American billionaires got $434 billion richer during the pandemic

I didn't assume anything. I asked a question someone making accusations of exploitation should have an answer for. So let's not think up imaginary scenarios to argue over, and simply address the question. What amount of value was exchanged in trade for the 434 billion? Do you have any idea?

When you're done with that you can answer this one: What is the appropriate amount of wealth increase Bezos and Zuckerberg should have realized if, as you suggest, they didn't exploit any consumers?

 

I mowed my neighbors lawn today for $30. How much do you want OP? Did you even feel the pinch on your livelihood?

 

It's clear you do not understand what the OP is about, even after I explained it.

Please ignore this thread.

 

OT. T is not about personal anecdote.

 

It’s about left wing class warfare

 

My post was in jest, I am sure Mark Z would take this personal.

 

YOu are trying to reduce the OP to " If X makes X dollars, how much should the government take?

The thread is about windfall profits earned by billionaires on pandemics. I mentioned 'windfall' but I see now I should have highlighted it to make it clear that this is what the thread is about.

"Windfall profits" is the Topic, not 'general earnings', and this would require a commission to study the matter..

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/w/windfall-profits.asp
Windfall profits are large, unexpected gains resulting from lucky circumstances. Such profits are generally well above historical norms and may occur due to factors such as a price spike or supply shortage that are either temporary in nature or longer-lasting.

I set some parameters for discussion:

1. Is this a good thing (that billionaires are allowed windfall profits on pandemics)? (part in italics I should have given in the OP)
2. If not, what should the lawmakers do to correct it?
3. or should the government just allow it to happen, even if it is not a good thing?
4. Is the article accurate? If not, to what degree, what context is missing?

You, however, are trying to hijack the thread to some much narrower point (to a degree which puts it OT ) which you believe supports a right wing agenda.
But, since i could have been clearer on the OP, I'll cut you some slack,

If you asked 'what portion of the windfall should be taxed' , well, that is the question, in essence, I"m asking, but I added some stuff about 'philanthropy' as well.

 

They tell me there is such a place where all are equal and all share and share alike. It's a Catholic sect of nuns. They are in most major big cities in America. They do have a major flaw though. No males can join.

1. No, of course not. We have a Constitution ,like no other country, which is an attraction to just about every country in the world. What is the attraction? Life, Liberty and the opportunity to pursue happiness and own land.

2. Personally the least government is the best government. They should roll back all regulations that hinder anyone from being able to start a business as long as it isn't infringing on others.

3. The government needs to get out of the way and let those who have job skills do their job. We have way too many lawyers, who's main purpose is to propose laws that create controversy and lawsuits, which lines their pockets.

4. I think some research on large corporations and their management teams might surprise you on the amount of good and charitable works they do not only for this country but other countries. Americans are the most charitable people in the world. I'm sure some on here will talk about the evils and others may enlighten us all on why cities and states have failed their own citizens.

 

Not focusing on earned income.

I'm actually focusing on windfall profits, but upper limits on wealth, too, is related.

So, the question is not 'value exchanged for value', but windfall profits giving individuals vast amounts of power.

so, the question is, should individuals, accountable to no one, have has much power as having multibillions affords?

What if someone similar to Bin Laden were a multibillionaire?

Is it right to allow individuals acquire this much power?

Did you know that some very rich people, rich person Y, when dealing with country X, who was giving rich person Y some problems, told country X, "if you don't agree to my terms, I will finance your enemy", see what I mean? Billions give an individual power. Is it right to allow individuals to wield this much power?

I don't know that anything can be done about it I'm just asking questions.

Windfall profits (investopedia)
Windfall profits are large, unexpected gains resulting from lucky circumstances. Such profits are generally well above historical norms and may occur due to factors such as a price spike or supply shortage that are either temporary in nature or longer-lasting.

 

Simplistic libertarianism. It fails to factor in the complex economic, political and power dynamics of the upper echelons of society.

I suggest a review of the following sources

tps://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/12/how-the-rich-use-the-government-to-enrich-themselves.html

A study of this book explains how the rich use the government to enrich themselves.

https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-captured-economy-9780190627768?cc=us&lang=en&

https://www-cdn.oxfam.org/s3fs-publ...conomy-one-percent-tax-havens-180116-en_0.pdf

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-american-economy-is-rigged/

As an egalitarian, allow me to disabuse you of a myth, and that is the myth
that egalitarianism's objectives is everyone the same level of economic status.

No, what it is about is a reduction of extremes that are running away from us in the extreme directions, insofar as opportunity, priviledge, wealth, etc.

It's not about "making everyone exactly equal" which is a strawman.

 

Yeah, and I'm trying to get you to realize that "windfall" and "exploitation" are subjective terms that you cannot effectively define without a concrete measurement of both halves of the trade. Value is subjective.

So go ahead and define it. What was traded in value for the 434 billion. Put a number on it. Was it 10 billion worth of value in a non covid market? 100? I'm trying to get you to back up your claim with some evidence, any evidence other than just shooting off a large number like 434 billion with no context.

They are accountable to their clients, but you haven't shown they need to be held accountable for using that power in any way that wasn't incredibly positive.

What if we don't discuss imaginary scenarios. You claimed exploitation took place. I'm arguing you imagined it. If it's real, there should be real evidence that you can produce. Let's see that evidence because all we have at this point is your perception of some people earning too much profit.

Should you have the power to limit them?

More imagination. Are the imaginary people in your scenario wearing top hats and carrying canes?

I can't solve the problems that exist in your imaginary world.

Please go ahead and prove this definition true! You can start by answering the question I asked in the first place. How much value was traded for the 434 billion. If Amazon's profit margin went from 4% to 50% in a month, we can certainly talk. But I don't think that happened. I think their volume increased, and you're suggesting punishing them for offering a service that was the exact service everyone in the nation needed.

 

Please tell me it's a commission of captured government regulators. That would be mint.

 

1. Of course it is a good thing. Business profits create all the wealth in society. Bezos and Zuckerberg didn't get any richer really. Their stock holdings became more valuable. They would only get richer if they sold some shares. That value could well decline.
2. Government has a duty to treat people equally, not what you view as fairly. As soon as government takes from one group to give to another it is failing that duty. The concept of equality is the basis of the strength of the foundation of our country. Bezos should be treated no differently than I am by the government. The fact that Bezos was better than me at making money is immaterial.
3. But it is a good thing despite where this question leads.
4. See above.

 

Meanwhile, only 39% of Americans could pay a $1,000 emergency bill from savings:

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/18/few-americans-have-enough-savings-to-cover-a-1000-emergency.html

This has been in the making through decades of supply side economics. The middle class has been forced to two income earners per family to survive, and needed to rely on credit more and more for basic needs. It is no wonder that a large majority of Americans can not afford to stay home for a month. Now, we are forced to reopen the economy prematurely without a plan, so people can survive economically . All that, while the billionaire class is raking in the profits, sitting safely at home and protected from the virus. However, the minimum wage earners bear all the risk by having to go out every day to work, taking the chance to get infected. This has all been very predictable, but whenever someone talks about those systemic problem, they are labeled as a socialist immediately, so the argument is shot down.

 

During the lockdown I personally purchased many goods from Amazon that I would normally have purchased locally. Some of the things I did pay a higher price for, but that higher price must take into account the value of having the product delivered to my door (sometimes the exact same day). Some of the prices were in fact lower than I would have paid had I gotten into my car, driven to a local store, and picked something off a shelf myself (an action that also has an opportunity cost associated with it.) That opportunity cost was highly modified by the fact that I might have gotten a disease along the way and infected my immunocompromised wife. That's a big chunk of value right there that you can't directly measure in dollars. But, that value is reflected in the dollars I'm personally willing to pay for products Amazon provides. Willing payment is key. Nobody wrenched my hard earned labor out of my hands and used it to buy goods on Amazon. I did that willingly. So for you to imagine that Bezos exploited me and others completely ignores the value calculations we did when deciding to buy our products from Amazon, or when deciding to Facebook message a loved one we haven't seen in a while instead of visiting with them in person.

 

American billionaires got $434 billion richer during the pandemic
So, at least there was a blessing in all the suffering.
"Class warfare"? If there is any warfare being conducted on classes, it isn't coming from the poor.
The unconscious group of ridiculously wealthy are their own and everyone else's worst enemy. Undoubtedly, we will all suffer from the consequences.
The repeat a saying a dear friend and (unlike I) life long communist once related to me, "Capitalism is the exploitation of man by man, whereas communism is the reverse." I fear the extremes of those at the "top" and their failures of vision will plunge us into some "reverse".

 

It's only a matter of time before progressives claim any dollar above the median is excess and take it.

Their desire to created fairness is a slippery slope contrary to the foundations this country and our economy were built on.

 

Your thinking is delusional. Do you HONESTLY expect that if you tax the rich an exorbitant amount that they’re just going to bend over, grab their ankles and pay your tax?

Of course not. They’re going to recoup that loss by making a combination of moves. They will use cheaper materials meaning you pay the same amount for an inferior product, they will reduce quantity (ie mcdonalds charging for the same large fry but decreasing the size of the box so they use less fries), Or they will increase prices, fire employees, reduce hours and end expansion plans. All of this means the consumer gets screwed EVERY time they purchase anything from any store.

If that doesn’t work, they will liquidate and take their money to a country that doesn’t tax them at an absurd rate.

What they will NOT do is simply pay your tax.

 

Amazon handles something like 20 million transactions a day. Absorbing the cost of a single regulation through a price increase is not even noticeable to the consumer. But amazon is not regulated by just a single policy. It's regulated by many. What doesn't happen is any sort of comparison between the regulation's intent, and it's actual performance. So let's say we assume that Amazon needs to be regulated because of a "windfall" profit they experienced during the covid. A regulation is put in place, the consumer absorbs the penalty and then next year the assumed windfall is "unexpectedly" even higher! It's because they are only focusing on half of the trade and not comparing that value to anything on the other side of the transaction.

Imagine the wailing that will take place if big pharma is able to produce 300 million doses of covid vaccinations that everyone in the country has to take. It will not matter a jot what sort of monumental hurdles pharma had to leap in order to produce that. It won't matter a skosh what the profit margin would be. No one will add up all the people that didn't die as a result of the vaccine, and put a dollar number on that.

They'll look at the posted profit and scream abuse.

 

Well, tsk tsk, you are just regurgitating the right wing talking points. Allow me to disabuse you of some myths.

All I ask, is that you watch the entire video.

 

All you are doing is saying 'it's tooooo hard' 'we can't do it' blah blah which is nothing more than whining.

My OP was asking asking questions, I wasn't pretending I had the precise answer. But, with studies, a commission dedicated to the task, it could be done. The power of individuals can be limited via legislation. You say it an't be done, but you are wrong.

If you are making 6 billion year, and are required to by $3 billion in taxes (in the 50s, the tax on superrich was 90%, and no, no one paid it, but after loopholes, they did pay about 50% ).

You are left with about $1,000,000 per hour on a 40 work week.

What part of one million bucks per hour equals 'punishment' ?

Your logic wanes, and history proves it.

 

So, as a side related issue, you favor voting by mail ( for the same reason) right?

See, many on the right are opposing voting by mail, but have no problem with buying stuff by mail.

 

Which non-billionaires were prohibited from buying stock?

 

So let me get your last couple of weeks summed up.

You want everyone to stay home
You want businesses remained closed
You don't like that Amazon made a bunch because Everyone was home and ordered online for goods while businesses were forced to be closed.
You don't like that Amazon provides cheaper goods to those struggling financially, you would rather take that revenue, which would force Amazon to raise the prices on those struggling financially, hence make them struggle even more.

Sum it all up? Seems very logical

 

Not once have I said something in this thread was to hard to do. In fact in every one of my posts I ask you to provide me with evidence of the problem with the expectation that you will. Every time you fail to do it. The entire premise of this thread is based on an problem you imagine exists. You gave me a number, 434 billion dollars, that is supposed to be evidence of this problem. My argument is that it's not. You've made an assumption that exploitation had taken place. Prove it and then maybe we can discuss policy to correct the problem. Otherwise we can't correct a problem if we don't actually observe it.