ONES*
I can't believe how idiotic you all are.
They didn't pay 90%. They didn't declare ALL OF THEIR INCOME!
*JFK KNEW THIS AND HE LOWERED TAXES*
I have to crack up about the last few seconds, he says goodbye to AOC, and transitions to saying "We'll be back with Method Man!" 😂😂😂❤❤❤❤👏👏👏 Its lit 👌😂
We'll be right back with Method Man LMAO
we need more young compassionate people running for public office.
She's a typical politician
@@brandonellis8111 i made the comment 2 years ago. AOC is a nut job. DPYDIT.