Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, December 10, 2025

Fewer than 60,000 people -- 0.001% of the world's population -- control three times as much wealth as the entire bottom half of humanity, according to a report that argues global inequality has reached such extremes that urgent action has become essential.

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

the interests who pay them. Authoritarian states take away education and personal choices from their citizens. Authoritarian states keep people in constant fear. Authoritarian states steal the productivity of the many and siphon them up to the benefit of the few. Authoritarian states

-- Pam Keith (@pamkeithdc.bsky.social) Dec 6, 2025 at 8:55 AM

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Updated 2021

www.forbes.com

#1 | Posted by Petrous at 2025-12-10 11:25 AM | Reply

But the problem is the inner city child who gets a baloney sammich for lunch in school according to people who simp for billionaires.

#2 | Posted by Nixon at 2025-12-10 12:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1


#3 | Posted by C0RI0LANUS at 2025-12-10 12:14 PM | Reply

Communism controlled half the land area of the world at one point.

For a Reason.

This kind of Crap will cause a Renaissance of Communist activities.

To counter the Concentration of Wealth and Control.

Every Action causes an Equal and Opposite Reaction.

#4 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-12-10 12:15 PM | Reply

But the problem is the inner city child who gets a baloney sammich for lunch in school according to people who simp for billionaires.

#2 | Posted by Nixon at 2025-12-10 12:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

Why is the inner city child eating a baloney sandwich anyone's problem, other than the parent(s) who decided to hit the hood lottery by spitting out children for WF checks.

#5 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-12-10 01:11 PM | Reply

" the parent(s) who decided to hit the hood lottery by spitting out children for WF checks."

Because having children is a for-profit scheme?!?

Talk about your Republican Math. Stay in school, kids!

#6 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-12-10 01:19 PM | Reply

-Because having children is a for-profit scheme?!?

It's definitely not a scheme.

#7 | Posted by eberly at 2025-12-10 01:30 PM | Reply

- people who simp for billionaires.

Every Trumper on these pages, and all those who aren't.

They blame immigrants instead, because that's what billionaire/corporate owned media to them do. Imagine that.

#8 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-10 01:42 PM | Reply

Hold on now.....let's not rag on baloney sandwiches. LOL

But...what's the problem with them? That they are baloney sandwiches...or that it's free to the inner city kid paid by someone else?

#9 | Posted by eberly at 2025-12-10 01:46 PM | Reply

-They blame immigrants instead

I agree....but ever see "Gangs of New York"?

Politicians been using immigrants as a wedge issue for a long time......

#10 | Posted by eberly at 2025-12-10 01:47 PM | Reply

When a 28 year old has the same skills as an 18 year old,it's the 28 year old that is at fault.

If you spent your life not improving, your wages will reflect you.

#11 | Posted by Petrous at 2025-12-10 01:48 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#11

What is this 'everyone starts out with the same genes' nonsense?

#12 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-10 01:51 PM | Reply

"Meritocracy" my @$$

#13 | Posted by hamburglar at 2025-12-10 02:05 PM | Reply

Beverly is a fugging idiot.

#14 | Posted by Angrydad at 2025-12-10 02:28 PM | Reply

14

You can be ignored or be confronted.

which is it? I would assume you prefer to be ignored based on your weak ass posts....but you can answer for yourself.

#15 | Posted by eberly at 2025-12-10 02:30 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

- Politicians been using immigrants as a wedge issue for a long time......

A distinction sans any difference; doesn't make it right.

#16 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-10 02:37 PM | Reply

"...prefer to be ignored..."

LOL!

#17 | Posted by Angrydad at 2025-12-10 02:44 PM | Reply

Because having children is a for-profit scheme?!?

Talk about your Republican Math. Stay in school, kids!

#6 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-12-10 01:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

People are poor for primarily one reason - because they made bad decisions.

No amount of your "it's the rich people" is going to change that.

If someone is poor and decides to bring children into the world they can't afford, it's a bad decision and it's not my fault or the billionaires fault.

#18 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-12-10 03:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Hold on now.....let's not rag on baloney sandwiches. LOL

But...what's the problem with them? That they are baloney sandwiches...or that it's free to the inner city kid paid by someone else?

#9 | Posted by eberly at 2025-12-10 01:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

The wife buys the Boar's Head brand. Nothing wrong with a baloney sandwich once in a while. A fresh sliced tomato from the garden goes great with it. And a plus on sourdough bread.

#19 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-12-10 03:04 PM | Reply

People are poor for primarily one reason - because they made bad decisions.

Like being born into poverty?

You have no idea how lucky you are. Born on third thinks he hit a triple.

#20 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-12-10 03:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

- Born on third thinks he hit a triple.

Sort of a mandatory misconception for rwingers; they expect folks with no boots to pull themselves up by their bootstraps.

#21 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-10 03:13 PM | Reply

" People are poor for primarily one reason - because they made bad decisions."

Starting with choice of parents, amirite?

#22 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-12-10 03:28 PM | Reply

20

why the intentional deflection? Everyone knows being born into poverty is the easiest way to be in poverty. Nobody is including kids in this discussion. Nobody is pointing to bad decisions made by children.

Do you just not want to accept that adults that end up in poverty made bad choices?

Is it just too hard to go down that road?

#23 | Posted by eberly at 2025-12-10 03:28 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

-The wife buys the Boar's Head brand. Nothing wrong with a baloney sandwich once in a while.

my wife grew up on baloney.....so it's not allowed in our house. I think it's mostly a symbolic protest from childhood.

#24 | Posted by eberly at 2025-12-10 03:31 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

-A distinction sans any difference; doesn't make it right.

I don't disagree. I'm just saying it's just as wrong when a 2-bit carnival barker running for city council does it as when a billionaire who support candidate for Federal office do it.

It's an effective tactic and it's worked sans the billionaire.

#25 | Posted by eberly at 2025-12-10 03:35 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Like being born into poverty?
- Alexa

No, being born in a high crime area, which keeps them in poverty.

I find it interesting, defend violent crime and basic mayhem, then complain about poverty

Here's the reality, the distribution range of wealth as the world gets richer means some will have 0 and others are offered 1trillion. So yes a smaller and smaller % of people will hold enormous wealth, if you want universal healthcare that's going to have to be the case.

The only question is did they earn that money or was it stolen from the government revenue.

I would argue earning it makes the world a better place.

Of course people are born into it, the system they were born into is better than the poor systems other people were born into.

Be happy we are in the worlds top 5% .

#26 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-12-10 03:37 PM | Reply

Everyone knows being born into poverty is the easiest way to be in poverty. N
- eberly

No the easiest way into poverty is to live where there is crime. People, living there or otherwise, don't invest in crime riddled areas. Why would you?

Learned helplessness is a real thing.

#27 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-12-10 03:39 PM | Reply

There are people here who believe there are exactly zero wealthy people who did it honestly.

Haven't seen Clownshack for a little while......hope he's okay. But he's one of them.

#28 | Posted by eberly at 2025-12-10 03:40 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

- it's just as wrong

It's much more effective with billions of dollars behind it.

- I would argue earning it makes the world a better place.

Replacing democratic voters with billionaires who purchase votes en masse through the media by making money = speech is what many of the Founding Fathers warned about.

www.azquotes.com

#29 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-10 03:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Let me throw this idea out there for your consideration:

How about we start taxing the uber-wealthy who have, for the past 40 years, been able to dodge their financial responsibilities that provide them with a country that protects them and their money and their property?

Not to mention the fact that this country has given them, the uber-wealthy, a nation of publicly educated wage-earners who can afford to buy their products/services?

How about that?

Afterall, ingratitude is a Cardinal Sin.

#30 | Posted by A_Friend at 2025-12-10 03:50 PM | Reply

" Haven't seen Clownshack for a little while"

He got tagged by ICE.

#31 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-12-10 03:54 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

- How about we start taxing the uber-wealthy who have, for the past 40 years, been able to dodge their financial responsibilities that provide them with a country that protects them and their money and their property?

Which is what the Pres who was elected 4 times did.

#32 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-10 04:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

#32 And was subsequently started on the downhill slide under Raygun.

#33 | Posted by A_Friend at 2025-12-10 04:41 PM | Reply

#33

Absolutely. Ronnie Raygun (ZAP!) and Margaret Thatcher were ideological soulmates controlled by deregulated Supply-Side 'free markets' that never ever ever Trickled Down on anyone, even according to their original economists who have now repented their economic sins. Or say they have anyway.

#34 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-10 04:56 PM | Reply

"There are people here who believe there are exactly zero wealthy people who did it honestly."

Another feces-laden beverly claim.

#35 | Posted by Angrydad at 2025-12-10 05:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

-How about we start taxing the uber-wealthy

What do you have in mind?

A higher rate for the highest brackets? start it where and how much? It's already a marginal system.....but in reality it's not as marginal as it should be.

an estate tax? we got one...but it's easy to avoid

I think corky made a reference to FDR......he's not available to run, IIRC. Who do you think can do it?

Bernie Sanders? The Left won't let him on the ticket because the democratic party won't support him much less any republicans.

It's not that the idea is bad.....it's understanding how to get there.

#36 | Posted by eberly at 2025-12-10 06:16 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

- Who do you think can do it?

Mam Danni!

Hillary tried to be the stealth candidate that could pass muster with mid road swing voters, and then install a surprisingly liberal social plan.

www.google.com

But no, the far left wasn't having any 'steps', they wanted an impossibility of a candidate to do the impossible.

Michelle says we aren't ready for a woman, so don't waste her time.

AOC is the new Bernie. Who knows what Gavin is about? I don't. Jeffries, either, really.

So I'm thinking I might nominate Rogers Cadenhead '28!

But only if there's actually an Election, because the coming State of War may forbid that... and the Rwing Congress(maybe) and the Rwing SC may agree.

#37 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-10 06:48 PM | Reply

" Hold on now.....let's not rag on baloney sandwiches. LOL

But...what's the problem with them?"

Eating lots of processed meat is linked to higher rates of cancer?

#38 | Posted by sentinel at 2025-12-11 07:44 AM | Reply

An inevitable concluding phase for capitalism is economic fascism, where the few control the very many using violence, fear, intimidation, and gaslighting. Big money buys the legal system, the educational system, the political system, the medical system...you got it, they eventually own it.

#39 | Posted by Hughmass at 2025-12-11 08:06 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Why is the inner city child eating a baloney sandwich anyone's problem, other than the parent(s) who decided to hit the hood lottery by spitting out children for WF checks.

#5 | Posted by lfthndthrds

I'm always waiting with bated breath to hear what our resident Chreestians have to say on this sort of topic.

#40 | Posted by jpw at 2025-12-11 10:18 AM | Reply

I've stated this before, I'll do it again. During yesteryear, the bread winner of the family could support his/her family with the money he was paid from working his job. The middle class especially had enough to go on vacations, have little worry about entertainment, pay for medical procedures, food, housing (not limited to just rent), pay for higher education without a loan, and the various other necessities of life.

Now none of that is true to any extent any more. People are struggling to stay afloat just to have the things necessary without any extras. It takes two bread earners to even pay the rent for some, and that is with overtime/side gigs/or a second job. Does no one ask were that money went? It should be obvious.

#41 | Posted by BBQ at 2025-12-11 10:50 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

People are poor for primarily one reason - because they made bad decisions.

#18 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Oh, strange. The wealthiest people who just so happened to have gotten wealthier never mentioned that. They said raising the minimum wage would put businesses and people out of work. Lower taxes for themselves and their corporations would benefit everyone. Privatization, mergers and deregulation would lower costs and raise the standard of living. Social services would only put everyone in debt.

Are you saying that whole trickle down thing was a lie?

#42 | Posted by Derek_Wildstar at 2025-12-11 02:27 PM | Reply

People are poor for primarily one reason - because they made bad decisions.
#18 | Posted by lfthndthrds

What's the upside of letting people make so many bad decisions?

#43 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-12-11 02:32 PM | Reply

Countries go Nazi because the citizens made bad choices.

Does that seem true?

Poor people are poor because they made bad choices.

How about this one?

Or,

THe Drug war is a Real War,Let's invade Venezuela even though I pardoned a President of Honduras who brought in 400 Tons of Cocaine? I Really care about Drugs.

This is OUR PRESIDENT.... Poor Choices cause Chaos and Death...

#44 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-12-11 06:30 PM | Reply

#45 | Posted by C0RI0LANUS at 2025-12-11 07:52 PM | Reply

"People are poor for primarily one reason - because they made bad decisions. " - so how does that explain the cratering of the birthrate among those who can afford kids: middle-class and upper-middle-class Americans?

#46 | Posted by 4th_Party_Voter at 2025-12-12 04:07 AM | Reply

"Like being born into poverty?"

Being born into poverty isn't why you remain there. Most likely, those born into poverty spend a lifetime being trained to stay there.

#47 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 08:57 AM | Reply

Let's hypothesize...

If the top 1% of global income earners had never been born, would the remaining 99% be better or worse off?

#48 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 08:58 AM | Reply

"How about we start taxing the uber-wealthy who have, for the past 40 years, been able to dodge their financial responsibilities that provide them with a country that protects them and their money and their property?"

We already are doing that.

#49 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 09:00 AM | Reply

Be happy we are in the worlds top 5%."

I would hazard that every last participant in this conversation is in the world's top 1%. That's anyone making more than $60k per year.

#50 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 09:03 AM | Reply

Not enough. Tax capital gains at 30% to get the froth out of the economy.

Why should passive income be taxed at a fraction of sweat of the brow labor?

Tax law always favors the very rich.

#51 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-12-12 09:05 AM | Reply

Why is the inner city child...anyone's problem...
#5 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Personally, I feel we all benefit when that child grows up to be a doctor rather than a mugger. People like you would rather put up a higher fence around their house and hire private security.

#52 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2025-12-12 09:05 AM | Reply

born into poverty...trained to stay there
#47 | Posted by madbomber

So who do you suppose will untrain them? Their parents who obviously can't move up themselves?
Sounds to me like you're making the argument for better education, healthcare, and social services that will untrain them from their environment.

#53 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2025-12-12 09:11 AM | Reply

I see that MB is back at his 'Avg Americans Should Just Be Thankful They Aren't Somolians!" obfuscation.

Such ingratitude to the Elite who let them eat the crumbs.

#54 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-12 09:14 AM | Reply

#48 If the top 1% had never existed the economy would not be distorted to accommodate them and the 99% Would be better off.

More money to go around instead of a tiny minority hoarding most of the social product.

Look at the Gulf States. Rich Shieks with everything and grinding poverty for almost everyone else.

No consumer base except the very rich. No industrial capacity, completely dependent on an extraction economy that only benefits a few insiders.

That what letting the 1% control everything leads to.

Widespread prosperity is not a reality when the 1% control everything.

Why are you a Shill for rich --------?

You even Kill for them.

What happened to you?

#55 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-12-12 09:16 AM | Reply

"Tax law always favors the very rich."

How so?

It's the rich who pay the majority of taxes in this country. The poor, almost nothing. In absolute amounts or percentages of earned income.

#56 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 09:46 AM | Reply

Bezos pays less in taxes than you do.

#57 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-12-12 09:46 AM | Reply

"Bezos pays less in taxes than you do."

You've seen his tax returns?

I have the overseas tax exemption. The only taxes I (and everyone) are obligated to pay are FICA taxes.

#58 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 09:50 AM | Reply

"More money to go around instead of a tiny minority hoarding most of the social product."

So your argument is that wages would be higher for the remaining 99% if the top 1% had never been born?

Why?

How would the lack of the 1% change the labor value of the remaining 99%?

#59 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 09:51 AM | Reply

ever see "Gangs of New York"?

Bill The Butcher is the hero!

#60 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2025-12-12 09:52 AM | Reply

Look at the Gulf States. Rich Shieks with everything and grinding poverty for almost everyone else.

Yeah. Did you know the median monthly household income for a Qatari citizen is ~$20k?

Not exactly grinding poverty.

#61 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 09:53 AM | Reply

- How so?

Because they game the system that they themselves bought and paid for with bribes to politicians.

Billionaires who pay no taxes:

www.google.com

"While these individuals paid no income tax in specific years, collectively, the 25 wealthiest Americans paid an average "true tax rate" (taxes paid relative to wealth growth) of just 3.4% between 2014 and 2018, far below the average American's tax rate."

#62 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-12 09:54 AM | Reply

What's the upside of letting people make so many bad decisions? Lawyers and investors in the poverty industry get paid.

#63 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2025-12-12 09:57 AM | Reply

What's the cost of living in Qatar?

How much of that is needed to just scrape by?

These things matter.

The cost of living in the US is so high that a livable income in say, Africa is far less.

So income is only part of the equation.

So, How much of that is needed to live?

#64 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-12-12 09:59 AM | Reply

"Most of the government's federal income tax revenue comes from the nation's top income earners. In 2022, the top 5% of earners " people with incomes $261,591 and above " collectively paid over $1.3 trillion in income taxes, or about 61% of the national total.

If you include the top 10% " everyone who made at least $178,611 " that figure rises to $1.5 trillion, or 72% of the total.

The top 50% of earners contributed 97% of federal income tax revenue."

usafacts.org

#65 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 10:00 AM | Reply

"What's the cost of living in Qatar?"

Not so much that you can't do it on $240k per year.

#66 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 10:00 AM | Reply

Rents, Food, Transport Etc?

#67 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-12-12 10:01 AM | Reply

Numbers not generalities.

#68 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-12-12 10:02 AM | Reply

It's not the top 5 percent that are so much the problem, it's the top 0.001 percent who pay around 3 percent in a bad year for them.

#69 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-12 10:02 AM | Reply

"Billionaires who pay no taxes"

They don't pay FICA taxes? Do those not count?

I need to learn that trick.

#70 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 10:03 AM | Reply

"It's not the top 5 percent that are so much the problem, it's the top 0.001 percent who pay around 3 percent in a bad year for them."

Really?

The problem is .001% of the population?

#71 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 10:06 AM | Reply

In Qatar 85-90% of the population is migrant workers living in poverty.

They don't get the $20,000 a Month, only Qatari citizens do.

Qatar also has universal Healthcare and extensive social assistance for CITIZENS.

CITIZENS make up only about 5-10% of the population.

So, MB, did you know this or just not mention it?

As it kind of Destroys your Arguments.

#72 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-12-12 10:10 AM | Reply

That's 1300 households nationwide.

And BTW, in 2019 the effective tax rate for this group was 24.7%.

#73 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 10:11 AM | Reply

The problem is .001% of the population?

#71 | Posted by madbomber

Certain problems.

If the ultra-rich saw themselves as part of the country they live in rather than as a distinct people, things would be a lot better.

#74 | Posted by Zed at 2025-12-12 10:12 AM | Reply

#71

"While these individuals paid no income tax in specific years, collectively, the 25 wealthiest Americans paid an average "true tax rate" (taxes paid relative to wealth growth) of just 3.4% between 2014 and 2018, far below the average American's tax rate."

from the link you ignored... it will save you asking silly questions.

or perhaps you are ok with those facts which belie your claims?

#75 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-12 10:12 AM | Reply

- effective tax rate for this group was 24.7%.

And the actual rate they paid was 3.4 percent.

Is this thing even on?

#76 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-12 10:14 AM | Reply

"So, MB, did you know this or just not mention it? As it kind of Destroys your Arguments."

I knew it. And no, it really doesn't destroy anything.

Most Qatari citizens don't work. They don't need to Tamim the Glorious gives them everything. The country is run by foreign nationals, who do everything from manage key industries to mopping floors.

#77 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 10:17 AM | Reply

"And the actual rate they paid was 3.4 percent."

Not according to the IRS.

Really, the biggest winners tax-wise in the US are low-income earners.

#78 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 10:19 AM | Reply

- low-income earners.

Are people who don't make a Living Wage in this country any longer so that Corporations can pay bigger dividends to people that can afford to invest.

To say they are the biggest winners is ludicrous... which is why you added the 'tax-wise' caveat, which is fooling no one.

#79 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-12 10:27 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"from the link you ignored... it will save you asking silly questions."

From your post:

"Overall, according to ProPublica data, the 25 wealthiest Americans paid taxes equal to 3.4% of their wealth gain from 2014 to 2018. Bloomberg paid just 1.3%, while Bezos' "true tax rate" in those years was less than 1%."

Pro-Publica uses something called a "true tax rate," which isn't really a thing. It includes unrealized capital gains, which are not income and not taxable until they become realized capital gains.

#80 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 10:27 AM | Reply

Isn't that Socialism for the Citizens?

Isn't that BAD?

So Qatar has lavish socialism for citizens and hard labor and no social safety net for 85-90% of the population imported to "Serve" them.

Is that what you think we should have in the US?

Pointing out the massive disparity at the social level would have been more honest and straightforward, Ya think?

#81 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-12-12 10:30 AM | Reply

AI

"For the ultra-wealthy, much of their increase in economic power comes from the rising value of assets like stocks (unrealized capital gains), which are not taxed until they are sold.

A White House analysis found that the 400 wealthiest U.S. families paid an average federal income tax rate of just 8.2% from 2010 to 2018 when their wealth growth was included as income.

In summary, the wealthy pay the most money in taxes and a higher rate on their reported income, but a combination of tax code provisions and tax avoidance strategies means the very richest individuals can have lower "true" tax rates on their overall wealth growth than many middle-class workers."

www.google.com

You'll just have to get a new Go-To Elitist Apologetics Guide.

#82 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-12 10:31 AM | Reply

To say they are the biggest winners is ludicrous... which is why you added the 'tax-wise' caveat, which is fooling no one.

"America will never have a European-style welfare state without a VAT. Democrats want European-style spending but without the efficient tax that makes it possible."

"Tax refunds for poor families are exceptionally generous. In 2019 a single parent of two children earning two-thirds of average pay faced total net labour taxes of only 10%, according to analysis by the OECD, a club of mostly rich countries. In egalitarian Sweden the rate was nearly 33%."

www.economist.com

#83 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 10:32 AM | Reply

"A White House analysis found that the 400 wealthiest U.S. families paid an average federal income tax rate of just 8.2% from 2010 to 2018 when their wealth growth was included as income."

It's not real wealth.

Let me give you an example. During COVID I bought Peloton stock at $48 per share. It topped out at $168 per share. So my unrealized capital gains had more than tripled. I sold it when hit $38.

So, if you can get taxed on unrealized capital gains, should you be able to claim unrealized capital losses as a deduction?

#84 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 10:35 AM | Reply

Technically, I guess the government would be obligated to cut you a check if your unrealized capital losses exceeded the amount you owed in taxes.

#85 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 10:39 AM | Reply

#82

AI just makes this site dumber.

#86 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-12-12 10:40 AM | Reply

"As long as we fail to tax their main source of income"the growth in their fortunes"many billionaires will continue to live largely tax-free lives," said Frank Clemente, executive director of Americans for Tax Fairness.

"Teachers, plumbers, firefighters and other working Americans can already pay higher tax rates than billionaires"and that's just counting the small part of billionaire income that is now taxed. When you include their untaxed wealth growth in the calculation, many billionaires pay almost nothing."

americansfortaxfairness.org

#87 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-12 10:41 AM | Reply

Financial markets just Suck.

They are destroying the ecosystem and the social contract.

The East India company on Steriods.

Quick bucks for a few and missalocation of resources because of hype and bubbles for everyone else.

Not a good development.

#88 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-12-12 10:43 AM | Reply

#86

YOU are what makes this site dumber, especially when you post Big Lie threads like this one:

drudge.com

#89 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-12 10:43 AM | Reply

#87

Again, when they make those claims, they are not using a real tax rate because they are including unrealized capital gain, which are not income.

#90 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 10:52 AM | Reply

"They are destroying the ecosystem and the social contract."

How have they made your life more difficult? Did you get poorer as a result of Musk or Bezos existing?

#91 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 10:53 AM | Reply

I am going to hazard a guess that many of you want Bezos and Musk to continue engaging in behavior that earns them billions of dollars, you just want the government to be able to control those billions.

Amiright?

#92 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 10:54 AM | Reply

I'm sorry, really sorry to be the one to tell you this, MB... but you are never going to be Bezos or Musk or anyone anywhere nearly as wealthy.

So it's really not to your benefit to shill for them because you won't EVER be able to not pay any taxes at all some years the way they do.

Sorry, really, really sorry.

Perhaps were you to encourage politicians to make Laws that Corporations have to pay a Living Wage to workers rather than $7.fiddy an hour, St. Peter might be influenced when you get to that Gate.

#93 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-12 11:04 AM | Reply

"I'm sorry, really sorry to be the one to tell you this, MB... but you are never going to be Bezos or Musk or anyone anywhere nearly as wealthy."

Bezos pulls his schooner into Durres sometimes. Maybe I'll go have a beer with him when he's in port. Musk is just too ------- weird.

"So it's really not to your benefit to shill for them because you won't EVER be able to not pay any taxes at all some years the way they do.".

Way ahead of you, bro. I have the overseas income exemption, which means that the first $130k of my income in not taxable. The rest is, but I'm able to offset it with different deductions. Like everyone else, I do have to pay FICA. There is no getting out of that.

#94 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 11:10 AM | Reply

I'm talking about ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION,not my personal finances.

The loss of Common goods. Like open land and access to it.

I'm talking about Social Outcomes not whether or not a rich guy has more.

I'm poorer as a result of the concentration of buying power that warps the economy in favor of a few very rich individuals.

Housing costs inflated by rich investors buying up housing stocks.

The cost of Everything increased by the existence of ulra rich people buying everything at higher prices.

Not to mention,but I will, the Rich buying policy at every level and making extreme changes that regular people have to fund themselves.

Cellphones,AI,etc.

Not everyone wants them you know.

Not having a cellphone isn't realistic if you need to work or function today.

AI eating up land and Water. Data centers using the electricity of a city.

What exactly do these data centers do?

I do know Electricity gets far more expensive for everyone when they build them.

Now State sovereignity is being limited by Executive Fiat by Trump.

No state laws regulating AI are going to be permitted if the SCOTUS agrees with Trump.

All are harms to the social and political lives of Americans

The Environment is also damaged severely by High Wealth People.

Private Jets,Massive development plans in unsuitable areas for a few big shots etc.

#95 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-12-12 11:10 AM | Reply

"Perhaps were you to encourage politicians to make Laws that Corporations have to pay a Living Wage to workers rather than $7.fiddy an hour, St. Peter might be influenced when you get to that Gate."

You think that St. Peter would be happy that I supported a system where workers were unable to sell their labor unless that labor met a certain value threshold?

I don't. I think St. Peter would have wanted people to be able to sell their labor, something granted to them by god, for as little or as much as they wanted.

#96 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 11:11 AM | Reply

#94

Hey, MB... that's great for you. And we know that it's not all about the avg worker in the US, it's really all about you!

- a certain value threshold?

Set by the Invisible Hand of the Almighty Free Market?

There are other ways, including minimum wages, which need to be increased.

And you shouldn't try to fool St Peter... or Mother Nature.

#97 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-12 11:17 AM | Reply

"The loss of Common goods. Like open land and access to it."

Much of the land west of 110W longitude is BLM land. It is yours to spend as much time on as you wish. As are national forests, wilderness, etc.

"I'm talking about Social Outcomes not whether or not a rich guy has more."

You'll have to define "social outcome" for me. I don't know that term.

"I'm poorer as a result of the concentration of buying power that warps the economy in favor of a few very rich individuals."

Walk me through that while you're at it. It sounds to me like what you are saying is that they are able to spend more money on an object than you are, and that makes you poorer. Is that about right?

#98 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 11:18 AM | Reply

"Set by the Invisible Hand of the Almighty Free Market?"

No. Set through an agreement between the seller of labor and the purchaser on the price at which that labor will be purchased.

#99 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 11:19 AM | Reply

"There are other ways, including minimum wages, which need to be increased."

Why?

If a 16-year-old kid wants to work for $7.50 an hour, why shouldn't they be legally allowed to do so?

#100 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 11:20 AM | Reply

Why does a 16-year-old kid need a living wage?

#101 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 11:20 AM | Reply

"I think St. Peter would have wanted people to be able to sell their labor"

Hahaha.

That's among the dumbest takes on Christianity ever to grace the Drudge Retort.

Got any Scripture to support Peter's belief in laissez faire Capitalism?

#102 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-12-12 11:21 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Why does a 16-year-old kid need a living wage?
#101 | Posted by madbomber

Nobody needs a living wage.
Nobody even needs to live.

#103 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-12-12 11:22 AM | Reply

You make arguments that sound good on first hearing but are clearly duplicitous.

Like not mentioning that 90% of Qataris are impoverished peons brought in to "serve" the Citizens of Qatar.

Should people be allowed to sell organs to the highest bidder,or sell their Children?

Selling labor is not like selling computer chips.

Labor is sold to provide cash income. For People with no other way to get it.

If the People owned the means of their own subsistence they wouldn't sell their labor.

Labor is what they have to sell, a bare minimum is not harming them.

You're just Cheap. You want to Exploit Desperate, Hungry people.

They have to sell their labor or starve.

Of course they will sell it cheaper if that is all they can get.

You already knew this but like the Qatar citizens thing you are selective about acknowledging the true situation.

Also known as Lying by Omission.

#104 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-12-12 11:23 AM | Reply

#98

They are able to spend more money in bribes, er, political donations, to people who will write tax laws that benefit them.

Billionaires spent enough on Trump to own him outright, and this is possible because the science of money to media equals votes is now well established.

We can thank Republicans and the rwing SC members who gave us CU and money as speech and Corporations as Super Citizens with Corporate Personhood.... wait, am I speaking a foreign language to you?

#105 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-12 11:24 AM | Reply

That's among the dumbest takes on Christianity ever to grace the Drudge Retort.

I think it's #1. Madbomber knows less about Christianity than he does socialism.

#106 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-12-12 11:25 AM | Reply

"If a 16-year-old kid wants to work for $7.50 an hour, why shouldn't they be legally allowed to do so?"

I don't believe it's illegal for them to do so.

Can you show me where working for $7.50 an hour is a criminal act on the part of the worker?

#107 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-12-12 11:25 AM | Reply

"Set through an agreement between the seller of labor and the purchaser on the price at which that labor will be purchased."

So, the price fluctuates depending on the negotiation skills and other circumstances of the buyer and seller?

The same exact labor has different value, based on those externalities?

Why not, like, a restaurant menu, with listed prices, that don't fluctuate based on the negotiation skills of the waiter and the hungry person?

#108 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-12-12 11:30 AM | Reply

"Labor is sold to provide cash income. For People with no other way to get it."

You don't need cash.

More than a few people live off the grid in places like Alaska, using their labor not to earn cash, but to satisfy their own needs. Food, shelter, things like that.

Cash is a relatively recent advancement in the history of mankind, but it's only a necessity if you choose to live in a world that requires it.

#109 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 11:30 AM | Reply

"I think it's #1. Madbomber knows less about Christianity than he does socialism."

That is 100% true.

#110 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 11:31 AM | Reply

"Cash is a relatively recent advancement in the history of mankind"

And Capitalism is even newer than that.

But if you try living without Capitalism, The West conquers you.

#111 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-12-12 11:31 AM | Reply

"The same exact labor has different value, based on those externalities?"

Yes.

A teenager may be willing to work for $3 an hour, even if the employer is willing to pay more.

It's no different than selling anything else.

#112 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 11:32 AM | Reply

"But if you try living without Capitalism, The West conquers you."

There are lots of primitive tribes out there who would disagree with you.

#113 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 11:33 AM | Reply

Alex

www.youtube.com

#114 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-12 11:34 AM | Reply

There are lots of primitive tribes out there who would disagree with you.
#113 | Posted by madbomber

Which ones?

#115 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-12-12 11:34 AM | Reply

It's no different than selling anything else.
#112 | Posted by madbomber

It's complete different than selling most other things .

When I buy tires, or food, the seller's price is published.

#116 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-12-12 11:37 AM | Reply

The relative cost of Everything is increased by excessive wealth at the very top.

Housing,Education, Cars,Food.

The cost of everything is increased but not the real value.

That's why rich countries have a higher cost of living than poor ones.

I thought you were an Economics Whiz?

You didn't know that?

Or more Lying by Omission?

#117 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-12-12 11:38 AM | Reply

I just makes this site dumber.

#86 | POSTED BY ONEIRONAUT

FTFY

#118 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-12-12 11:39 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"The same exact labor has different value, based on those externalities?"

"Yes."

So value can be created by gaming the system?

How does that actually alter the intrinsic value?

Show me the math.

#119 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-12-12 11:40 AM | Reply

"More than a few people live off the grid in places like Alaska"

Unless they're Eskimos, they spent cash to get there.

#120 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-12-12 11:41 AM | Reply

"Which ones?"

Dani-Papua New Guinea
Sentinalese-India
Shompen-India
Ayoreo-Bolivia
Asmat-Papua New Guinea

These are just a few...

#121 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 11:45 AM | Reply

I do give credit to MB for his cool t-shirts, though.

'Specially the one that says, "Mom was Ayn Rand, Pop was von Mises!"

It's a Classic!

#122 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-12 11:45 AM | Reply

Off the Grid in Alaska?

Cash not necessary? I don't see just what you mean.

A small shack in Alaska costs $200,000 if you buy it.

Food is extremely expensive,highest cost in the nation.

Farming is limited by the climate.

Being A Trapper who lives on seals and lemmings isn't really getting by.

You aren't for real. Just a Glib Liar..

Your arguments are in as Bad Faith as Nuttyahoo's about the West Bank.

#123 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-12-12 11:46 AM | Reply

"How does that actually alter the intrinsic value?"

You're approach the question in the way Marx did. There is no such thing as "intrinsic value." That's why marginal value is a thing. You may pay $6 for the first slice of Pizza, and maybe the second, but at some point, that next slice of Pizza is going to be worth less and less. The baker may continue to charge $6 per slice, but he is not going to sell any more Pizza. But, if he lowers the price, the marginal value of the pizza might be greater than the money spent to purchase it.

#124 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 11:48 AM | Reply

#121 Those are all regions we have made the strategic decision not to conquer because they don't have anything we want.

There's only a few places on earth that haven't been conquered by the West when the West wanted to conquer them, since the dawn of Capitalism.

Arabia, parts of Southeast Asia, bits of East Asia.

#125 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-12-12 11:48 AM | Reply

"There is no such thing as "intrinsic value.""

Is there extrinsic value of labor, then?

Is it the extrinsic value of labor that fluctuate based on internal, non labor related determinants like negotiation skills?

#126 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-12-12 11:51 AM | Reply

'You may pay $6 for the first slice of Pizza, and maybe the second, but at some point, that next slice of Pizza is going to be worth less and less."

That's not an economy.

A piece of pizza being worth zero to me, right now, since I just had lunch, doesn't make the pizza worth any less to somebody who is hungry.

#127 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-12-12 11:57 AM | Reply

"A piece of pizza being worth zero to me, right now, since I just had lunch, doesn't make the pizza worth any less to somebody who is hungry."

But using your logic, that slice of Pizza would still be worth $6.

Even wonder why stores offer deals where you buy one object at full price and get the second at a discount?

#128 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 12:04 PM | Reply

"There's only a few places on earth that haven't been conquered by the West when the West wanted to conquer them, since the dawn of Capitalism."

The west?

Invasions and colonization pre-date capitalism by a thousand years. In fact, I would argue it was capitalism that led to decolonization.

#129 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-12 12:06 PM | Reply

- people who simp for billionaires.
Every Trumper on these pages, and all those who aren't.
They blame immigrants instead, because that's what billionaire/corporate owned media to them do. Imagine that.

#8 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-10 01:42 PM | Reply

Are you saying that in light of the latest Somalia rip offs?

#130 | Posted by fishpaw at 2025-12-12 12:09 PM | Reply

The following HTML tags are allowed in comments: a href, b, i, p, br, ul, ol, li and blockquote. Others will be stripped out. Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Anyone can join this site and make comments. To post this comment, you must sign it with your Drudge Retort username. If you can't remember your username or password, use the lost password form to request it.
Username:
Password:

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy

Drudge Retort