10 ms·
The rich shouldn’t feel like the enemy’: Is New York turning on the wealthy?
- yardie 6y agoWhen equity feels like oppression. No one is turning on the rich but the workers are certainly getting tired of the empty platitudes.
- bobthechef 6y agoThere is certainly an entrenchment of an American and global oligarchy. What oligarchs historically fear the most is growing resentment among the masses, whether justified or not (i.e., disliking rampant exploitative practices like usury vs. your run-of-the-mill envy). When that happens, distraction, _unwarranted_ suspicion, and confusion are excellent tools. Distraction and _baseless_ suspicion can refocus resentment by whipping up conflicts among the masses themselves. This has the secondary benefit of dividing the masses and rendering them harmless. Confusion about basic facts and weakening the level-headed exercise of reason can render people blind, inert, and ineffectual, often producing self-absorption. There are lot of ways to do this. Pornography ("sexual liberation as political control"), fear mongering, racial conflict, prurient and stupefying film, sensationalist news. Even COVID, which is very much a real virus, became an instrument of political control (the senseless prolonging of undiscriminating lockdowns and social distancing limits social contact and communication). Censorship is another symptom because if you censor discussion that says too much, again, a dangerous consensus might result that will destabilize the status quo that those in power rely on. But such tactics don't last. Either the society in question self-destructs because such a state of affairs is never sustainable, or people realize what's being done anyway. This is a dangerous situation to be in. Those in power rarely wish to change, and the mob can itself impose the most terrifying tyranny. All this would explain the emerging interest in socialism. Ties between private interests and government are extremely fuzzy, with revolving doors between industries like Big Tech and Washington. Growing resentment among the masses poses a threat. Socialism would seem to both secure oligarchic power by completing the merger of corporate interest and government while also pacifying the resentment of the mob with state-funded services and UBI or whatever else. Not all oligarchs agree on the precise means, which is where power struggles can come into play, but the general trajectory is thus.
- ur-whale 6y agohttps://archive.is/xXBOx https://archive.is/xXBOx
- amelius 6y agoFor the not so wealthy.
- underseacables 6y agoBeing rich is not the problem, being rich and using that to pit Americans against one another for profit, greed, or entertainment, is the problem.
- sacomo 6y agoBut that is the crux of the issue. Wealth is political power. The only way to mitigate wealth's influence on political institutions requires drastic, systemic changes. The wealthy can be as well meaning as they want, but no individual should control that many resources in a democratic society.
- nicoburns 6y agoI don't think it's possible to prevent wealth from having political influence. Wealth is economic power by definition. The only way to significantly reduce the impact of wealth on democracy is to reduce the amount of wealth that wealthy people have.
- underseacables 6y agoAbsolute. Wealth is power. Power is not having to worry about your safety and security. When you have so much money that you’re not answerable to anyone, you don’t worry about paying the bills or the mortgage, you can really speak your mind and spend your money in ways that others simply cannot. That is true power, imo.
- nicoburns 6y ago> When you have so much money that you’re not answerable to anyone, you don’t worry about paying the bills or the mortgage, you can really speak your mind and spend your money in ways that others simply cannot Indeed. And when you have so much money that you can offer that same freedom to others (or smaller but still significant improvements to their lives) then you inevitably gain influence over them (on average, if not always in specific cases).
- 6y ago
- willis936 6y ago>There was once a sense of collegiality among business and labour leaders fighting to rescue the city, he laments. “None of that exists now.” How is this anything other than the fault of the rich no longer “fighting to rescue the city”? They appear to just be victim blaming and complaining because there is pushback on wealth flowing upwards for decades. Moving to low tax hellholes won’t make their lives better, it’ll just keep driving the wedge of wealth inequality down further and make the rich have to install water filters and generators. It would be great news to New Yorkers since decreased demand from the rich would start making the city livable. If the rich aren’t giving to the local economy, they are only taking.
- toolz 6y agoTax revenue has outpaced median wages by a long shot. I'm not sure I can relate to the argument that increased taxes is what is needed to close the wage gap as the tax collector's have done nothing to prove they will do any better than the rich at distributing wealth.
- danaris 6y agoThe problem is not the amounts of the taxes: it is their distribution. Median real wages haven't grown much since the '70s. In that time, the income and wealth of the upper class has skyrocketed. If we need more tax revenue...but the middle class doesn't have more...maybe we should be getting that money from the people who do.
- pc86 6y agoYou're not responding to the GP's argument. They're saying that tax revenue has increased faster than median income, and this hasn't addressed income inequality at all. Why would taking more even faster do anything different? "If we need more tax revenue" isn't a foregone conclusion. It might be the answer but there's at least some evidence to the contrary.
- thrownychuman 6y ago"Low tax hellholes"? As opposed to high tax ones? Have you even been to Miami?
- Applejinx 6y agoOn the contrary, when powerless helpless and broke people intend nefarious things, that is not especially worrying. They are powerless, helpless and broke, and they can't do much to hurt you. Pretty much by definition the rich are exceptionally powerful and capable. To assume they never intend anything nefarious is a really weird assumption, and they are categorically capable of doing more about ANYTHING they might intend, for good or ill. If they intend ill, by definition that makes them a formidable enemy that must be taken seriously.
- toolz 6y agoYou'll just create a self fulfilling prophecy with that mindset. Why would the rich be prosocial if they're treated as antisocial regardless. They might as well behave nefariously and reap those rewards if people are going to treat them as an increased liability.
- meepmorp 6y agoThis. The problem is actually the fault of the poor who don’t see how wonderful the rich are. If the plebs were more fulsome with their praise, the pennies would rain down upon them from in high.
- toolz 6y ago"the rich" are not a single entity, nor are "the poor" - there's a wide spectrum of individuals that would do well to be treated as such in each category.
- fennecfoxen 6y agoNew York had better not turn on the wealthy, because we rely on the taxes they pay for so much of our city budget. A distressingly small number of people make up a distressingly large percentage of revenues.
- mrep 6y agoInteresting quote from the article: "The top 0.05 per cent of earners — just 1,786 filers — accounted for 16 per cent of its income tax revenues in 2018"
- bel_marinaio 6y agoIf the top .05% have 30% of the wealth their taxes are too low. No sure what the actual numbers are, but it would be interesting to find out.
- fennecfoxen 6y agoNo one is taxing wealth, though. They are taxing income. Please be aware of the fact these are different, that such wealth can be accumulated despite steep income taxes, and that even if such taxes are desirable NYC is not necessarily the jurisdiction which (a) is able to collect those funds, or (b) deserves to have them. Social engineering schemes at the city level have meaningful constraints.
- Chris2048 6y agoDoes that 30% wealth necessarily belong to NYC? It might not have been acquired there.
- sacomo 6y agoNY should rescind the Stock Transfer tax rebates. They are losing out on ~$16 billion in tax revenue annually.
- est31 6y agoSomething tells me that many people won't pay those 16 billion and will move to a different place instead. NYSE isn't the only stocks market in the USA.
- thrownychuman 6y agoWith what little reasons there are to actually remain in New York due to the pandemic, the last thing New York should be doing right now is raising taxes. Didn't they learn their lesson from the Silicon Valley exodus? The article itself mentions just how easy it is to pack up for Miami, and a few percentages more of already sky-high taxes will just push people to leave, especially with the federal government already hell-bent on raising taxes on their end as well. And how will this tax be implemented? Will it be a wealth tax? Or will it be a tax that effectively taxes working class doctors, engineers, and lawyers instead? Given their resources and access to powerful accountants and tax attorneys, taxing the wealthy is near-impossible. Oh, they want to tax businesses, too? Don't they realize how much businesses are hurting there right now? And how will this money be spent? Will MTA ever join the current century? Or will this tax money just fund peoples' pensions instead like in CA? Raising taxes is an especially tough sell when nobody is convinced their tax money is being spent in ways that benefit them or the public at large.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago>Didn't they learn their lesson from the Silicon Valley exodus? The people spamming the "raise taxes" button have seen the seeds of their ideology spread far and wide with the "silicon valley exodus". In light of that, why would they stop?
- lefstathiou 6y agoIve been in NYC 18 years (half my life now) and I truly believe it’s the greatest place on earth for me. It is however becoming harder to defend. The tax rates are out of control high, the quality of life is getting lower (subway infrastructure is disgusting; homeless out of control), apartment maintenance fees are ridiculous and it’s more dangerous than ever (while I lived here). Add to that the “you’re not paying you’re fair share attitude” which I’m definitely getting... there are days I feel like I should move our company to Florida or Texas. I can’t see myself living in a city that isn’t happy to have me.
- sacomo 6y agoNY should rescind the Stock Transfer tax rebates. They are losing out on ~$16 billion in tax revenue annually.
- jasode 6y ago>NY should rescind the Stock Transfer tax rebates. They are losing out on ~$16 billion in tax revenue annually. I wasn't the one that downvoted your comment but as fyi... Increasing taxes doesn't automatically mean government gets increased revenue because the economic actors affected can _change_ their behaviors to circumvent that tax. So NYC probably would not get $16 billion in extra revenue. E.g. An excerpt from an article[1] about that real life game theory playing out: >In recent weeks, the New York Stock Exchange and NASDAQ have both discussed moving their data processing centers out of New Jersey in response to reports that New Jersey may impose a stock transfer tax. Technology has made processing trades away from New York’s physical trading floors simple, and the tax may provide incentive to shift stock transfers from one exchange to another. Nations such as Sweden and Germany experienced business relocation and diminished trading levels after enacting a stock transfer tax, subsequently leading them to repeal their taxes. EDIT reply to : >They didn't have the political power to outright abolish it. What should happen now is that rebate should be removed. Yes, you had already mentioned that proposal in your first message but your next message really didn't explain why stock owners and exchanges would simply pay the extra tax instead of changing their behavior to avoid the tax*. [1] https://www.cityandstateny.com/articles/opinion/opinion/dont-bring-back-stock-transfer-tax.html#:~:text=New%20York's%20stock%20transfer%20tax,coffers%20to%20be%20later%20refunded https://www.cityandstateny.com/articles/opinion/opinion/dont....
- amelius 6y agoWhat happened to the Occupy movement, why did it suddenly stop?
- sacomo 6y agoObama squashed it.
- failwhaleshark 6y agoActually, the mayor did the squishing. Maybe Obama leaned on Bloomy, but that's all.
- fsagx 6y agoActually, It was very well coordinated between federal agencies and local police departments: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/29/fbi-coordinated-crackdown-occupy https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/29/fbi-co...
- failwhaleshark 6y agoSo it was team squishing.
- ttt0 6y agoIdentity politics
- failwhaleshark 6y agoBecause: 1. 1% Michael Bloomberg billionaire decided it wasn't convenient anymore and sent in the cops to beat heads to clear them out. 2. Vague movements rarely are organized enough to have clear goals, a clear plan to get there, and sustain interest, attention, and involvement to achieve them. You don't ask billionaires for a donation because they'll never give more than a dollar. And you don't camp-out at their offices because they control the cops, the government, and it looks weak. Once the physical presences of OM were lost, the community, social, and political bonds were severed because the people weren't serious and committed to seeing real change through; instead, they treated it like a Wall St. Woodstock. If citizens were serious about recouping loot stolen from working people, there are only two things billionaires understand: money and survival. If a movement can't effectively threaten either of those, then they are irrelevant. This dynamic of under-regulated capitalism is the fault of the billionaires, and how their grotesque greed snatched defeat from the jaws of obscene success and just handed it over to likely rapid upheaval and an unproven, alternative system.
- wombatmobile 6y agoI couldn't access the article from the link because it is paywalled. Same with the search result from archive.org But when I google "The rich shouldn’t feel like the enemy’: Is New York turning on the wealthy?" and click through from the google search result I get the full article.
- dredmorbius 6y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26710929 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26710929
- throwaway0a5e 6y agoYou Reap What You Sow You wanna tell people they're what's wrong with the world fine but don't be surprised when they don't wanna give you their resources, distance themselves from you and support your enemies. I do not feel bad at all for the people who are lamenting this. They should have picked up a history book.
- WhompingWindows 6y agoWhich history book? Many history books would tell us that high levels of income and wealth inequality lead to social unrest (French Revolution, for instance). In my view, taxation comes down to a judgment of "fairness" and this is very hard to agree upon. Given the rise of COVID, it's even harder to fairly allocate the more limited revenues in big cities now.
- throwaway0a5e 6y agoFunny you mention the french revolution. I think it's a great point of comparison because the precursor situation has so much in common with NYC's current situation. The french didn't revolt because the rich were rich or because the rich weren't kicking in. They revolted because (warning, massive generalization) the government was taking a lot of money from everyone and squandering it (paying back debts for boondoggles, to the benefit of many wealthy people) despite times being very tough for many. While few are literally starving in NYC the parallel, particularly the government taking in tons of revenue yet failing to deliver better conditions for its people, is definitely a strong one. Refresher for those interested: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution#Crisis_of_the_Ancien_R%C3%A9gime https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution#Crisis_of_th...
- willis936 6y agoIt looks to me like people were pissed because regional parliaments (nobility) were bleeding a turnip with the poor while not bothering to kick in. Saying it was squandered money when literally the first two sentences say "state income was not being done properly" is puzzling.
- failwhaleshark 6y agoThe rich are in their own bubbles of selfish, narcissistic, malignant neglect and destruction of the planet and all of us "little people." They ARE the enemy of all life and all people, by definition.
- cwhiz 6y agoTaxes are already too high in NYC. A single adult in NYC with a $100k salary has an effective overall tax rate of 31.5%, and 9% of that is city and state. Trying to raise the rates higher is insane. We have a spending problem, not an income problem. Not to mention that the timing of this is just absurd. Everything that makes NYC great has been closed for a year. The next mayor wants people to pay more, but won’t commit to reopening the city? Why would the “rich” stay? Why would anyone stay? For the trash, and piss?
- stuaxo 6y agoThat's a way lower effective rate than ordinary people pay.
- cwhiz 6y agoDo you think someone earning $100,000 in NYC is not an ordinary person?
- titzer 6y agoIn Germany, you'd be paying 42%. You'd get subways, a national rail system, universal healthcare, and college would be free. America doesn't have a "spending" problem, it has a history of mal-investment and neglect. But those F-35s. And nukes! Enough to wipe out most of humanity.
- cwhiz 6y agoNot a spending problem. Proceeds to list things that we spend and invest unnecessarily on. We have a subway system in NYC. Run by the MTA. A bloated and incompetent organization that needs a billion dollars to extend a subway line a single mile, and will routinely spend hundreds of millions of dollars on unnecessary bridge painting and other shenanigans. There’s a reason we don’t have nice things, and it’s not because our taxes are too low. Edit: It is actually $3.5 billion for a mile.
- titzer 6y ago
- gatlin 6y agoI'm getting some kind of paywall. It's all relative but in general if you're hoarding wealth beyond anything you could possibly ever make use of while the people around you want for necessities, you are behaving as an opponent and should not feign surprise at the treatment. Also until we are past capitalism, no, society is not turning on the wealthy (they're still wealthy)
- iandanforth 6y agoLotta high-income people in this thread bemoaning taxes and threatening to leave. Tiny violins will play your way out.
- failwhaleshark 6y agoNawh, just temporarily-ashamed, wannabe billionaires in the forms of homeless to yuppies. A few actual billionaires need to be lined-up against the wall to motivate the rest of them to do what they should've done of their own accord. There is no other effective way because their greed and inhumanity are unlimited. The prescription maybe unpleasant to a handful, but the condition is far, far and away worse (climate collapse, extinction, downfall of civilization) if left untreated in the grand scheme of things. Every rationally- and morally-courageous person must advocate the assassination of some billionaires to send a message that the "1%"'s behaviors, interests, and goals must change immediately, or they too shall die, since they have stopped listening to everything and everyone else. It is unfortunate, but it is necessary and critical to our survival because of the existential threat they pose to the rest of us. Calling all XLR practitioners.
- WhompingWindows 6y agoWhy do we have to make anyone into the enemy? I legitimately do not hate any American leaders, even the leaders of the opposing party who do the most to prevent "my" policies. They are human beings too, and we'd all be better off without hatred.
- weakfish 6y agoMany people my age (20) feel as if the likes of Bezos and Zuckerberg are slowly sucking the life out of the planet (figuratively and literally) and henceforth stealing our future, so to speak.
- gremlinsinc 6y agoJust an anecdotal... Here in utah we have water shortages and major droughts. Politicians like the governor plead with us to "watch our water" while not doing anything about industrial use of water. Now for statistics... All private use of water in the state amounts to under 3% total. Meaning: If everybody in the state took one shower per year it'd do diddly for the water shortages/droughts. Because industry is still using the bulk by a shit-ton. It's all posturing to make us "feel good" that we're "helping" but it doesn't do anything. My yearly household amount of water is something like 0.016% of state use..or maybe it's 0.0016... I read the statistic somewhere else, but it's not even worth doing anything because it won't move the needle one iota. I personally have an abhorrence towards all politicians, at least the ones who take money from special interests and corporations (so 95% of politicians).
- 0xbadc0de5 6y agoWho's John Galt?
- weakfish 6y agoDo you think Ayn Rand is the answer to America's problems?
- sleepysysadmin 6y agoHow does someone become a billionaire? They typically have to have a good idea + other people helping them. Then beyond that them and their team have to do something people like. Apple is worth 2 trillion right now. They didn't get there by robbing anyone. They produced a product/service that people wanted. They produced a value without forcing anyone to do anything. That creates an imbalance. Society now owes them in kind. I did something for you and now you do something for me. That's where the 'enemy' part comes in. The rich are owed a value in return but people don't want them to get that value back. They want to increase taxes and take the rich people's money away. In effect they want the rich to produce a product/service and get little to nothing in return. The problem is that you can never ever adjust for that. The original product/service is priced with taxation accounted for. NY increases taxes to take the money from the rich but in turn only makes the products more expensive. The rich then just get that much more rich because they still take 20% profit margin.
- iso1631 6y ago> How does someone become a billionaire? Typically billionaires become billionaires by gambling other peoples money and winning "Most fortunes were made in the staid finance and investments industry...Notable finance and investing list members include Warren Buffett, the third richest person in the world and Robert Smith, the founder of private equity firm Vista Equity Partners...It turns out managing or investing other people’s money can make you rich" https://www.forbes.com/sites/willyakowicz/2019/03/09/how-the-worlds-billionaires-got-so-rich/?sh=45faff4c6ae6 https://www.forbes.com/sites/willyakowicz/2019/03/09/how-the...
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]