Skip to main content

Cross posted at Working Man Radio.  If you like this diary, recommend it, like the video and then share it.

It's one of those perennial questions raised by rightwing ideologues.  "Why should the rich pay higher marginal taxes?"  Flat taxes are said to be "fair," as opposed to "redistribution" which is "stealing."  

For today's podcast, we offer the simple obvious argument for the simple justice of progressive taxation, especially with respect to the estate tax.  We start with the question of what exactly the Walton sisters, as an example, did to earn their fortune?  

Is it really harder to push your way out of a rich woman's vagina?  

As for why the Walton should pay more, that's simple.  They use more government services.

Local police protects Walmart's goods from thieves.

Walmart uses interstate highways to transfer tons of goods to their stores.

Walmart tracks it's inventory, and moves money around using satellites and communication infrastructure built at taxpayer expense.

Last but not least, the United States Navy protects the sea lanes between China and the Walmart store near you.

The argument is simple . . . and you need to use it everytime you hear your favorite conservative complaining about how "unfair" taxes are to millionaires.

As usual, the video is much more entertaining than the dry write-up.  Enjoy.

And make your morning drive faster with our daily audio podcast available at Working Man Radio.  Available on iTunes.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  The Flat Tax I Support (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Kevskos, llywrch

    The six heirs to the Walmart fortune own 48% of the wealth of this country.

    Six people own 48% of America.

    I support a "flat tax" where these 6 people pay 48% of all taxes in America.

    •  koseighty - your statistic isn't correct (5+ / 0-)

      The Walmart heirs may have more wealth than the bottom 48% of Americans combined, although the last number I read was more like the bottom 30%. As a percent of total wealth the Walton's at about $115 billion of cumulative net worth have less than 10% of the total national wealth. I have no idea where you found any credible data that suggested the Walton's owned nearly half the wealth in the US. It's shocking that they own even 5%, but the number in your comment is fiction.

      "let's talk about that"

      by VClib on Thu Jul 18, 2013 at 09:40:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  A Flat Tax ????? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Conceptual Guerilla, unfangus

      I would prefer to flat tax the shit out them...

      I don't worry about rich folks.

      Holy Cow!!! 06/18/2013 and I've got my mojo back!!!! A new signature will be written shortly.

      by Josiah Bartlett on Thu Jul 18, 2013 at 10:00:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well I think he is proposing ... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Kevskos, Josiah Bartlett

        ... something like the way property taxes work.  Tax them based on their accumulated wealth, as opposed to their income.  Even at 5%, their taxes would be staggering.  Something on the order of $15 billion a year.

        Good luck getting that one through the Ways And Means Committee.

        •  Something really needs to be done about (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          artr2, Josiah Bartlett, unfangus, llywrch

          accumulations of wealth in this country.

          When two brothers can manipulate the national oil market to their advantage (and thus fucking the rest of the country,) something needs to change.

          With the miracle of compound interest rates and the Capital Gains tax rates, money calls to money like mass calls to mass -- and eventually, you have a black fucking hole that can only make the person who owns it richer while sucking money out of the pockets of everyone else.  We're already at that point.

          Consider the fact that Bill Gates made $6 billion off of his investments last year.  That's 6 billion in income.  That's $192 every second.  The man could literally burn a hundred dollar bill every second of his life and he'd still take in a little less than half what he made.

          At some point, we have to say that people are Rich Enough and that they really don't deserve any more money, because their ludicrous accumulations of wealth are a detriment to us all.

        •  probably not constitutional. (0+ / 0-)

          you'd need an amendment first l, which is unlikely.

  •  Let me suggest that, since the federal Treasury (3+ / 0-)

    is the source of all currency and the Congress is tasked with distributing it, the function of all taxation is to bring the currency back to the starting point, to keep it circulating, so we don't keep having to issue more. It's called "revenue" because it comes back.
    The Congress, in the interest of shirking one of its responsibilities and because banksters wanted to continue making a living managing the currency (a practice that traces back to the Dutch who accumulated all the gold Spain and Portugal stole from the Americas and the issued letter of credit in its place), set up the Federal Reserve Banks in 1913 as a gigantic money-laundering scheme. That is, dollars from the Treasury are first passed through the banks, so they can get a "cut" of every public dollar sent out and then they lend it back to the Treasury for Congress to actually spend on public works. The banksters are quintessential middlemen -- highwaymen whose "take" is legal because the legislative bodies say so.
    "legalized crime" -- the U.S. has excelled at that from the start. After all, slavery was a legal state.

    We organize governments to deliver services and prevent abuse.

    by hannah on Fri Jul 19, 2013 at 03:59:08 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site