Comments by "Harry Mills" (@harrymills2770) on "He turned into a STUTTERING MESS when challenged with simple questions!! lol" video.

  1. The fact is that whether it's the government or a private investor, EVERY job in existence requires someone to put up the money. That money is invested based on risk:return ratio. If you tax 90% of the profits at 90%, you're reducing the return on investment by 90%, and that makes the risk:return ratio tilts towards being more risky relative to the expected return. The "social democracies" of Europe have LOWER capital gains taxes (by far) than the USA. They get it. (for once). The rich are always going to scheme to stay rich. When you raise capital gains taxes, they put their money into SAFE investments. They're less willing to invest in a venture that entails any kind of risk. So the innovation machine slows to a crawl. And not just innovation. "Normal" businesses will also have a tougher time getting start-up money. The beauty of the leftist narrative is you can't point to businesses that don't exist and jobs that don't exist but WOULD exist under a less regressive (they call it "progressive") tax structure. But the leftist can always point to a few winners who benefited from the money they stole from others through taxes. "Look at all these people/businesses we helped!" People arguing against such charlatans never have a similar list of people who were HURT because of the tax policy, even though there are many times as many such people, who just didn't get a break because business and entrepreneurship were strangled. No. The leftist would argue "We could have MORE successful businesses if we taxed more and used the money to help businesses." It's a very powerful, yet blatantly disingenuous argument that's made more effective by the fact that so many educated people BELIEVE it. The best thing government could do is get out of the way of small business. Instead of taxing 90% of a tiny pie. Take 5% of 20 million pies! Charge $50/month for your exclusive YouTube content and get 50 subscribers or charge $1/month and get 200,000 subscribers. It's that sort of thing. More people will want to - and be able to pay/play - if the cost is low, relative to the return. Like I said, the rich will find a way to stay rich, regardless of the rule set. High capital gains taxes favor the already-rich over the just-want-to-improve-my-situation-without-having-to-cheat people (You know. The largest number of people this leftist pretends to care about.
    1
  2. it's because they "know" they could put it to better use than the people who actually created the wealth.
    1
  3. The free market effortlessly weeds out $5,000 hammers and $10,000 garden hoses. In government, that's what it costs, after everybody "overseeing" the production and managing the money gets paid. "They need more oversight." Yes. Your top-down model of reality requires a lot of "overseers." You create an artificial system that is only sustainable by force and authoritarianism. You give everyone an incentive to cheat and then you need to "oversee" everybody to keep them from cheating. You make it harder and harder for people to succeed without cheating in the process.
    1