The private wealth of individuals should be legally available to those who, while they’re stealing it, agree to mean well:
The United Nations on Thursday called for a tax on billionaires to help raise more than $400 billion a year for poor countries.
An annual lump sum payment by the super-rich is one of a host of measures including a tax on carbon dioxide emissions, currency exchanges or financial transactions proposed in a UN report that accuses wealthy nations of breaking promises to step up aid for the less fortunate.
The annual World Economic and Social Survey says it is critical to find new ways to help the world’s poor as pledged cash fails to flow.
The report estimates that the number of people around the globe worth at least $1 billion rose to 1,226 in 2012.
There are an estimated 425 billionaires in the United States, 315 in the Asia-Pacific region, 310 in Europe, 90 in other North and South American countries and 86 in Africa and the Middle East.
Together they own an estimated $4.6 trillion so a one percent tax on their wealth would raise more than $46 billion, according to the report.
“Would this hurt them?” it questioned.
Why of course it wouldn’t. After all, who are they to decide what it is they do with the money they’ve earned. That’s the kind of decision that should be left up to those who would spend that money for the Greater Good — seizing it, taking their administrative cut, then redistributing it to its various bureaucratic arms, who will take their administrative cut before sending it on to the next agency in charge of redistributing it to the poor, who have every right to it, wealth being a finite thing, and those who have it morally compelled to answer to the dictates of an unelected world body who has decided it has every right to steal the property of others by way of a tax it will deem moral.
The rich are not to be emulated. They are to be punished for not doing with their money what others who don’t have that money want done with it. Because they know best. By dint of not having that money. And so are free to wear the mantle of poverty-fighters without really having to worry about losing anything of their own. In fact, they’ll feather their nests a bit by way of administrative fees and high salaries and benefits, etc. Because let’s face it: fighting poverty is a tough job, a moral job, and those who do it deserve a little bit of luxury for helping out the poor. With other people’s money.
[…]
The idea could appeal to the likes of Warren Buffett, the US tycoon who has complained that he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary. France’s new Socialist government has caused consternation by vowing a 75 percent tax on salaries above one million euros ($1.24 million).
But the UN acknowledged that the idea is unlikely to get widespread support from the target group, saying that for now its tax on the unimaginably wealthy remains “an intriguing possibility.”
Yes. Wielding unbridled power — answerable, really, to no one, your being the world government and all — is certainly “intriguing,” isn’t it? Though first we’ll have to further demonize and weaken the antiquated notions of national sovereignty and arbitrary borders. Otherwise, how is a world leader supposed to get his most effective moral tyranny on?
I’m probably the only one here who watches “The Five” on Fox. Yesterday, Bob Beckel was making the argument that the rich were evil bastards who were greedy and shackled the starving poor, %c. Kimberley Guilfoyle (the ex-Mrs. Gavin Newsome and Victoria’s Secret model) demolished his argument. She told him that that was bullshit and that Obama had done his damned to destroy the middle class and private enterprise. “He’s handcuffed them behind their backs and put cement blocks on their feet, Bob!”
It was awesome. Beckel just sat there like Ralph Kramden “hamana, hamana, hamana…….”
I really need to see Warren Buffett’s secretary’s tax returns, or they need to quit making that bitch the puppet through which they agitate for higher taxes.
I find it utterly unsurprising that our watchdog media hasn’t taken it upon themselves to ask Mr. Buffett the simple question “so, Warren, how much does your secretary make per year?” They’d rather let the low information types persist in the false notion that she makes $35K per year.
leigh
I’m down sick with a really bad head cold … was propped up on the couch yesterday when I came across “The Five” on Fox yesterday … did watch some of it, but that Beckel dude really got to me. I wanted to wipe that condescending smirk off his face.
It’s as if these “eat the rich, they can afford it” clowns believe (or more accurately, want you to believe) that “billionaires” have their wealth in gold coins in a great big swimming pool like Scrooge McDuck and some of it from the shallow end can be siphoned off.
That “wealth” is in businesses, buildings, property, inventory, etc. Percentage wise, very little is in actual liquid cash. Seizing a percentage of “the rich”s property will have consequences …
No wonder the total collapse of Zimbabwe’s economy after the compulsory confiscation of land from landowners isn’t covered in the news.
If I were a billionaire, I would tell the UN to kiss my shiny golden ass. As I’m not, they’ll have to do with my polycotton one.
The problem with being a third world petty tyrant is the petty part. No one you are oppressing has anything worth stealing. So you have to use the UN to steal from other countries rich people for you, that is what this is about.
But to get the targetted $400 billion you would need to tax at about 10%.
That will probably leave a mark.
I kind of wonder what would happen if the world’s billionaires got together and voluntarily spent one fourth of one percept of their wealth (11 and a half billion dollars) lobbying for the total dismantling of the child-trafficking, aid and rape, dictator kowtowing, terrorist shielding, anti-semitic, unelected faux world government, environmental fascism mongering, cash parasite UN? I’d say that if they opened the project to donations from the general non billionaire public, and sold Anti-U.N. t-shirts, buttons, and posters, that they might even make decent money on the deal.
Hope you feel better soon, Darleen. Beckel is an ass. I only watch to see the other three let him have it.
All, I was out running errands with my husband today and we both said that if all the billionaires and the rest of us thousandaires just kept our withholding taxes until we were obliged to pay them on the 15th of April, it would surely throw a wrench in the works. Of course, Tiny Tim could just print more Obama bucks.
Anyway, t’was all a pipedream.
Beckel is just another Ed Schultz without the lifetime chain-smoker voice. He said the eff word on Hannity one night when he thought he was off the air and then he went from crass, merciless, accusatory smear merchant and bravado bully to a sad, repentant puppy dog, looking for pity, in less than a second.
The guy is a huge creep and a party machine type. He was the guy who started the whole Obama is illegal thing to help Hillary and now calls people fools for believing it.
There is no conscience at work in there. He is a robotic shit flinger and liar. He is Lonesome Rhodes without the charisma or inventiveness.
Beckel is pretty much the reason I cannot watch The Five. Every time he lies his ass off I want to punch him, and that’s pretty much every time he talks.
Pretty, much?
My husband is the same way. Even though the ladies are usually seated at the ends of the table when Gutfeld isn’t there and Guilfoyle and Tarantos are having a gam-off for the cameramen, he can’t stand Beckel. When Juan subs for him, it’s no better.
I like the show because it’s not scripted and I like Eric Bolling.
Where did I put my “Ask me about John Galt” button?
Wasn’t Beckel buddy-buddy with Big-Dog Horn-Dog Clinton? I assume he spouts his nonsense because he continues to get lucky with lithesome young innocent lefties by doing so.
More troubling to me is that the U.N. is attempting to gun control the U.S., with Obama’s (covert) blessings…
Eric Holder could hardly keep from laughing.
Beckel is pretty much the reason I cannot watch The Five. Every time he lies his ass off I want to punch him, and that’s pretty much every time he talks.
I watch it while I work out some times. Beckel’s lying is more palatable to me, because the other four are usually laughing at him. Compared to – say – watching Wasserman-Shultz lying her ass off on FoxNews Sunday, and the interviewer having to continue on in a professional manner. On the Five, they’ll call him out.