Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Americans Vote For Paid Time Off u0026 Higher Taxes On The Rich!" video.

Taxing the rich at a higher rate does not do much. One, a lot of times they pass if of to the consumer and two, a lot of these so call "rich people" have a large portion of their wealth tied into their stocks of their company. That is why Warren Buffet supposedly pays less than his secretary.
5
@rustinusti "My right to my daddy's money is worth more than your right to live tyvmmmm" It is in all reality.
4
@bluehero-96 how so? I can justify all of it. Take my modem for example. Because of government mandated lock downs we have to hold meeting virtually and I have to do online rules test. Thus internet is required. As I said, though, I am not going to make much money as my season was canceled so instead I will use it as an education expense. Why? Because since my classes are online I need internet to complete them, especially after Thanksgiving when they are going to shut down the university again. It is being smart and knowing the tax code. In fact, this is why the rich benefit so much along with politicians. You have corrupt politicians like Biden and Harris saying they are going to raise tax on the rich but instead will say they did while adding numerous loopholes. This is why Trump and many of his supporters support a simplified tax code, one the rich would not benefit from. Most people do not have the ability to hire accountants and lawyers to swim through the tax code nor are nerds like me. Everything I do is completely legal. Again, take the modem for example, prior to covid it would be hard to challenge it as an education expense, now I can. Same with buying shoes. I need to be in shape to run up and down the field thus having a good pair of jogging shoes is needed. BTW, sports officials are made up of all types of careers including lawyers and accountants. One, who is an accountant, told me all of this.
3
@custos3249 by law banks can only hold 10% of their reserve. They use the 90% to loan out to people. It is a way to grow the money system by what is called "the inverted pyramid".
3
@robm6645 it does expand workers' right. People who "work" for those companies are independent contractors and thus have a lot of flexibility in how and when they work. I am an independent contractor on a part time gig I do and I like the flexibility. If prop 22 were to not pass Lyft and Uber will have less employees as basically all do not want to work 40 hours a week with a strict schedule. As a result Lyft and Uber will have to raise prices or cease to exist creating a monopoly with cabs.
2
@robm6645 If people left with less money that is their fault. As an independent contractor you can pull it off to where you pay basically no taxes. How? You get a 1099 when you file for taxes. There are so many tax write offs. I do not do the driving but I am a sports official for high school sports. I am an independent contractor. Things like mileage driving, buying a pair of shows, a gym membership, a polo shirt as I have to show up on site dressed in a professional way, etc. are all tax write offs. For example, the gym membership allows me to stay in shape to officiate. A pair of shoes I use to jog in. I may use those shoes for normal wearing as well, but if I use them to also jog it that is a tax write off. So me buying a pair of shoes I would have bought anyway becomes a tax write off.
2
@BrokenAbyss every little bit counts. You go here or there and it starts to add up. I just bought a new modem as my other one went to crap after 7 years. I could use that as a write off as well as, during these times, we hold virtual meetings and I have to do online test. Due to my spring season being canceled I am going to be making less money this year so I will most likely use it as an education expense instead.
2
@custos3249 you do know people work at banks and banks need to pay those employees somehow? Also, your constantly hear Kyle complain about how so many live paycheck to paycheck (really, a lot is because of poor money management), but if people need to make an unexpected payment where are they going to get the money? From a bank.
2
@kevchard5214 screwing people how? How did the rich, besides politicians, screw people over? In the private sector in order to succeed you have to offer something consumers want.
2
@kevchard5214 "They only help society when they can make a profit" Exactly, what is your point? There is no force involved there. I take my car too the mechanic I do because he provides me a good service, not because he held a gun to my head and forced me to.
2
States have different laws. Most do have these policies voted on. At the federal level nothing is determined by the majority of the people as the federal government is there to serve the states, not the people. Thus states send representatives to decide in Congress.
2
Kind of my thought.
1
You should be for prop 22. Almost all app based drivers support it.
1
What were they?
1
@robm6645 I am a scientist to start. Next, they do not do what you say. If they do they will be losing money as people will no longer work for them.
1
@bluehero-96 Trump wanted a simplified tax code with no loopholes.
1
@oldmoney1022 that is not against the law. I use them to jog to stay in shape. I also use them for everyday use. Why? Because I have no other pair of tennis shoes. Thus I need them to jog. So please tell me how am I breaking the law? Again, I had accountants and lawyers that I work with guide me on this.
1
@oldmoney1022 you see, there is a lot of gray area in this. If I travel say, 120 miles to work a game and along the way I buy something to eat, I can use that as a tax write off. 50% of food expenses count. One can argue that no matter what, game or not, I will still need to eat, which is true. But since I purchased a food on a trip where I worked a game 50% count as a tax write off. Again, I have had lawyers and accountants guide me in this.
1
@kevchard5214 I have spent time around the rich. How are they sociopaths? Career politicians are, but those in the private sector are, for the most part, great people that help out society.
1
@ismaelolafson2583 Germany and the US are two different cultures and economies as a whole.
1
@ousarlxsfjsbvbg8588 it is not meaningless. Yes, the money is still their money. That is why, in a crisis, no bank will go broke and they can still give the money back to the people who try to pull it out. This occurred during the Great Depression where banks were going broke and people could not give their money. Thus banks are one, insured, and two, they can receive credits from the Federal Reserve if needed. The money is invested in which people pull out a loan from the bank and use it to buy a home, a car, start a business, etc.
1
@ousarlxsfjsbvbg8588 it is not a bad argument. Read the book "Debunking Utopia". Culture plays a major role in how laws and tax codes are developed.
1
@jankjaws9815 what was wrong with what I said? I come here to have a discussion. Just dismissing me shows you have no actual argument. And the reason why I keep coming back because your side struggles in giving me evidence or data or factual information.
1
@ousarlxsfjsbvbg8588 "there is no direct correlation between the ultra wealthy just letting their money sit inside bank accounts and banks loaning out money to people" How else do banks get money? " Furthermore, the sole purpose of bank loans is to generate profit for the banks and studies show that there is no significant relationship between bank loans and economic growth probably because all that money and then some has to be paid back to the banks" Care to give me a study? I would like to read it. Also, in economics there is a thing called "the inverted pyramid". Basically saying I have $100 in the bank. $90 get loaned out to someone who say wants to buy a new radio for their car, or a new tire, or whatever. That $90 goes to the company which, while true, goes to a bank (probably another one), $81 is loaned out to someone buying something else and the cycle continues. It is one method in having the economy rolling. The 2008 recession were a function of two problems. One, democrats pushed to give out loans to anyone and two, banks were protected because of government action. Not the free market. It is a "heads I win tails you lose" situation.
1
@jankjaws9815 so you know, when I am presented with enough evidence I have changed my mind.
1
Angel Fox no I won't what?
1
@ousarlxsfjsbvbg8588 I looked at the paper. One concern is that they are talking about after a financial crisis as opposed to normal economic times. During a crisis economic is slow to begin with. Next, interest rates are lowered to encourage people to no longer save money but spend it, thus pull it out of banks. So while an interesting studies, it is one of many pieces of the puzzle. And again, it was talking about a financial crisis, not normal economic time. The Glass Steagall repeal did not cause the banking crisis. Several banks who went under did not fall under Glass Steagall. Read the NPR article entitled "Fact Check: Did Glass-Steagall Cause The 2008 Financial Crisis?" They say in the end "The 1999 changes to Glass-Steagall led to much bigger banks, but that was, at best, just one factor in the 2008 financial crisis." Next, HUD gave Fannie and Freddy authority to take on riskier loans. Before HUD's changes 30% of their loans were supposed to be low income, but under Clinton it went up to 50% and under Bush up to 55%. Also, they made the risk because they were going to be bailed out in the end. That is not capitalism. It is, once again, a "heads I win tails you lose" situation.
1
@jamborichamata1525 not true. Most successful people engage with all walks of life. Career politicians do not.
1
@kevchard5214 what is moral? Most of the rich in the private sector became rich by giving people what they demand. For as awful you may feel Jeff Bezos is he never forced anyone to use Amazon.
1