I like the idea of wealth assessments, in addition to moderate increases to the highest income tax brackets.
.
We could accomplish the latter by imposing a new tax bracket of 41% on income over $750k a year for individuals (1 million for couples), and adjusting the top bracket for capital gains from 20% to 22%.
.
The prior is a bit more radical. I propose that our tax system treat individuals worth $500 million or more similar to how condo associations treat owners. For major, one-time capital expenditures like wars and natural disaster recovery - the richest Americans should pay a variable assessment on their wealth to cover the cost.
.
And of course we should talk to the rich, like we talk to all Americans, about taxes!
4
I an earlier comment, I asked would the wealth tax apply to Warren's wealth. Replies to my comment indicated no; that since she has "only" $20 million, the tax would not apply to her since it starts at $50 million. And by the tone of those who replied, they seemed to be perfectly fine with that!
So in the spirit of Orwell's "Animal Farm," some millionaires are better than the other millionaires, or to put it differently, some millionaires are "greedy", whereas other millionaires are "not as greedy".
Marx, Lenin, and Mao would not agree. Thank you.
2
Bill Gates net worth is 106.3 billion, 2% of all that comes to 2.126 billion. Come on Bill I know you dropped out of college but no math comes up to 100 billion or 94% of your entire net worth.
8
Mr Gates is a plutocrat with good intentions. And he is smarter than the average bear. But, he was not elected by us to define education policy in the US, scientific research agendas, or Healthcare priorities. And yet, the wealth he has or controls permits him to do just that. Moreover, his good works (and power) are heavily subsidized by everyone else because of the tax deductibility of his contributions under current law. As government is starved of resources, his Foundation has diverted power that should be all of ours to him.
I guess that's OK if you believe that our country is best run by philosopher kings, but, as quaint as it may seem, I remain a fan of representative democracy.
14
I trust Elizabeth Warren, an expert in the field, who single handedly created the Consumer Protection Bureau, a whole lot more than Gates, or any of the other billionaires who are livid about being taxed their fair share.
10
Watching Bill Gates video of what he said on the issue of Elizabeth Warrens wealth tax proposals was much less offensive than reading about them. However why should he not have to pay greater tax on his investments and wealth in order to finance health care for citizens in the USA?
Bill Gates is committed to giving away his billions through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which finances desperately needed health care initiatives in third world countries.
Why not advance some of those billions of dollars to advance health care for all USA citizens?
9
I believe government has a spending problem not a revenue problem. Pretty sure Elizabeth knows that. Government waste is rampant public should not fork over more money to make new agencies or departments unless current ones have their waste checked.
I see how people in comment section don’t understand why gates only paid 10 billion taxes its because he hasn’t cashed out of his Microsoft stock and thats how it should be. Why should anyone pay taxes to something they have yet to make profit on yet?
It’s called capital gains, Tempo...
5
what's amazing is to watch the random nobody here go after bill gates for daring to suggest that he'd like to keep the money he earned. if you need evidence of the economic hubris of the left, it's here, just below. it's easy to learn (just google it), that the "wealthy" (top 1%) pay an enormous amount of the fed tax burden (nearly 40%). and it's fine to ask successful people to pay taxes. but this snarky arrogance, as if anyone that's successful is somehow a bad actor? that's fascism, and propaganda, befitting a would be dictator.
3
Do we want all Americans to have health care or not?
4
Of that 10 billion in taxes he claims to have paid, how much was that paid on capital gains taxes, which are taxed at lower levels than wage income. Gates has apparently donated billions to charity, but his cumulative wealth has not really decreased significantly and that is because of the continued growth in his investment income. Assuming he has 100 billion of wealth taxed at 6%, a good portion of the remaining wealth would be invested, at an average 5% rate of return, and recoup a big chunk of the wealth taxes. Actually, Sanders who has a higher wealth tax should be taken more seriously,
Gates is no a genius who has given us all this beautiful software. He just happened to strike a deal with IBM, when the software industry was in its infancy. purchased an operating and operating systems are natural monopolies.
Because of this Microsoft grew enormously because its birth and life coincided with a blossoming of the value of software and PC's.
The choice between a wealth tax as one means to implement M4A, free tuition, universal child care, and affordable housing is a no brainer. Apparently not apparent to
Hilary as another article in this paper shows
6
When it comes to really, really big numbers I tend to think Bill Gates knows a lot more about financials than Elizabeth Warren.
3
Did the camel pass through the eye of the needle? Honestly, how much money does a billionaire need?
The nerve of taxing the rich!
5
This one sentence says it all for me “i have paid 10 billion in taxes...”. Given that mr Gates his wealth on average over the past 2 decades was maybe 50 billion, that makes a net tax rate of 20 pct. I am sure most working people would love this kind of taxation. Maybe the 6 pct rate is a bit too much, but the direction of mrs. Warren is right.
5
His wealth should be taxed at the highest personal income tax rate.
2
Gates exposed--money can't buy Class.
1
I am the child of very middle class parents. I went to college and law school on scholarships, loans (paid back) and gifts from my grandmother. I am now retired from the federal government on a very limited pension, restricted from collecting Social Security above the minimum because of Congressional "reforms" and widowed. I have never owned any stock, and had to sell my late husband's funds in 2008 (remember 2008?) to keep going. I am not wealthy, and I freely admit being ignorant of the stock market's lure and status as being determinative of how '"well" our economy is doing. I well remember when the Dow broke 1000. I think that the "stock market" is simply an elaborate form of gambling and is NOT related in any way to the profitability of business nor the productivity of our economy. People get rick or poor by selling each other these "stocks"amd I think it is a shell game. I have NO problem with taxing the non existent proceeds of paper wealth. 2% or 4%, if it gets us modern infrastructure and medical are for everyone, GO FOR IT!
8
@jrd
I see where you're coming from but I don't think your comment gets to the meat of things. Bill Gates and Elizabeth Warren are good people. Education, however, is approximately as complicated as society itself. We as `a nation have utterly failed at improving our public schools. As in society, in education, also, the rich grow ever richer and the rest of us struggle merely to survive. None of the magic bullets (e.g., charter schools) have worked. I was surprised that they supported them. As you say, Bill's skills can be found in building a software company, not in education. Melinda does not deserve credit for even that. It is noteworthy that the educational establishment, including the pertinent schools at the best universities, have not made a dent in the problem either. I take issue with your last comment: Bill and Melinda are much smarter than the average movie star, football player, janitor. Smarts do count. A lot. Your statement is silly, and sounds like a typical Trump minion disparagement of knowledge and expertise.
jrd wrote:
"So Bill Gates' money -- and his ideas -- have improved American education? Where exactly did he and Melinda derive their expertise on schools and teaching? And their promotion of charter schools is really in the public interest? It would fascinating to hear why Gates and his wife are better qualified to direct national policy than, say, movie stars, football players, janitors or concert pianists."
1
China will be more of capitalist than United States if Warren Wealth tax goes through with more billionaires
2
Yes I feel so sorry for the billionaires
5
To run for elective office, one needs a certain amount of chutzpah bit Warren takes the cake. Did she roll a user interface into a deep-moat software behemoth? How many people does she employ? How many millionaires has she created? Only a handful of people on this planet have the right to educate Gates. She isn’t one of them.
7
Somewhere, someone said, "I'd rather hear about billionaire tax payers than billionaire philanthropists."
4
Anand Giridharadas' book "Winner's Take All" explains this well. These billionaires fundamentally do not believe in democracy. They want to help only on their own voluntary terms, in ways that preserves their own personal power.
Mr. Gates has more money than he can possibly spend before he dies, and yet he won't commit to voting for a women who stands for everything he claims to support simply because she will tax him more and use our democratic elected government to disperse those funds.
What billionaires hate about Ms. Warren is not just the taxes, but the very idea that the unwashed masses should have any input over their endeavors. But that is fundamentally what it means to live in a democracy. A government of the people, by the people, for the people, deriving its authority from the consent of the governed.
16
@Dan M
"...use our democratic elected government to disperse those funds."
...because the government is a good steward of our money?!?! You are smoking too much Seattle hemp if you believe the government is a better philanthropist than Gates!
2
Let's play a eeny weeny little violin for all the wealthy who are crying foul about Warren's proposed wealth tax.
Their lives, and their philanthropy, will not be dramatically changed by paying a tax which would enable the expansion of public services like pre-k for all, health care and social security? What they are really concerned about is losing the power to target their money to only the programs and issues they think should be funded.
Gates is the rich man he is because the rest of us buy his products. He has his money because millions have supported his efforts.
There's nothing wrong with politicians like Warren, Sanders and others reminding them that it takes a village to make people wealthy.
9
Warren may currently be the leading contender but if she gets the nomination there will be four more disastrous years of Trump. Her goals are worthy but her stated policies terrify the part of the public that doesn't want government in every single corner of their lives. Most of her goals can be achieved moderately (with a Democratic House and Senate); but even if she were to compromise right now it's too late to save her candidacy from Trumpian mendacity, which might not be too hard for folks to believe considering what she's already put out there.
Democrats, please don't shoot yourselves in the foot again!
6
I can see it now: a Fed TV channel called the Wealth Tax Road Show, where appraisers try to put a price on Mark Zuckerberg's Mickey Mantle signed rookie card and Donald Trump's hand-made hair pieces.
2
Gates is a very smart guy, obviously.
But I pity him if he has a public dialogue
with Warren, who is the debate Queen.
He will wisely shut his trap on this issue,
from this day forth, me thinks.
5
This article portrays Warren as being reasonable. She agreed to sit down with one of her critics with enormous wealth who would be affected by her plans. Yet for millions of Americans, ordinary citizens, having health insurance through their employment, they all face losing it, arbitrarily, if Warren has her way. When does she plan to sit down with them?
4
@blgreenie Write to her, I did. I explained that there are too many people out there that will not vote for someone promoting immediate Medicare For All. My husband and I have been on Medicare for over 20 years, and we know how good it is, but many people need to make that decision in their own good time not feel that they are being pushed into it.
Had the ultra rich been paying their fair share all along may our teachers wouldn't be paying for supplies out of their pockets or working a second job. Our infrastructure wouldn't be falling apart, poverty and homelessness wouldn't be at an all time high. Politicians continue give tax breaks to those that need it the least. Ask any working person that is just getting by. NO one wants to pay more taxes.
9
We love the generosity of philanthropists. It confirms our faith in humanity when a person, or family, of great wealth creates a charitable foundation or makes a massive, voluntary contribution to a worthy cause. We tend to overlook the fact that all that wealth accrued at the expense of millions of people of very modest means, and it certainly didn’t find its way into the paychecks of the company employees.
I’ll side with Bill Gates on taxes when his personal wealth isn’t a byproduct of a system that is incapable of putting the brakes on the accrual of personal wealth and, more importantly, propagandize its legitimacy. What is Elizabeth Warren asking of Bill Gates? Is she threatening the viability of Microsoft? No. She’s asking him to contribute more to healthcare, and childcare, and higher education. Perhaps that means he has less money to contribute to his pet foundation project, but you know what? I don’t care. I’m with Warren on this.
12
@Richard Frank If I have to pay 10% more in taxes I'd have to quickly move my family into a smaller home or cut out the less essential essentials from our spending. If Gates pays 20% more in taxes nothing would change for him. He'd be able to keep his house and spending habits on top of donating just as much to his charity.
4
It's clear that what is going on here is that Bill Gates supports Warren's plan, and is in fact working to create media hype over them meeting to discuss Warren's proposal.
I think this proposed meeting is fantastic, however the NYTimes is being disingenuous in comparing Gates to Zuckerberg, Gates is and has always been philanthropic, Zuckerberg has yet to show that he is not all about greed and power.
At the end of the day, we need more people like Gates and Warren who work tirelessly to improve the only planet we have and the people who reside here.
5
With $10 billion government contract for cloud computing platform awarded to Microsoft, I doubt Bill gates would have any differences with Trump.
2
This is a good sign; although, it would be better to read the headline: Billionaire Pleads to Retain Unequal Share of Nation’s Wealth.
I’m happy that Warren’s momentum is getting the attention of the rich but she has the most to lose here. As a candidate who’s mission is to represent the impoverished, over worked, increasingly underrepresented precaricates with no healthcare.
Now, she is sitting down to sell her plan to a billionaire pleading to keep his wealth—one who on the surface is attempting to eradicate poverty, albeit through the ill fated ideological lens of capitalism. Like the Islamist martyr that killed 30 for his “good cause” billionaires go on ideologically working within the confines of a system that they don’t see—perhaps forcing the suffering of the poor and the working classes.
Let’s not make a capitulation to capital. Bill Gates’s earned his money, yes, but under a broken system that needs to be fixed. Neoliberal ideology has emphasized deregulation. Deregulation has resulted in undermining of protections for vital social fabric and for the nauseating accumulation of wealth.
Warren, stand up to big money and you have my vote.
4
If Mr. Gates is concerned that Sen. Warren's tax plan will cause him severe financial distress, he is more than welcome to swap financial circumstances with me. I can assure him that Sen. Warren's plan will have no adverse effect on my finances.
5
Only a few economists think that Elizabeth Warren could fund all of her plans with her proposed taxes on the wealthy. To fund her programs, she would have to tax the upper middle class and the middle class.
The Gates Family is not against taxing the general public. Many years ago, Mr. Gates’ father worked hard to get Washington State voters to approve a tax on ordinary people to fund public pre-schools. The referendum did not pass. I would like to see public pre-schools, but I wonder why the Gates Foundation does not offer to pay taxes such that Washington State would have at least some of the money it would need to fund them.
If Bill Gates meets with Elizabeth Warren they might find that they both agree that it is necessary to raise taxes on ordinary citizens when, what they should be discussing, is whether the Gates Foundation and other private philanthropies owe it to the public to pay their fair share of taxes.
@ann
Given they robbed a many of us at the government’s behest, that would be so kind of them. In order to be in business nowadays and do things like file sales tax, one needs to run up-to-date computer equipment. (I remember doing a story on farmers and technology in college and how their livelihoods depended on computers, and how many lacked the knowledge.) As the wife of a business owner I do not even want to imagine the money spent on keeping up with Bill Gates whims.
1
It is very generous of Gates to sacrifice the welfare and future of the country so he can have his money.
9
Can someone tell this willy wonka 2 bit of a politician to understand the following simple concept. You cannot legislate the poor into financial freedom by legislating the successful and wealthy out of their accomplishments and earnings. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work hard to live because the government provides... and when the other hard working class gets the idea that it does no good for them to work for success because the government will steal the fruits of their efforts to distribute to the other half... that is about the END OF ANY NATION. Someone tell this Harvard minnow Warren that the government cannot multiply prosperity by stealing success in the name of equality.
12
The middle class is paying for the bulk of the infrastructure, legal structure, and governing that makes it possible to do business in the US. But the middle class wealth has been vacuumed up by the wealthy, so either the government gets weaker or it gets into debt.
Except you can’t run a business without strong laws, and laws are only meaningful if the government itself is strong enough to enforce it.
It’s just mind boggling that anyone really believes that “starving the beast” is good for the economy.
2
@WarrenAdvisor
Most of the wealthy belong in jail for crimes against humanity!
3
@WarrenAdvisor This isn't meant to legislate the poor into financial freedom, but to give them the education they need to do it on their own without the fear of losing everything they have if a member of the family becomes seriously ill.
1
Fearless! Not even intimidated by Bill Gates.
She will make a great president.
9
It's a real good idea to get some of the wealthy people on board with Warren/Sanders wealth taxes. Gates, Buffet and Zuckerberg are among a few billionaires who are willing to pay more in taxes for the better good of the society. They, and many other multimillionaires, are willing to pitch in more for the greater good, and we must and can bring them on board with the Progressive ideas rather than isolating them out as a representation of evil.
4
I do not understand why our country gives tax-free status to philanthropic organizations (such as the Gates Foundation and the Ford Foundation) that try to socially engineer people into the kind of society that they think would be best. If the private “philanthropies” had to pay taxes just like other organizations and businesses, these taxes could be used by the government to do what the public thinks is best. Instead, the philanthropies are required to spend only a tiny proportion of their tax-free endowments, and what they do spend, they can spend on whatever they want.
Private philanthropies are fundamentally undemocratic. Why doesn’t Elizabeth Warren propose taxing them?
6
If Sen. Warren is interested in moving the discussion of wealth inequality along, she should be happy to meet with Mr. Gates and anyone else who has the future of our country in mind. We want the best minds to tackle these problems with a view toward developing realistic, feasible policies that can be implemented, and without unnecessary displays of pride, ideological purity, and similar distractions. Just get the job done!
1
So, Bill Gates - the founder of the Gates Foundation that aims to help people around the globe, is apparently complaining that it is not 'fair' to tax his $100 Billion fortune at higher rates (though his wealth will continue to grow each year) to accomplish universal healthcare, daycare, college tuition, fight climate change, ensure social security, build affordable housing, and more?
7
It’s HIS money. Should he wish to fund those things, he can certainly find a way. Without the inefficiency of government. And if he wishes to instead spend his fortune to put tomato plants in every yard in America or to influence each state to designate an official ice cream flavor, that too is his right.
2
"You really want the incentive system to be there and you can go a long ways without threatening that." I wish there were more articles on what we can do to improve innovation while also making taxes more fair. America can do both.
@Derek D The thing is though...... How does Bill Gates the person getting taxed more affect Microsoft the company when it comes to innovation? Microsoft will have exactly the same ammount of funds for R&D no matter what Bill pays in taxes.
2
I think Elizabeth Warren is a terrific Senator and spokesperson for the average American. But her line of policy proposals as a presidential candidate worries me - a lot.
Our responsibility as citizens is to get Donald Trump out of office as quickly as possible. He is bent on destroying our Constitutional system of government, not to mention our environment, and his ongoing lying, bullying, misogyny and racism are deep disgraces to the office and our country.
All that said, why come forth with plans to add $3 trillion to government spending, funded by a possibly unconstitutional tax, that may well turn off swing voters? Everything Democrats believe in can be accomplished more traditionally, through much higher top income tax rates and stronger enforcement, the strengthening of the ACA and addition of a public option, reasonable re-regulation of corporations and aggressive action to mitigate climate change.
If Democrats present an agenda that seems sensible to most people, the deeply unpopular Trump will unelect himself. If we insist on an immediate jump to Medicare For All, wealth taxes and eliminating immigration enforcement, we could blow the whole thing. Those positions are not broadly popular.
4
@David It's par for the course for Democrats when it comes to raising taxes and expenses. Warren isn't much different really. The taxes always more than make up for the expenses and the deficit shrinks. The sticking point is that Republicans will argue til their purple that lowing taxes will increase government revenue over time and zero in on demonizing expenses. Government welfare is very effective at evenly distributing funds to those who need it and overall very few can and do abuse welfare. But that's the fact Republicans need to deny so that they can rationalize tax cuts to the average person.
1
Mega billionaires challenging Warren’s wealth tax and other money-raising proposals will probably only help her, partly because there is no good way to grab all the marbles and still come out smelling like a rose. Meanwhile, the focus on the wealth tax and whether there will be an middle class income tax increase or not all avoids more overarching questions such as, should we assume that all other government expenditures and budget items will remain unchanged as we try to figure out ways to help ordinary Americans? What about redirecting some of the current income away from subsidies to giant agribusinesses and procurement of obsolete military equipment, or subsidies to the oil and gas industries, for example? Or, are some sacred cows just too sacred to discuss compared to our kids?
@Pottree I don't agree that her focuses will help her get elected. One of the main problems being that Republican politicians have made it so most people don't even understand what income level is middle class anymore. For example. Most "southern" Republicans would argue that they are middle class and that their senators are improving the states they control. While in reality middle class is an annual income of more than 100k (not actually 100k but its noticeably less than the actual number) and the median income in most of the "southern" Republican states is around 45k. The result is that we get people who make 60k and think their taxes will be increased when Warren pushes for a big upper class and minor middle class tax increase.
2
I must say, when I hear of billionaires complaining about taxes and inheritance taxes and whatnot, I can't help but think of Golum in the Lord of the Rings saying, "Mine!" in his grumbley Golum voice.
I posit that America's ability for the various sections to do business (me buying corn from farmers, who buy equipment repair parts from salespeople who then pay their rent, say) is being constipated by large piles of hoarded cash.
Mr. Gates is a reputed philanthropist, who uses his hoarded cash (to what extent I don't know) to bring aid to developing nations, a task which many if not most Americans are uninterested. it's a noble goal. However, many other people in his financial situation are interested in, say, paying insane amounts of money for paintings, or transfer gobs of it to their layabout progeny.
All of this would not be an issue if Joe/anne Sixpack and their 2.1 kids were able to afford medical insurance, a reasonably sized apartment, transportation, and be able to retire without freezing to death - if they both work 40 hours a week at a minimum wage job. We'll throw in a nicety, like being able to put enough aside (with frugality) to pay the bills for 6 months if someone loses their job.
I guess I'm the optimistic type. I think there's still enough in the US for everyone - it's just a question of distribution. freeing up this distribution means making a painting, or a giant house, worth fewer ones and zeroes in the owner's bank account, so be it.
3
Should anyone who is paid minimum wage be married, much less have children? That’s about as irresponsible as one can be without endangering lives.
2
@From Where I Sit Your right and that's the problem. There's literally not enough close to enough non minimum wage jobs in the US to employ every adult. No matter how many people get college degrees there needs to be a large percentage of people doing simple labor and those simple labor jobs aren't paying enough to raise a family properly.
1
They will merely move their money and any businesses offshore if Warren or Bernie are leading in the polls. Most wealthy people and most of their money are very mobile. They can own a house in the US and travel in and out on their private jet.
2
I rather doubt that Bill Gates needs Liz Warren's explanation of the wealth tax. If Warren controls the power she will bring guns to Bill Gates home and hold a gun to his head and remove cash from his pockets. Pretty simple really. Politicians who have never created anything want the power to take a commision. As Milton Friedman said about a society that favors equality over productive capital that produces a more egalitarian society, the debate Warren is having is between A and B determining how much C pays to D and how big a commision A and B will take. Warren wants Americans to surrender Freedom and Liberty for her idea of what equality looks like. This type of thinking has always produced despots and tyrannical rule. It is too good a no good thinking.
2
@Andy
The problem is that there is no economic "law" that says capital must be used productively. It is a major problem without a simple solution. There must be buyers for the products produced, to encourage investment. If the buyers are short of cash, money will look for other non-productive investments. Simply taxing certain capital does not address lack of purchasing power. Rather than taxing the outcome, we need to re-access how the pie is divided, to promote productive investment.
@beaconps Exactly. When companies get money from investors it's mearly a loan that's paid back whenever the investor wants it. When a company sells something to a customer that money is wholly the companies. It's better for everyone when consumers have more money to spend, or more to the point, any money to spend.
1
A lot of commenters list philanthropy as a plus for the likes of Gates. Problem with that is most billionaires, even benevolent ones, get to decide where their money goes and what strings are attached. They wield power in proportion to their wealth. If billionaires believe that their contribution to the common good is best sent to the Treasury, that is where it would be going.
For most it isn't because they would have no more say than the rest of us, and that just will not do.
This is really where the "government is the problem" attitude comes from. So who would you rather have controlling services, your neighbors through the flawed and messy process of democracy or a few billionaires who just know, because they're billionaires?
5
I like Warren but, she is the epitome of the over-achiever you hated in high school. To be sure, that is her resume in short form.
Unfortunately, she (and a lot of Americans) have some weird ideas about the role of the POTUS. Her specific plan (Wealth Tax) as well as most of her "plans" have a zero chance of getting all the way through congress even if she is elected POTUS.
What none of the reporters or pundits seem to think about or even ask is how to govern in a nation that is evenly divided politically.
Unfortunately, our elected officials want to believe, and act on the belief, that everyone wants them to implement the most radical elements of their campaigns. Hence, at least half of the people that the office represents is angered and shut-out.
Yes this nation has problems and we also have extremists who can only see one solution - theirs. Yet, We the People can, and frankly must, come to compromise positions that address the problems without being radically disruptive.
I'm sure that Warren was the student who, when assigned a 50 page paper, delivered 500 pages with an additional 300 pages of footnotes all with a big grin on her face. Unfortunately, some times she missed the point.
Leadership is about guiding people to finding and owning solutions to their problems not having a plan to shove down their throats like it or not.
In this nation there is only US and no them.
3
Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg, college drop-outs. What gives them the right to assume their ideas and money are better than others with wealth?
4
There she (Elizabeth Warren) goes again! Proving once again that she's not afraid to both put forth and explain her Plans.
1
This article states Bill Gates has a fortune of over $100 Billion.
Gates says he has paid $10 in taxes (over what period of time?).
If Bill Gates paid $10 Billion in taxes LAST YEAR alone, he is in an enviably low tax bracket of 10%.
If Elizabeth Warren's tax plan were to be fully instituted, I am confident Mr. Gates will have a net worth that still increases each year, even though he no longer 'works' for a living.
When Mr. Gates says he's not sure how open-minded Elizabeth Warren is - it's like a 'window' to his psyche.
6
@TMM
"If Bill Gates paid $10 Billion in taxes LAST YEAR alone, he is in an enviably low tax bracket of 10%."
No, no, no. You are confusing "wealth" with "income."
3
@GMooG
You are correct - thanks for your comment.
Without tax returns and net worth calculations, it is impossible to get a totally accurate picture - BUT do we agree that if Bill Gates has amassed a fortune in excess of $100 Billion and has paid only $10 Billion in taxes while accumulating that $100B fortune, that he paid an enviably low tax of 10%?
1
Incentives, yes. Financial incentives that let a person amass more wealth than several generations of direct descendants would ever need to live a life of comfort and privilege, while others live in poverty, poor health, and very limited opporunity: that's the incentive principle run wild.
3
If they weren’t behind the creation of a graphic user interface and didn’t parlay it into a software juggernaut, they have no claim on any of Gates’ wealth.
It's interesting—and not surprising at all—that the only people who seem to be wary of wealth-taxation plans like Warren's are those who have exorbitant wealth.
Unlike most of us, who would seriously feel an additional 6% of our income or assets taken by taxes, the very few 75,000 families whose $billion+ assets would be so taxed would still retain the vast majority of their wealth—which would STILL be hundreds of times (if not thousands of times) more than the wealth of the average citizen.
Let us all not also forget that the ability to achieve such wealth relies on the infrastructure of public education, services, and regulations for which ALL citizens pay taxes. Why shouldn't those who have risen to the top, as much as from their own ingenuity as well as from the privileges afforded them by the public at large, repay society in DIRECT PROPORTION to their level of achievement?
4
A complete gutting of the financial friendly tax code might make these reasonable solutions unnecessary. Uniform moderate wealth such that all have time to contemplate the society in which they reside is necessary, in favor of these all too frequent instances of extreme wealth, entitled down to their future generations and dynastic inevitabilities.
Come on, Bill. What are you afraid of; a woman who might want to tax your wealth?
3
@DRR A woman better educated and can do math?
1
The astounding thing is that a lot of these ultra-wealthy types don't even understand money that well themselves. They have armies of money-managers who handle their wide-range of investments (often esoteric ones in real estate or overseas) in trust funds and other vehicles. I trust Bill Gates to talk about computers, philanthropy, or science - money, not so much.
3
@JS That's why it always confused me when people say Trump is a savvy business man. Has anyone heard him speak in public? He rambles on like a crack addict and his signature negotiation move is to walk away from the bargaining table. After which his advisors swoop in, apologize for his rudeness and close a deal that's favorable for both parties. Once your a certain level of rich you pay other people to be skilled in your place and can literally afford to do nothing and have no skill.
1
Let's face it there are a lot of companies like Amazon & Walmart where the owners have accumulated massive wealth on the backs of thousands of people who are not even making a livable wage and qualify for food stamps. That means these companies are being subsidized by the taxpayers.
Plus the minimum wage has no way kept up with inflation. And these are not just teenagers. For a lot of people this is their living because they do not have the education or the skills for jobs that pay more. But then our having the highest dropout rate and the highest poverty rate among the industrialized nations is another story.
It's time the wealthy started paying their fair share.
12
@uras It's unfortunate that so many people think unskilled labor isn't needed and doesn't account for more than half of the jobs in the US.
1
When there are discussions about an additional wealth tax, I would like to see more analysis about the potential distortions to the economy that would result. The transfer of assets from the taxable ledger to a less taxable world could be staggering.
1
@Backwash The thing is that there are not insignificant costs associated with moving revenue out of the country on paper to avoid taxes It's just that it's about as expensive as high tax rates and more expensive than Republican tax rates Enough of a cost either way at higher rates that smaller companies and entrepreneurs who won't be paying these tax rates due to their size will then have a small advantage over their larger counterparts.
"Ms. Warren’s team has been critical of Mr. Biden’s reliance on high-dollar fund-raising events."
Isn’t Ms. Warren being hypocritical since she, herself, had already raised a lot of money from wealthy donors before announcing that she would no longer do so (unless she wins the nomination, in which case, she says she will again take their money).
1
I prefer donations to the needy at the end of one's life, but, because the wealth inequality has gotten so egregious given estate tax loopholes, I support the Sanders/Warren plans.
The root cause of the wealth inequality is the fixed pattern of rich get richer while the poor stay poor. Why is it fixed? Because a vast majority of the wealthy parents pass on the wealth to their children.
Our current system rewards even those who are less productive as long as their parents are wealthy. On the contrary, children of the less fortunate families can only hope to inherit something let alone be left behind a heavy debt burden due to debts racked up such as student loans.
This isn't capitalism as originally intended. The fixed pattern of poor stay poor is so rigid that most children of less fortunate families can’t dig themselves out of the hole.
Loving your child is indeed a wonderful feeling. However, if that love is reserved only for your child without regard to others, then it'll shape itself into an act of selfishness.
In lieu of monetary wealth, leave your child a wealth of heartful memories from the highs and lows of life shared together.
And then, as for the monetary wealth that remains even at the end of your life, return it to the wider society for the benefit of those who are less fortunate. In the form of estate tax or, even better, donation to those who need it the most.
4
@BLOG joekimgroup.com They rebranded the "estate tax" to the "death tax" and convinced poor people they would have to give whatever meager money and possessions they have when they die to the government. (A big part of the problem is that within monetary "poverty" is educational/knowledge poverty. The wealthy always know what they are getting away with. The poor often advocate against themselves and do not even know it.)
1
Wasn’t gates a big fan of H1 visas and globalization? He had no problem not sitting down with the people who lost their jobs and likely wrecked their entire lives to benefit him.
4
Amazing that she’d be willing to speak with someone who might be affected by her policies... what a concept!
@MJ
Not really. She's been very clear, through her campaign events, that she'll talk to anyone—everyone—who is likely to be affected by (or maybe, it's "who will benefit from") her policies.
1
Well, Bill Gates bills us and that's why he's rich. So lets Bill Bill Gates.
There! that was easy.
3
@PATRICK
Everything is easy when you don't think about it. There's a crucial difference between you sending money to MSFT, and requiring Gates to send money to you.
First, MSFT provides you with goods and services in exchange for the money you pay MSFT. What does Gates get in exchange for the wealth tax?
Second, nobody forces anybody to buy anything from MSFT. That's not the case with a wealth tax.
2
"[W]hen you say I should pay $100 billion, O.K., then I’m starting to do a little math about what I have left over."
Who said you'd have to pay $100 billion?
6
There are so many positives about Warren but the all or nothing health care idea is a non-starter---I like her ideas on reining in some of the abuses in banking, Wall Street, and such. Sure we all would like to see everyone have insurance and care but I think the sensible path to that is to continue to build on the ACA and not arbitrarily force everyone to give up the insurance they now have. She is an excellent candidate in many ways but she will not be the nominee by taking the hard line on this issue.
@Mary Melcher She will move to the middle and compromise on the health care plan. Don't worry.
1
@Mels She'll need to and everyone sorta knows it. As far as the House and Senate are concerned if a Democrat sponsored bill is proposed and doesn't benefit the wealthy most of the time Republicans won't debate or vote on it and instead filibuster it. Though to be very clear that doesn't make it wrong of her to talk about the right way right now. Even if she'll need to compromise with the wealthy later.
1
Thomas Piketty's book "Capital" analyzed all economic data available throughout history, and determined that money gained through having money (stocks, rent payments, business, etc) always increases at a faster rate than money gained through work. Over time, this means the rich get richer and the poor get poorer...until something happens that causes the entire system to collapse (revolution, depression, etc).
Pointing out that the trends as they now stand are unsustainable, and that we need to do something about it, isn't ONLY in the interests of middle and lower class people, but of the upper class also. When the system collapses, the rich will not be rich anymore, either. (Of course, anticipating a collapse in decades and decades makes it a tough sell to the rich now, and the pathological wealth-worship of many of the poor is currently baffling to me.)
3
The interesting thing to me about this is not the substance of what Gates said. It's this "she probably won't even talk to me!" attitude, simultaneously self-important and self-pitying, that irritates me. It reminds me of all the doofy memes I see on facebook that, for example, have a picture of a young child and text that says "Thank God my mommy didn't abort me. I bet nobody will even share this!"
8
Huh, this should be fun. Like sitting down with the thief before they steal your household belongings
2
Gates, nor any private individual, has no business controlling even a fraction of 100 billion dollars worth of this nation's productivity. It is only due to the ridiculous deference this nation has shown to "free" market outcomes that he and others ever ended up in control of budgets large enough to suit several small nations. It is amazing that someone reputed to be a digital age whiz can't do any better math than this, but at the very least he'd never be taxed beyond his last 50 million, which is more than enough resources to incentivize anyone.
11
@Bill Smith
So Gates' wealth is due to "the nation's productivity," and not his own? Do tell us about your role in the creation and growth of MSFT? How many programs did you write? How many all-nighters did you pull? How many customers did you call on? How many nights away from your family did you devote to MSFT? How much of your money did you risk?
3
@GMooG The key point is how much did Bill do to make Microsoft what it is now. Currently? Not even 1% of Microsoft is made from his effort over his entire career. It's almost entirely built off the backs of others and he mearly did what his programmers do every day.
I admire everything Bill and Melinda Gates have done through their foundation, and I have been a fan for decades. I think people taking swipes at them for “not doing more” to solve the myriad of problems humanity has are being disingenuous and hyperbolic. I mean, really? On top of trying to eradicate dozen diseases, fix education for marginalized students, make agriculture more efficient, bring banking for the poor, fix climate change, fix malnutrition, increase health worker training, improve gender equity, etc, you now want them to also fix the homeless problem, the Flint water crisis, the presidency and the US tax code as well??? C’mon.
But, as much as I admire Mr. Gates, I am so disappointed with his digs at Elizabeth Warren. Really, Bill? Why would you say things like “...wonder if she’s open minded enough...” or “...even willing to meet with me...”? Those were cheap shots that served no purpose. As it turns out, you, Melinda and Warren have a lot in common with Elizabeth. It would be great if you guys could all work together but at the very least, don’t drag each other down! We have bigger fish to fry!
23
@Max
You mean what did they do with our money, as he and she rolled out product after product never standing behind the things they had produced? Rendering hardware useless with update after update? Our government should have sat on him, like Zuckerberg and Sandberg should be sat on now. These people are destroying other people lives and families and they aren’t being held accountable for any of it.
1
gates foundation gives to many causes, they want things to go well...in america, healthcare
is unavailable to millions. he and liz should definitely talk. maybe they can find a creative solution that hasn't been thought of yet.
7
What's really hard for us mere paycheck earners and Social Security dolees to understand is why anyone "needs" $100 billion, or, by that standard, a measly $1 billion. When that is your yardstick, possessing a paltry $100,000,000 must put one on a par with the toothless homeless. A huge number of Americans, citizens of the richest nation on Earth, go from cradle to grave never having earned a total of $1,000,000 over the entire span of their lives.
The costs of the basic necessities --food in your stomach, a roof over your head, clothes on your back and shoes on your feet-- for a comfortable existence over the average lifespan are on the order of half that million dollars. The healthcare industry harvests the major share of the other half. It's not hard at all to spend $1,000,000 on medical care for one person, let alone a family. To Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos a half million dollars is the equivalent of 5/100,000 of 1% of their wealth. Ask someone worth one million dollars, how much they would miss a nickel.
18
Gates is being facetious, but he's right that this is about maintaining incentives.
In particular, as wealth grows, its incentive value is a lesson in "diminishing returns". Your first $10 means you get to eat today, that's a really good reason to get out of bed in the morning. Your first $10M means a lifetime of economic security, that's a good incentive to work hard for many years. Your first $10B means you get to start a foundation to give your money away and your first $100B means ... well, your foundation gets to give money away in even bigger piles. The difference between $10B and $100B is little more than ego.
It's interesting to see how violent the reactions from some billionaires have been to this threat to their egos.
1
@harrym Well it's not really diminished returns on your earnings, as someone who stands to earn 1 million or more a year, if you paying anywhere close to what someone working minimum wage pays. It's only diminishing returns if theres a point where you can't earn more. With a gradual curve up to that point.
Bill, if, after your first $10 million, you say money is still your motivation, I would contend that money is no longer your motivation - possibly greed, lust for power or some other pathological obsession.
7
At some level, money is longer about itself or what it can buy, but a symbolic talisman.
1
Hmmm...Elizabeth Warren telling Gates what her tax plan is all about?
Could this be an example of Ma'am-splaining?
3
He’s exhibited that he doesn’t understand it and doesn’t know if she’s even willing to talk to him about. If that doesn’t indicate he’s open to an explanation, I don’t know what does. About time we had some lady-splainin going on.
2
No this not Ma’Am splaining. He asked, in a very snide way, and she immediately agreed to meet with him. Who was the gracious of the two?
4
It’s more like Haaavad-splaining. As though the Ivy professor will “school” the college dropout.
Oh the poor dear! He might only be left with $80 billion?!?!
I’d love to be a fly on the wall and hear Gates defend the indefensible.
8
I wonder, did Gates get a sit down with Trump or McConnell before the rich guys tax cut was enacted two years ago? Did he complain when he didn’t?
9
Bill Gates white boy with money being ignored by a white woman presidential candidate. Bill and the lovely Mrs. Gates have so much mouth where have they been all these years. I forgot working in Africa, destroying the US public school system, making people beg for their donations etc. They are in their own way vultures like the GOP
When it comes to trust, character, and understanding of numbers, I trust Ms. Warren, Bernie over a Bill Gates, Bloomberg, Milken , Diamond and all of Wall Street over those rich people who had no issue with Americans dying for lack of health care affordable housing.
Bill Gate is not even in the conversation because the rich could care less about the regular person on the street
7
God, she has these billionaires shaken, doesn’t she?
11
@Braden Lock
I hope you realize that none of what Warren is proposing will ever come to fruition. She is smart enough to understand this, but unfortunately, most of her supporters are not. What she is doing is proposing a cynical, liberal version of Trump's wall: a shiny object that will distract the naive & not-so-bright just long enough to get their votes.
2
@GMooG Partially true. A classic wealth tax won't happen again any time soon. But a watered down version will surely happen as inevitably does with Democratic presidents. Taxes on the wealthy go up, not as much as they wanted, welfare and public works expenses rise but not enough to offset the tax raise so the annual deficit goes down. More welfare and infrastructure means more happy citizens. Smaller, or no, deficit means financial security for the country.
From the guy who sells vaccines after selling bugs et viruses for decades.
Bill,
If you are arguing over just how many BILLIONS you have left over after taxes, you lost the argument before you opened your mouth.
20
Not only can he help in a big way provide healthcare for our citizens, he can also replace the embroidery machines which Windows 10 rendered incompatible. A comparable machine to the ones he destroyed, now costs $8k -$10K, money many of the old gals don’t have, including myself. He should be sued for the financial pain and suffering he has caused so many in his quest to dominate.
3
We were just fulminating over the same thing at our house this morning, but the devices made obsolete by updating Windows 10 were a laser printer, the port for the chip from a camera, and a slide scanner. The RICO plot, which was borrowed from the inventor and originator, IBM, is to force you to replace things that don’t necessarily need replacing because they’re made obsolete whether they work fine or not. For this, yes, you should help out more generously.
To all the AEI/libertarian folks here: please read Picketty's authoritative book on this subject before dismissing the idea of a small wealth tax. The problem isn't that Bill Gates became wealthy. It's that Bill Gates' children can make even more than he did in a lifetime without ever working, because large wealth concentrations perpetuate themselves with higher returns in unproductive investments than productive ones in the real economy. The European wealth taxes had poor success only because they clumsily allowed exemptions for things wealthy people often invested in like stocks, and they relied too much on self-reporting. Warren's plan will not make such errors.
4
I was disappointed with Bill Gates' answer. He could have and should have said "Yes, I'd like to talk to her" but instead insinuated that she was close minded and wouldn't be willing to talk to him. Uh, that wasn't the question. And now that she has called him out .....
7
We are reputed to be an advanced country. But we shirk to spend money on good causes.
We need better and affordable schools and colleges. We need better roads, railways, and airports. We need healthcare that everyone can afford and has access to, not just for the well to do. We need housing so that there are no homeless people.
We have allowed our atmosphere to become so thick with greenhouse gases that we have dangerous global warming; hurricanes and tornadoes are becoming more destructive; more destructive fires and snow storms are occurring.
If we sit down to design a tax pie and dispassionately divide it into slices so that everyone pays their fair share of taxes, we can really build a nation with prosperity for all versus the much touted but delusional "great America."
I have not paid much attention to the numerous candidates who are running for the office of the President. There are just too many for me to process. None has the erudition and oratory of a Narendra Modi (the prime minister of India) to forcefully communicate their message. I am waiting for such a candidate to emerge.
The tone-deafness of the ultra rich is astounding. Listen to the sound of the world’s smallest violin playing a sad, sad song for Bill Gates having to count how many billions of dollars he’ll have left over after he pays 100 billion more in taxes. This must be some terrifying arithmetic. He’ll have to make gut wrenching decisions about whether to fuel his private jet (although I suspect he still wouldn’t face such a crisis). In the meantime, many working class Americans have to decide whether to spend money on food or prescription drugs; whether it’s more important to put new tires on their car or spend on their kids’ education, etc.
11
@Andrew "whether it’s more important to put new tires on their car or spend on their kids’ education, etc." Most US citizens will put that money into their kids education and with their soon to be bald tires spin out and crash into a guardrail during the winter. Then once they've been slapped with the 5,000$ deductible from their health insurance little Timmy college fund will then be used to pay that off then for cheap weak pain meds cause their parent will have moderate spinal pain for the rest of their life cause they wanted their kid to have a better life.
1
"So you really want the incentive system to be there and you can go a long ways without threatening that.”
So he was only willing to do what he did - create and build up Microsoft - if he could make a hundred billion dollars? Where does that leave the majority of Americans who are working for the next paycheck? What's in it for us?
1
Bill Gates said, he is kidding. He should be mindful of what he is saying. People only remember that he is implying that Warren tax would cost him 100 Billion Dollars, which is nonsense. This is a subtle way of damaging the candidates who are running on a platform to make the government work for all not just for Billionaires.
4
I can understand how those few mega wealthy are worried. I guess they will need to line the glove compartment with leather instead of cashmere in their second yacht. It is time for these people to realize how the vast majority of people live. My question is...
Why would Warren need to sit down with anyone millionaire. Democracy is based on votes, supposedly, instead of how much money you can bribe candidates with.
Warren should refuse.
3
I don’t feel sorry for Mr Gates. I payed more than anyone. He sent all the computer jobs to China for cheap wages and no health benefits. He helped pollute Chinas air and water so they now need to wear masks. They make lousy computers to many things wrong with them with recalls. How many off shore accounts does he have? If he paid through the years Americans 15.00 an hour and health benefits he would not be so wealthy today. Shame on him he needs to pay up whatever Mrs Warren asks for taxes. Make the rich pay .
4
I don’t feel sorry for Mr Gates. For decades he was given breaks from his rich Republican supporters and received all of Trumps welfare for the rich tax breaks . Make him pay more since he took so much and tell him stop whining.
2
Bill Gates cannot stand it paying taxes on a $100 billion? His wealth is obscene and no one should have so much while others are homeless, hungry and have no health care including children) here in the the US. Although he purports to do good, public policy and how monies are spent should not be made by one individual (or 1% of total population). Decisions should be made democratically by elected officials and not by the likes of Bill Gates and his cohorts. Making decisions on how billions of dollars are are spent by a few uncollected amounts to dictatorship by a minority. So yes, tax the 1% and use that money for purposes that are decided through a democratic process. We don't want the 1% dictatorship. Their greed and hunger for control are what is destroying this country. Gates even wants a private audience. That's how much hunger for control he has. The common person will never have access like that to candidates, so Bill and the rest of the 1% please pay your fair share and stop trying control government. You are not elected. If you want to influence policy, then run for government and get elected.
2
The issue is not whether the wealthy should pay more. The issue is how and to whom.
Here in CT, one of the highest taxing States in the nation, the Dem governor wants to tax us even more by installing tolls on our roads. Obviously, the taxes the State is collecting is not enough. Where is our money going???
I suspect that the public sector is wasteful. Pay is fat, overtime is fatter, work hours are short, accountability is a foreign concept, retirement is early and with the kind of generous benefits the average private sector worker can only dream about.
There is not enough Bill Gates's in the world to satisfy the monster.
1
I thought Bill Gates gave away all his wealth? How can he still have $100 billion?
If I had a few billion to give away, I'd much rather give it to the Gates Foundation than to our government.
How many trillions has Gates wasted in the Middle East? If we could have saved the $9 triilion we've spent there it would pay almost half the 10 year cost of Warren's M4A plan.
Don't blame Gates because we've elected a government that has other priorities it considers more important than health care.
54
@kridge
"If I had a few billion to give away, I'd much rather give it to the Gates Foundation than to our government."
It's important to remember that "our government" is of, by, and for the People. Giving money to the government means giving that money to us all. The people ARE the government. Many people seem to forget that.
19
@kridge I don't blame Gates. I blame the fools who have elected politicians like Donald Trump.
Yes, we've wasted trillions in the Middle East. But not because of Elizabeth Warren.
Don't blame decent politicians because selfish/ignorant/willfully stupid/apathetic/all of the above citizens have elected a government that has other priorities than the public good. (Those "other priorities", by the way, being to make rich people like Gates richer.)
20
@kridge
But that is just it, there is something fundamentally wrong with a country in which anyone has billions to just give away in the first place.
I don't believe there has ever lived any man or woman who could fairly be said to have earned the insane levels of wealth that are now had. Nor do I think that any sane person could believe that the extraordinarily gifted will choose not to contribute to society if they can't earn that extra 100 billion, when they already have 900. And I don't believe at all that the richest people in our society are at all those who have contributed the most to it in any sense, they are simply those in the right place at the right time in 99.9% of cases.
17
I recently watched the documentary about Gates. I think that if Warren and Gates sat down for a nice long chat, perhaps over a game of cards, they would find a lot of common ground. They are both creative big thinkers who want to use their talents and resources to make a difference in peoples' lives.
5
@Katherine
He took 10 years or more out of my life when his Windows 10 disabled an embroidery machine!
3
You do know the Bill Gates left the company (2008) 7 years BEFORE Window 10 was launched (2015)?
Not ultra wealthy. I am a 70 yr old widow with a 30 yr legal career behind me. My late husband and I worked very hard to purchase a home and to finish my legal education, and to educate our children. I own the home that cost $64k in 1977. I have SS, a pension, and a reinvested 401k account that I saved for over many years. My late in laws, who also worked very hard to buy a home; left their post WW 2 cottage to my kids. It cost $9k to build in 1946. My kids sold it two years ago for $2m. One purchased a home and put the rest in the bank. The other put it away for his kids’ college education.
Point: The only things I would do differently if I were Bill Gates would be to travel a bit more, and give more to charity than I now do. This constant tug between the so called have and have nots is getting tired.
4
@Mary D
Many people who are not professionals work just as hard all their lives and they don't have 2M cottages to show for it. They can't afford a house to begin with.
The 'haves and have nots' conversation may be tiresome for you since you obviously have enough. How about people who don't?
1
References to Gates often discuss how philanthropic his foundation is, especially to education. I believe one of the benefiting educational initiatives was Common Core and while I can’t speak to how reputable the sources are that I’m beginning to read, they and Gates supposedly are starting to admit just how well CC doesn’t work. As a teacher I would whole heartedly agree. What seems to get left out of these discussions is just how many profits Common Core created...at the expense of children’s learning.
3
I'm glad Warren responded to Gates and invited him to meet.
I hope to see her talk with anyone who is open-minded enough to listen. I believe the wealthy will always have more than enough even after paying taxes. I have to work 7 days a week to break even (and pay plenty of taxes) so I have no sympathy for the wealthy...
I know some wealthy people who have more than one home and several vehicles and often eat out at fancy restaurants yet complain about taxes. Give me a break. They don't know what it is to have financial stress....
11
Wealthy is having more than most others. On a desert island where nearly all have only hard tack to eat, the person with cans of beans is wealthy.
Warren is running on fairness as a principle not solving needs with available resources. She’s going to have to do better than that to get support from Gates.
@sfdphd I’m sure she will sit down with him for the photo-op, but she looks at people with success as cash cows to be milked (Possibly butchered) for her version of how society should be. Don’t look for any changes to her plan (s) coming out of that meeting
What I find interesting here is that the Gates Foundation has spent billions of dollars to fight poverty and improve education. Yet poverty and education have only gotten worse. I guess philanthropy is overrated compared to just having economic equality.
11
@Mike L
Poverty and education have actually improved drastically across the world and especially in poor countries thanks in big part to the Gates Foundation. They're saving millions of lives and improving the lives of millions more. In the US it is very difficult to get things done due to the political climate which suffers from its citizens not being properly informed and therefore not voting better people in office.
6
It's not surprising that a single person can't solve these problems. Even our government, which spends trillions (not billions) hasn't made much progress.
Sorry, that’s simply incorrect. A good book on the subject is Hans Rosling’s Factfulness.
1
Billionaires defend their tax views by pointing to their foundations. But it's a specious argument.
If taxation was more fair and just, that money would be belong to local COMMUNITIES -- as it used to be in the mid 20th century -- rather than by a billionaire's foundation.
Public-Good-By-Foundation is a far inferior public good.
Rather than await the billionaire's largesse, proper taxation would fund medical research, local library expansion, infrastructure improvements, scholarships for the needy, etc.
Our tax code is a rigged obscenity. Gates' buddy Paul Allen died with more money in his "giving pledge" foundation than when he started it. Couldn't give it away faster than the power of compounding investments.
10
It's funny to watch this coordinated attack on Sen. Warren by the ultra wealthy in this country who are afraid of parting with a few bucks that they won't even know is gone. But think about it another way: the state of Mississippi has an annual budget of $6.3B. If Sen. Warren's 2% wealth tax goes into effect, Bill Gates will be paying $2B more in taxes, or nearly 30% of Mississippi's budget. Something is wrong in this country if one person's tax bill could partially fund an entire state.
13
Let us all stand and applaud the billionaires who have committed to the "Giving Pledge" - the neutron bomb of virtue signaling. It's a perfect way to deflect any introspection about the obscene amount of wealth they control with the added benefit of pre-stroking their other wealthy friends before they die. We can all agree they are geniuses except when it comes to that pesky problem of income inequality. Give them a chance to design a toilet that can be used in the Gobi and they'll move heaven and earth to collaborate, explore synergies and think outside the box. Ask them how to solve income inequality and suddenly they lose their spark, throw out a quote from Milton Friedman and need to get ready for Davos. Yeah, vast wealth concentration seems pretty much insoluble even for really smart people with all that power.
17
@rcman
If not for giving away their money through philanthropic causes and investing in companies trying to improve the world, what do you suggest they do? Gates is for a tax increase just not through the means she suggests. He has been very clear about this if you listen to any full conversation he's had about it. Even as rich as he is he can't change tax policy by himself. Voters have to stop putting these right wing nutjobs in office.
1
Hey @Jason
Well, I certainly agree with that !
But concentrated wealth is concentrated power.
It's getting worse.
Meanwhile, the billionaire class is chattering like a three card monte dealer about moral hazard, socialism and the need to preserve the greatest economic system in the world.
You know, the one where the top 1% control almost 40% of the wealth - and rising.
I personally loathe the Warren proposal but Gates misrepresents it. And that's how it works - his $100 billion tax lie will get repeated and amplified because he and his friends don't want anything to change. Much easier and frugally tax-advanaged to solve 3rd world problems with hoarded 1st world wealth.
What would I have him do ? How about use his power and approach the wealth inequality problem with the same zest as he did with the eradication of the guinea worm ? I wonder why one problem is so urgent and the other one so humdrum ? I have a guess.
1
Wow .... Bill Gate has paid $10 billion in taxes. That works out at a little over 95 of his net worth.
For the last 30 years my tax rate has averaged between 16% and 24%. and I am now worth about $500,000.
Bill Gates is right - he needs to pay about $20 billion. When he does that, he will still be the 3rd richest person in the world, a smidge ahead of Buffet and $15 billion ahead of Zuckeberg
Now what about $20 billion from Bezos, $15 billion for Buffet, and $10 billion apiece for everyone over $50 billion.
I am sure anyone can manage to live out their life on $40 billion plus income.
That should raise about $125 billion by my reckoning. And lets have them paying 25% income tax a year from now on.
12
IRS takes away 20% from me each year—no matter what. And Gates is complaining about paying 2% on the amount over $50 million?
17
So Bill Gates is in a bubble: He thought Elizabeth Warren was just fooling around or posing, while being clueless and timid. This is remarkable.
10
Mr. Gates is an insufferable egoist. He is business monopolist, who was extraordinarily aggressive in the earliest days of personal computing, not to mention extraordinarily dishonest, notably in his buying the simple operating system developed by a company in Seattle WA when he agreed to rent an operating system for IBM's planned personal computer. When he made that agreement, he had no operating system to rent. He of course told the selling company nothing of his agreement with IBM. Mr. Gates continues in the news, as if he has anything of value to offer to the world. He does not. He should in fact shut up, when an issue has to do with public policy, such as this issue regarding taxation.
6
He's paid more than anyone because he _has_ more than almost anyone. This is not a novel concept. I'm pleased with the philanthropy efforts of Mr. Gates, but to play the victim card here as one of the world's richest men is disappointing.
9
Awfully tired of the Gateses. I’m sure both are smart, but they’re hardly omniscient as some of their failed “investments” in urban education amply demonstrate. Their “smartest kids in the class” arrogance — when Bill was certainly born on third base — is sometimes astounding. Good for Elizabeth — who’s no slouch in the brains department — for standing up to Bill, and it’d be great for him to surprise us by showing a modicum of humility in giving her proposals a fair hearing.
12
Notice all the hyperbole being spewed by billionaires and wall street against Elizabeth Warren ... oh, dear, they might not be able to afford their insulin or cancer drugs. We know that will never be a problem for them but for millions Americans ... it’s a deadly problem. As someone pointed out, back in 1975 Gates founded Microsoft and top marginal tax rates were 70% and Warren’s rates would be less. Working Americans experience bankruptcy from medical bills ... these whiny billionaires will never have to worry about that. Maybe one less yacht or estate !
Working Americans bailed out the bankers and GM and those hedge fund managers made their millions, billions by stealing working American’s homes. Then buying them for pennies on the dollar in the financial crisis ...THAT THEY CREATED IN 2008 ! Now, Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan Chase has the audacity to come after Warren. He and his corrupt predators should be in jail.
Bill Gates and his billionaire buddies will be fine under Warren’s tax plan. Interestingly, Gates and his other tech billionaires are the one who supplanted thousands of their American workers with H1-B VISAS from India and China. More than time for them to pay more taxes ...we know they can afford it.
8
Good for Gates.
Warren's "wealth tax" is little more than a confiscatory, pandering, populist gesture, an appeal to class resentment of those who have been most successful in the private sector.
It is more of the tiresome Politics of Envy that would, in reality, produce little toward continued funding of all the new and enhanced entitlements she wants to create.
5
@C Nelson A collection of well-worn slogans: Politics of envy, pandering, etc. Snore! Nothing of substance here. Moving on. . .
@John
Of course they're well-worn. As I already noted, those "slogans" are directed at a "tiresome" rendition of populism.
In that regard, they are perfectly relevant.
Furthermore, it's obvious that my "slogans" struck a nerve with you, so yes, there's "substance" there!
1
@C Nelson Since most Americans agree that we should be "entitled" to a single-payer, tax-supported, universal health care system, then yes, let's tax the ultra-rich. Confiscate, redistribute, expropriate--whatever you want to call it. FWIW, I don't think most regular people harbor a lot of resentment towards the rich for their riches per se. We simply don't want to worry about becoming homeless, going hungry, or falling into bankruptcy because of illness.
America was founded on the idea that if we pay taxes we built opportunities for everyone. Bill Gates became extremely wealthy on this quintessential American value. It should not be a surprise to anyone that now he doesn't want to pay his share of taxes. Bill, Trump and the rest of millionaires think they are too special and we should continue underwriting their lifestyle.
16
This article misrepresents Gates' views. He believes the wealthy should pay much more in taxes, he simply believes a wealth tax is not the most effective way to do it. He believes the capital gains and estate taxes are the easiest and best ways to tax the extremely wealthy. The wealthy get most of their new income from capital gains, not direct income from a job, and taxing net worth is difficult because of how complex valuations of that are. Also, a wealth tax would incentivize the many wealthy people who fight against any tax increase to hide their money which isn't all that difficult. Perhaps listen to Gates full views instead of cherry picking comments, he's on the the Dems side of this.
13
Bill Gates is one reason why computer programmers in America do not have unions.
14
Whether Warren is selling this well is one thing. But it's clear that the middle class has died and is twitching on the ground. I know, because I'm in that group. I work THREE JOBS and am exhausted, don't eat steak and lobster, and live quite frugally. The system is corrupted to benefit the already wealthy and the middle class has been squeezed HARD.
Time for a #GreenNewDeal to rebuilt the American middle class.
19
"Mr. Gates, a Harvard drop out..." yep, that describes him.
3
I'm a little confused why they would refer to Joe Biden as Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
1
Keep Going EW. You obviously have the rich scared and they can now join the rest of us living in fear, fear of economic ruin from the madness that has been bestowed upon us from the powers that seem to not care about working people. Let them eat cake I say.
16
The lady is delusional if she think a wealth tax will ever pass.
She's double delusional with the tally of $20.5T when experts put the total at over $30T.
Since she is both offering medicare for illegals, and decriminalizing crossing the border illegally, you can count on a huge influx of any one in the world who wants a free American Dream. Which means the 20.5/30T bill will balloon to a whole lot more than this in no time.
With no way to pay for it.
Oh wait, there is a way, tax the middle class. No thanks.
7
President Warren’s reply is:bring it on!
9
Gates would pay around $6 billion in 2020, assuming his net worth is still around $100 billion in 2020. Evey year thereafter he would pay 6% of his wealth. The math is not hard. If he can somehow maintain his $100 billion wealth over time despite the 6% tax, he would pay $100 billion in total tax in around 17 years.
Bill Gates has given around $50 billion to charity over his retired life.
Will a wealth tax have negative effects on "the incentive system," which I suppose means reducing entrepreneurship? I doubt it. But it's a good guess that it will result in a reduction in charitable giving.
3
It's scary that a man like Bill Gates can't do simple math to figure out how much he'd pay under Warren's tax proposal. I guess he pays people to figure that out for him now. Perhaps if THEY can't figure it out, it's time to hire some new accountants.
2
Just nationalize Microsoft and be done with it.
Congress can run it and they can spend all of the profits until they run it into the ground.
Let's be clear a 6% *wealth* tax is a ridiculous level of taxation. Even 2% is very, very high.
Switzerland, one of the few first world countries that still has a wealth tax, taxes around 0.5% - Switzerland also does *not* have a capital gains tax, nor does it tax investment income.
EW is using the public's general financial ignorance and people's willingness to apply punitive taxes to a group other themselves.
A wealth tax of some sort may be a solution, but I would like to see one that cuts a little deeper.
Let's not forget that EW is a 1%-er herself - let's see her propose a tax that will tax her wealth at at least 50% of what she proposes to tax billionaires' wealth.
Yes, billionaires can afford to pay more, but so can a lot of millionaires (Warren included). Let's come up with a reasonable plan to pay for medicare that doesn't focus the cost on a tiny minority, wealthy though they may be.
2
I'm so tired of people referring to a reduced "incentive system" if taxes were applied to extremely high incomes. It's as if, in 1974, Bill Gates said, "If my projected 2019 net worth from this idea doesn't reach $100B, let's scrap it."
Here's another example of your reduced incentive system. If Facebook, Walmart, and Microsoft shut down the morning after implementation of a wealth tax, ten others would be up and running by noon.
8
Bill Gates himself said that instead of $10B in taxes, he'd be fine if it was $20B. Looks like Warren is after only a sliver of that (e.g., 2% of wealth above $50M). I for one would cheer such a meeting, the likely outcome of which is that Bill would walk away convinced that Warren's plan was sensible, and to endorse it... just as Warren Buffett likely would. And that would be a big boost for E. Warren.
9
Ms. Warren should meet with Mr. Gates and others. Maybe in a forum that includes ordinary people as well who struggle to pay for life saving medicines, who are burdened with student debt and whose homes were foreclosed by banks whose CEOs seems clueless while raking in millions. Mr. Gates deserves kudos for his business acumen, but, should pay his 'fair share' to combat poverty & despair in the richest land on earth!
7
Those that be fitted from outsourcing, layoffs, mergers, and global sales should pay back the American people who have put the military on our credit card for the last 50 years. So those profits Mr Gates earned were due to American commitment to global safety. Why shouldn’t these globalists pay us back now that they drained us dry?
5
Bill Gates is someone used to venturing well beyond his portfolio, essentially that of a businessman who managed to leverage a crummy product monopoly that subverted progress and doomed us to inferior computer services for many years, reaping billions in the process. He supposes this confers special expertise on subjects like education where he freely holds forth in readily available fora. He needs to abandon these pretensions and actively assist with any political trends aimed at reclamation of vast accumulations by such as he, before, if history is any guide, the fed up hoards come for his head.
3
Why are we mired in the melodrama? Gates snipes at Warren, and Warren offers to "explain." Why can't the two of them just sit down and talk without an agenda? Imagine a conversation between them on TV. Imagine more talks like that, like with Elizabeth with Warren Buffett and others? The core issue is billionaires need to realize Warren is not actually a fire-breathing dragon. I'm sure she has the smarts and charm to impress our captains of industry if she steps out of the campaign rhetoric. Like so many of us already do, they'll see that Elizabeth Warren is really quite affable.
7
Why should Warren Buffet pay a lower tax rate than his secretary? Why did Trump give a trillion dollars to billionaires who don't need it? Why are social security payroll taxes capped at $138,000? Warren's two-cent tax is more than fair and gives an entire generation the opportunity to pursue the American dream.
12
So... money equals access then. That’s what he’s saying.
Why are wealthy people the only ones entitled to meet with America’s elected officials? Here in Colorado, so few people have seen Senator Cory Gardner that there is a parody organization called Cardboard Cory. The cardboard cutout goes around and takes questions from Colorado residents, because no one with less than $10,000 can seem to get a chance to speak with the man himself.
So I have a question for Bill Gates. Would a rich person be willing to sit down face to face with someone like me who is barely inside of the middle class income group, to talk about policy?
Because I’m betting the last time Bill Gates had a sincere interaction with someone of modest means in this country was a long time ago. I’m not talking about a photo op. I’m talking a SINCERE heart to heart.
Oh, and spare me the “But his charity in Africa” trip. That’s not a valid argument. Just because the Gates foundation does charity work does NOT mean it’s okay to watch economic inequality destroy communities in the United States. Also, their struggle is our struggle. Bill Gates’ charities are a perfect example of the problem with charity by authoritarian decree. Instead of democratizing the process, Bill Gates gets to play God about what gets funded and what doesn’t. That’s not freedom. That’s just colonialism with a happy face emoji plastered on it.
So how bout it, Bill? Care to have a chat about what it’s like to not be a billionaire?
10
I couldn't stand Bill Gates when he was in charge of Microsoft, so smug, so selfish. Then he retired and became a philanthropist, leading by example how someone who is ridiculously rich can contribute to the world.
However, like him or not, Gates is one man. His later years are a poor example of giving by the wealthy. Most wealthy people hold onto the vast sums they've collected and bequeath these sums to their direct descendants. Gate's philanthropic conversion is an outlier, and frankly he's an outlier partly because he's so rich. He could give away 200 fortunes and still be ridiculously rich.
As a society we need a better system of incentives, incentives that allow the less privileged of us to participate.
The Gates of old showed up in this exchange, he's the Gates who feels threatened. He needs so much to feel secure.
1
I can't get windows 10 off one of my laptops to go back to windows 7 so who cares what King Bill says? It's like the security software we buy that takes over our computers all the time to help us avoid the rare virus now and then. My funny paranoid joke is that the security companies are writing the offending code to keep them making money with the security programs.
Really Warren, don't cower now.
2
This should be rich. Warren "Lizsplaining" to one of histories smartest businessmen. For her next act she should sit down with Larry Summers, who also doesn't buy her numbers. As treasury secretary, estimating tax receipts was literally Summers' job.
5
Until now I've held the wealth tax in low regard. Bill Gates just changed my mind.
2
I am among those who really likes Warren’s sleeves up approach to solving this nation’s problems, including lack of universal healthcare and income inequality.
However, I am deeply concerned about the wealth tax getting traction in the general electorate.
Conceptually it just appears unfair and people may fear a slippery slope.
Also as the op-Ed pointed out, it could be unconstitutional.
If so, this really puts Warren’s campaign at a disadvantage and I am worried about the Democrats having viable plans that can appeal to the center of the country. Could the NYT delve deeper into this?
Now Sanders wants to make crossing the border legal too. What the heck, Bernie? Canadians are going to come flooding in.
Bill Gates should be leading the way to reform America's 0.1% Welfare Queen program.
Instead he mischaracterizes Warren's tax by suggesting he might have to pay $100 billion.
Reckless, irresponsible hyperbole from another whining billionaire.
12
@Socrates
Your comments always give me hope. Thank you. I cannot remember ever disagreeing with one of your comments before. See, however, my own comment just below this one. His comments about paying $100 billion and about incentives were silly. He should know better.
2
@Socrates
The "You know, I'm not sure how open-minded she is, or that she'd even be willing to sit down with somebody, you know, who has large amounts of money" really got to me.
He thinks he's his own planet.
Hey, maybe he's the planet Bezos is planning to visit on his rocket ships.
Bill Gates is good people. So is Warren. Both are human and have both made their share of mistakes. Bill was good at making Microsoft what it was, and sometimes assumes that makes him good at everything else, too. For what it's worth he is worlds better than all of the other tech CEOs. Jobs was abusive, sociopathic. Zuckerberg is deep-sixing our democracy, and couldn't care less. Jobs and Zuckerberg remind us that power corrupts. Bill has sidestepped that demon. I like Warren precisely because of her long record which the Sanders people are now pillorying her for. Yes, she did start out as a Republican. Etc. The cat's out of the bag, fellas. For the Sanders bros, Warren's gender is what matters. That cat's out of the bag. I think Warren should stop acting like a Sanders minion. She has a skill set that Sanders can only dream of. She knows about pragmatism, negotiation, planning, taking what you can get today and living to fight another day. That is how she got us the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which is (was) the Microsoft of government agencies. It was superb until Trump and his Trumpies sabotaged it. In case you haven't noticed, they are not good people.
4
@Robert So her big success is actually her big failure is that what you're saying? Warren knows how to spin a moment to enhance her personal brand, sticking her own neck out for others....haven't seen any evidence of that.
@Nick
Thanks for your reply. I think my meaning was clear: I do not think the CFPB or her other accomplishments are failures. I can see how somebody who doesn't like Microsoft could intentionally or otherwise misconstrue my meaning. My meaning was simply that the CFPB was a very significant positive accomplishment that truly benefitted literally millions of Americans. That is, until Trump and his Republicans sabotaged it. As far as I can tell, Warren and pretty much all of the other Democratic candidates are willing to, as you put it, "stick their neck out for others.
He apparently also said when asked if he would vote for Warren over Trump, he would vote for “whoever I decide would have the more professional approach.”
Thanks, but no thanks Mr. Gates. If you have any doubt that Warren, or any of the Democratic candidates, is LESS professional than the serial liar, about to be impeached for BRIBERY, individual who currently occupies the White House, then you've clearly lost sight of anything beyond your own personal wealth.
4
Watch him "answer" Mr. Sorkin's question about if he would vote for Warren.
Enough said.
2
I would think he'd be better at math. Disappointing.
4
This is a no-win conversation for Bill Gates.
His best bet at this point is to go all-in for Elizabeth Warren's tax plan, and to publicly endorse her.
Elizabeth Warren gets a free campaign ad that will garner many more votes for her.
Remember, Bill Gates has over 100 billion dollars in net worth.
America helped to make him one of the 5 richest people on Earth.
He could not have gotten where he is today without America's help.
9
@S Butler Tell us how you helped him.
1
@Jackson You tell us first how Gates could have done it without America's help.
3
@Jackson I can answer that. America helped him by allowing his parents to build the wealth that put him in that position to succeed. America helped him by protecting the infrastructure that led to his wealth, America helped him by providing education to his employees, by building the internet which propelled PC use and ownership etc etc ad infinitum.
2
What Warren is proposing is taxing assets that derived from already taxed income. It is a recipe for disaster and the accounting part alone would be a nightmare, both for the individual as well as for the IRS. Plus, why 2% of >$50mn in assets? Why not 10% of >$2mn? Could happen. It is arbitrary appropriation hiding as a "tax."
If the tax code is not working, fix it. Get taxes right the first time.
7
Just to consider math only.I suspect most people don’t quite get the concept of Billions.So,if BG is worth 100 Billion,give or take,and he won a lottery that paid 10 million a week- he would continue to collect for 200 years-anybody think Bill and friends could pay a little extra to help out the many less fortunate in this country.
10
who knows? A sit down with Bill Gates would gain publicity, never bad in this world, and definitely when the topic is taxes and economics and it is hard to hold attention.
Could anyone predict where such a conversation about taxes ( and services) would go? It would be a deeper dive into how taxing the really, really wealthy might work out. Biden may be eager now to attack her ideas, but HE would never sit down with her or Bill Gates and go point for point, plan against plan.
5
I love her attacks on people like Bill Gates. Not because it is right, but because of how bad it makes her and her supporters look. Bill Gates is a billionaire, but he is one of, if not the most, philanthropic and generous billionaires. His foundation does amazing things for people around the world. Attacking him and what he has done for the world with his wealth shows the level of hatred and resentment and envy Warren and her supporters have towards icons like Bill Gates. 99% of the people in our country want to be like Bill Gates. Attacking him is like attacking every single one of us.
14
@Kevin
Good luck on your quest to be Bill Gates.
@Kevin
Did you read this article?
Where is Warrens' attack exactly?
Bill Gates has pledged to give all his money away except for $10 million for each of his three kids. He is not just donating his money to alleviate problems in America but around the world. He has pledged himself to eradicating some of the most destructive problems the world faces - from trying to end malaria to re-inventing the toilet so communities without running water can have safe places to dispose of human waste.
Bill Gates, despite his flaws, should be lauded, respected, and appreciated. He is a man who is trying to fix societies problems which governments and international organizations have so often overlooked. Yes, greed among the richest does exist. But, I firmly believe Bill Gates is taking great strides to improving our world.
5
@Naveen: Elizabeth Warren, despite her flaws, should be lauded, respected, and appreciated. She is a woman who is trying to fix societies problems which governments and international organizations have so often overlooked. Yes, greed among the richest does exist. But, I firmly believe Elizabeth Warren is taking great strides to improving our world.
8
@Anne Why don’t you explain why she never got any legislation passed.
2
@Jackson
She created an entire agencey....the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
How's that for doing something worthwhile to help Americans?
1
Love it! Using Libertarianism, too. Ironically, for the first time, the candidates, mostly the Republicans in my local election, were using the Libertarian party as well, to garner additional votes, especially for judicial candidates! Don't know if they were members of the Federalists.
Anyway, the billionaires couldn't spend it all for their heirs for generations until the end of time. It's the power thing. Everywhere they go they're feted for their wealth and power.
There are some decent ones as well, who have done good things, particularly for the arts that the rest of us can enjoy.
And there are people like Gates and Buffet who donate to others around the world. Hopefully, they also do worthy things here for our poor.
3
It's almost comical to even discuss this stuff because most of it will be DOA in Congress. Even if the Dems keep the House, win the Presidency and get a small majority in the Senate (longer shot there), there will never be enough moderates to go along with most of the stuff that Warren and Bernie are talking about.
Most of this cannot be touched with executive orders either. Obama pushed the envelope and the courts kept, and are still, striking his stuff down.
3
Bill Gates says we need to keep the “incentive system in place”, and he is right because, after all, where would we be if Albert Einstein hadn’t been motivated by unbelievable wealth when he developed the theory of relativity?
Billions of dollars is only an incentive for millionaires.
The vast majority of us work tirelessly for the promise of far, far less money than the ultra-wealthy make, and we work like this knowing that we will never achieve billionaire status. Our priority should not be to protect million and billion dollar incentives, it should be to reduce income inequality and to invest in lower- and middle-class families - where all the greatest ideas in American history have originated.
4
"The two candidates are on opposite sides of a party divide that pits the structural changes favored by more left-leaning front-runners like Ms. Warren and Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont against a more moderate approach that speaks to values of unity and bipartisanship, which Mr. Biden espouses."
Wow! "structural changes" vs "unity and bipartisanship", What a choice! Mr Obama and the VP hid behind unity and bipartisanship and where do we find ourselves? with an economic system on the brink (only after Dodd-Frank the bankers don't need to notify the public) and a protest vote which gave us The Donald Trump Show (Your Fired! Presidency). Why not just merge the parties and run the monopoly honestly?
1
Bill Gates will not even notice the amount of money Warren is requesting. Of course, the way out of taxation is philanthropy, and that is fine too!
@John Mardinly There’s no way she can “request” taxes.
@Jackson Requesting is to Congress for tax legislation. That's how it works.
The real insidious harm of his statement lies in the fact that, at his level of wealth he fully understands how marginal tax rates work (the same w/ EW's wealth tax), yet making such a financially inflammatory mischaracterization. At 100 billion net, the 2% tax on 950 million = 19 million. The 6% tax on the remaining 999.99 billion = 5.999 billion. His total wealth tax bill, on 100 billion dollars, would be 6.01899 billion. So, to throw out 'possible payment' figures like his entire net 100 billion is beyond disingenuous. Using only the wealth tax numbers: 100 billion minus 6.0189 billion = 93.981 billion. In one year, 93.981 billion dollars, earning 2%, = 1.8796 billion earned. Nice work if you can get it...
1
This wasn’t Bill Gates’ finest moment. He sets a poor example and comes across as another closed-minded, greedy billionaire.
9
@Say it You are kidding, right? Do you think Lizzie understands economics better?
2
So Bill Gates is admitting that he only paid a 10% tax rate?
3
@Marc A Taxes are on income, not stock.
Whoops! Bill may come to regret the offer. Elizabeth is both persuasive and intelligent. It's be good for the country, all in all.
5
@Tomasi She is neither. She has never gotten legislation passed, so let’s not call her persuasive. But you can use the terms abrasive and shrill.
1
Dear Mr Gates,
To whom much is given much is expected. I'm pretty sure that's in the Bible, or maybe it's Spider-man.
Sincerely,
All the people not crying for you that you have to pay a couple extra billion dollars in taxes.
5
Is nobody else frustrated that the former CEO of one of the most successful companies on earth can't do math? 2% of $100B - $50M, anyone?
Sheesh. I hate that he can just spout this nonsense and people will hear and remember it.
But I'd like to know what it is about the additional $99B that acts as incentive to work harder than one would for the first $1B. I was going to work hard, but then I found out that there'd be a tax on the billions I can't even use!
6
Can someone...anyone...ask Warren to clarify what she means by "Medicare for all?" As she well knows (while many people don't) Medicare doesn't cover everything. If Medicare beneficiaries want coverage beyond Part A, then they need to pay an additional premium for that. Further, an overwhelming majority of people opt then to purchase additional coverage to supplement a great deal of what Medicare still doesn't cover.
If she doesn't clarify what she means, then a lot of people are going to vote for her expecting what she isn't going to deliver; free healthcare coverage.
2
I would love to see Ms. Warren of whom I support, sit down with folks like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett as well as other Billionaires and have a meeting of the minds on how to solve some of the problems that never seem to have real solutions.
Perhaps each will come away with a new perspective. And who knows? Real solutions can be found and compromises can be made on all sides if everyone starts talking to each other in a meaningful way.
2
@J. Clark It’s probably not in her best interest to talk money with businessmen. She’s an attorney, remember?
@Jackson
Again, since you seem to have a lot to say, she created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. She knows plenty about Americans getting ripped off. That aspect of money she understands quite well.
Interesting. I wonder if she'd spare all this personal time for an average voter who didn't win a lottery of some kind for the opportunity?
1
@Nick
So Bill gates "won the lottery"? It's not that he created a company that employees thousands and has made significant innovations that have made life easier and better for millions. He risked his own capital to take a chance on an operating system and turned that into one of the biggest companies in the world. He did not win the lottery....SMH...
So if we end up having to choose between a candidate who has nutty ideas about how to change the system to benefit more people and a candidate who is just plain nuts, I'm all in for the former.
Her personal net worth is st least 12 million dollars. Fine....she got hers....but no one else can be successful. I hope she likes her portfolio after she systematically dismantles capitalism and the market craters.
Watch your pensions y’all. You’re going to feel a whole more poor and insecure about your future. Not many of us can afford to own property in Cambridge Mass....pretty darn elitist if you ask me.
6
who can vote for this? i dont have that kind of money. under trump i pay my phone bill on time, pay my child support early and get to eat out with friends once a week. she wants to take that from me. why does she hate me so much, im just a single dad with a job trying to squeak by. i cant vote for her as a long time demarcate.
1
If you are a billionaire you should really be so proud of paying your child support.
2
I actually saw this headline the other day: "Billionaire thinks wealth tax is a bad idea". Who would've thunk?
9
The Democrat's currently shared view seems to be that you should work hard, work smart, become highly successful so the government can penalize you. The very rich already pay most of the taxes while providing great employment, goods and services for the benefit of society AND the greatest proportion of taxes but the jealous people in government are like the racketeers and want to take a bigger and bigger bite.
3
If we treated capital gains like ordinary income, subject to a progressive tax rate, all this talk about wealth taxes would instantly vanish. It really is that simple.
3
Everyday, people get out of bed and go to work to provide for their families without a thought of making a million dollars for their labor in their whole lifetime much $100 billion. Why is there this fear that unless we let megamillionaires and billionaires keep every last penny of their wealth no one will be "incentivized" to work, to invent and improve things, to take risks with their lives and their money? It is human nature to do all of that just to make more money. "More" doesn't have to be millions more and billions more. There are plenty of entrepreneurs, inventors and investors in Great Britain where there is a truly "socialized" national healthcare system and in Germany, Sweden and France where free or low-cost higher education, childcare, paid family leave and longer paid vacations are available to all.
25
@abigail49 You probably should ask them why they have to wait 18 weeks to see a specialist.
1
@abigail49
As an engineer, I can tell you I work because I love the work. I would not work harder at twice my salary. I would not work harder at three times my salary.
This idea that they'll fold their arms and say, 'well, I'm not doing anything if I'm only going to get one hundred million instead of one billion' is so ridiculous it's amazing.
2
@abigail49 France has 20% youth unemployment, so maybe it’s not a good example. But in any case, none of these countries has a wealth tax (it was tried and repealed in France). The social safety net is financed by higher taxes on the middle class. Warren’s contention that she can turn the US into Norway overnight and NOT raise taxes on everybody is a lie.
3
There is no question, those who have need to pay more. The question: Is a wealth tax the best approach? Others have tried it with mixed success. Assets can be camouflaged with creative accounting and transferred abroad, incognito. If successful the stock of wealth subject to the tax will decrease over time generating less revenue. As with 'medicare for all', the complexity is such that it may be best to focus on goals and broad policy parameters rather than getting into the weeds with detailed plans that will not survive their first legislative encounter.
1
Bill Gates hires an investment team to manage his wealth. Don't you think his portfolio is diversified and flexible enough to make up the difference? Also, any money already committed to his charitable Foundation is not taxable.
4
The solution is simple. We get rid of the tax and we get a lot more by letting customers sue for Microsoft's defective products. We make it possible to sue to back to 1980. Within a month, Bill Gates will be selling pencils on the corner.
3
@Keith Dow
There's nothing to stop anybody from suing Microsoft for products they believe are defective. How's that going so far?
What a smart move on Senate Warren's part. It will become a brilliant media event to be followed by tens of millions. Plus, Bill Gates is exactly the right man to talk to. He is not only a rich man but also a kind man who has every good intention to help the country and the world.
8
I don’t care whether Bill Gates pays more taxes: I am sure he can afford it. I do care about my own taxes. And I do care about the kind of country we are going to have. Perhaps because I am an immigrant and have first-hand knowledge of other countries and their histories, I believe that Warren’s class-warfare rhetoric is dangerous. Every country that set as its goal to punish the rich and enforce equality ended up self-destructing. When China under Mao pursued equality, 50 millions starved to death. When Deng Xiaoping declared “To be rich is glorious”, China became the second-largest economy in the world and lifted tens of millions out of abject poverty. I would be in favor of raising some taxes to finance investments in science and technology, combat climate change, and offer basic healthcare to all. But I don’t trust Warren to administer such a raise or to make good use of the resulting revenue.
4
Why isn't Sanders isn't being pressed to release a detailed plan for how he will pay for Medicare for All? Why is it only Warren?
This baffles me.
3
"She outlined a plan... by increasing her proposed wealth tax on net worth above $1 billion to 6 percent annually."
If I understand this correctly, the Gates fortune (and all others) would be more or less gone after 20 years or so. If that's true, it's a bad plan. Forget about how liberal you are or aren't re: wealth distribution. Voters will NOT support this.
1
@Joe J. More importantly, Congress, even if the Dems keep the House and get a small Senate majority, will not support it.
1
And I thought I was bad at math, but your math is really very bad. Off the top of my head, Dude would still have 40 some billion after twenty years. And that does not include any additional accretion of the hundred plus billion in wealth. Unless someone strikes it 100 billionaire rich when they are five, they will have plenty of billlions left for their old age.
4
There are different kinds of money. The term "wealth tax" appears to be a term for expropriating the kind of money we call "capital". This "wealth tax" argument appeals to individuals who view gobs of money as the same kind of money that they spend a few dollars at a time in retail establishments. That perception cannot be correct. Converting capitol to current assets is really a form of de-capitalization. Many people rationalize this de-capitalization argument by saying "Spend your savings today, for tomorrow you die." The idea is perpetuated by borrowing today using phantom wealth as collateral, and then letting the future take care of itself. Those of us at the bottom of the economic heap, who believe in the merits of old-fashioned thrift, have a hard time finding a solution to economic problems in a wealth tax.
Gates wealth is built on unethical business decisions (Microsoft). Aggressive investments into unsustainable exploitive businesses (allied waste management, Coca Cola, Walmart etc). If Bill decolonized his wealth from destructive businesses would the positive social impacts of sustainable ethical investment outweigh his self aggrandizing philanthropic organization “look at me I’m bill gates, I’m smart, my bandaid philanthropy is perpetuating suffering the world over”
2
@Gumaeliusart Yet Bill Gates by one estimate created nearly 15 million jobs worldwide, 144,000 direct jobs at the company, over 11,000 millionaires via direct employment, and boosted untold IRA and 401Ks for everyday working people. And for all the stock in retirement plans pays about 1.3% dividend yield.
And is giving away millions to charities worldwide.
Horrible situation he created.
2
Thanks for this article.
When I read about Bill Gates, I remember that he made a fortune here in the U.S.A., but his foundation spends 75% elsewhere in the world. This during decades that the inequality in the U.S.A. grew more than ever before as far as I know.
Patriotic?
3
I'd vote for Warren in a heartbeat, if only she'd go easy on the woke stuff. Every politician including Sanders, Warren, Biden, and Trump, are worried about an energised and unwashed populace, and they all pander to at least one of the elites of media, academia, and business so as to be electible.
2% tax on your net worth EACH YEAR is simply not fair...
If a person goes from $30bn to $10bn due to massive business losses, and now we're charging you $200mm that year because you're "too wealthy to feel it" doesn't seem like a great idea... sounds like wealthy people will simply move their money out of the country.
A better idea is a luxury tax on expensive goods... or *gasp* a Federal consumption tax, like virtually every other country in the world has... Those two items could pay for universal healthcare and then some.
2
@George Maybe, but the the other problem is that many of the folks in the US want nothing to do with Warren's plan for universal health care. Many folks in the US have great insurance and timely access to services though the workplace private insurance. Not to mention Warren has not talked about the economic impact of removing a large part of the economy and huge chunk of stock from the market (and folks retirement plans).
@Marvin - you can have universal health care and still have private insurance -- that's how it works in Canada and the UK... but, you're guaranteeing a minimum of medical coverage.
Virtually every nation on Earth - except the US and a few very poor countries - have universal basic healthcare... it's actually much cheaper than the alternative currently in place.
1
It's funny--in an infuriating way--how people with so much money and privilege demand to receive special attention and be treated with deference. I'd love to sit down with EW to chat about how her policies will affect me, but I'm willing to read her proposals, watch her speeches and interviews, and use my brain to sort it through. I generally admire Gates, but this is bad form.
284
@Jason Yes! And the tone of Andrew Ross Sorkin too seems overly deferential, wearing kid gloves.
13
@Jason
Ha - you want them to pay for all your pet projects that benefit other people not themselves, and you find it infuriating that you actually have to convince them not to go stashing their money in a place that respects property rights...how about we take what's yours for the common good and expect you to just hand it over with no questions asked?
6
@Jason
Read or listen to Gates views also while you're at it, because this article does not do them justice. He believes in higher taxes on the wealthy just through more effective means than a wealth tax.
14
It is interesting that Bill Gates has achieved the level of wealth he has and paid only $10.0 billion in taxes. I assume that is because he has unrealized gains on Microsoft stock and because he has avoided taxes by donating to his Foundation.
It is also interesting that his friend Warren Buffet has pledged much of his fortune to the Gates Foundation, which is a move that will presumably eliminate much of the tax liability he would otherwise have on his death.
Is it better that all this money goes to the Gates Foundation rather than to the US government? The Gates Foundation has some wonderful programs, but do they have any more merit than Warren's proposals do?
22
@gbc1 Concerning the Gates Foundation and the billionaires pledge, i agree completely. We all swoon over the supposedly charitable contributions of the captains of industry and tech, and have done so since the time of Carnegie, but we have to remember that they still get to control how that money is spent, and it is often way down the list of the greatest of societal problems.
The Gates foundation has done good things, but the NIH and WHO would have happily done the same if given the funding and freedom. I’ve heard such glowing things about the Gates’ philanthropy, yet they are still worth nearly $100B, so clearly he hasn’t given until it hurt. When the average person gives to an existing charity after careful consideration, they usually have to think about whether they can afford to do so...that’s philanthropy.
10
@gbc1 The issue is not Mr. Gates' choices of what to do with his money, or that he has so much to begin with, it is with a tax code that allows him to legally avoid paying taxes.
6
Dear Bill,
Thanks for all your philanthropic (tax-deductable) efforts.
It's obscene for anybody to have $100 Billion. Aren't you even a wee bit embarrassed?
Microsoft products are lousy. I shudder each time I have to use Excel or Word.
Yours truly, Anne.
53
@Miss Anne Thrope
Dear Anne
I built MS out of an idea and I was confident enough that I left Harvard to create it from nothing.
Word and Excel are the most popular programs of their type in the world.
Microsoft has been one of the best performing companies in the world over the past two years returning 75% over 24 months.
If you don't want to bet on MS by actually investing in MS I am not sure why you think you have a claim to my success and my money.
Yours, [eliminating Malaria, HIV, Enteric, maternal & child diseases in Africa and around the world] Bill
4
@Miss Anne Thrope Build a better software product and you too can be wealthy.
4
@Miss Anne Thrope Yes, Gates became a multi-billionaire because his products are lousy.
3
I think Elizabeth Warren still has time to renounce her platform and beg forgiveness. She could have a shot in the General Election if she hustles to the center. Maybe she could ask Jaime Dimon for a minute of his time. It all depends on how much she wants to sit in the Oval. Good luck
8
Oh poor Mr. Gates. It’s so hard to live off of $100 billion. Here’s an idea, let’s switch! He can pay the amount I pay in taxes, but he has to live off of my $40,000 a year. I’ll pay almost all of his earnings to taxes and live off of just a million!
24
@Lori
Look the guy gives lots of money and I don’t think he ever complained about not having enough money to live on.
2
@Lori If you make $40K per year and are single with you standard deduction you pay a whopping 2.85% or $1142 in federal taxes. Some would say you are not paying your fair share.
And you might want to move out of SF and CA. That is what is killing you.
3
OK, let Warren promise if elected she will first get Congress to collect the $30 trillion in taxes and deposit the money in an interest-bearing account -- and then pass Medicare for all.
Warren is smart enough to put on the trailer any rich person that comes to her to talk about her plans. Does she know more about operating systems than Bill Gates? Nope. But she knows more about any topic related to governance, policy, regulation, economic history, and economic data than he does.
If Warren wins the nomination, I'm going to enjoy watching her humiliate rich white men. (I'm a white man).
21
Will Warren's wealth tax apply to her wealth?
4
@Southern Boy No, she only has $20 million. Tax kicks in at $50M. The rule of 72 (time required to double an investment based on compound returns) would have Warren's net worth at $40 million (7% return) in 10 years.
The tax kicks in at $50M. Hence, the adage that the definition of a rich person is someone with one dollar more than me.
if you think her net worth of 12 million is wealthy you really have no clue about wealth.
@Southern Boy If she has over $50 million, yes.
Let’s hope they do indeed sit down, and that the discussion is televised!
8
Bill Gates is a philanthropist who has pledged to give at least half of his fortune to charity. He partnered with Warren Buffet (who feels that people like him should pay higher taxes) to found the Giving Pledge. Dozens of 1%ers have joined by making the same commitment:
https://givingpledge.org/
I really don't think that Gates would be a hard sell. Get back to me when she convinces the politically powerful !%er Koch Brothers (although one would require a seance) when they agree to a wealth tax.
I'm not saying that she needs buy in from the 1%ers. Just that, if she wants to demonstrate support from the wealthy, she should pick a more skeptical audience.
1
@David Well, when you throw out the numbers it is interesting. Straight from the feds:
"The top 1 percent paid a greater share of individual income taxes (37.3 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (30.5 percent). The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid a 26.9 percent individual income tax rate, which is more than seven times higher than taxpayers in the bottom 50 percent (3.7 percent)."
@Marvin The top 1% owns 40% of the wealth in this country, more than twice as much as the "bottom" 90% combined. Half of the country would struggle to pay an unexpected $400 bill. We have the second greatest wealth inequality among OECD countries, and the gap is growing.
I'm in favor of rewarding success, but this is obscene.
I'd like to see them together on TV.
I'm confident she would wipe the floor with him.
Just as she would if Trump ever debates her, which he totally
lacks the guts to do.
37
@A. Stanton
I am not all that s certain that Gates is all that antagonistic towards Warren. Let's hope it happens. Two people with something to say and enough time to say it: compare that to the "debate" format.
I'm with Bernie: There shouldn't be any billionaires.
10
@JD Wreckers and kulaks alike.
In November 1917, at a meeting of delegates of the committees of poor peasants, Lenin announced a new policy to eliminate supposedly wealthy Soviet peasants, known as "kulaks": "If the kulaks remain untouched, if we don't defeat the freeloaders, the czar and the capitalist will inevitably return." In July 1918, "Committees of the Poor" were created to represent poor peasants, which played an important role in the struggle against the kulaks, and led the process of redistribution of confiscated lands and inventory, food surpluses from the kulaks. This launched the beginning of a great crusade against grain speculators and kulaks. Before being dismissed in December 1918, the Committees had confiscated 50 million hectares of kulak land.
By the 1930's there was famine in the USSR (and genocide of Ukrainians).
1
So we aren’t starving because Bill Gates has 100 billion dollars? So confusing.
1
@Joe B. Yes, when you consume the seed corn there will be a famine in the near future.
Technology has erased literal famines, but metaphorical famines (decline in innovation, drop in GDP, lack of opportunities for new graduates) are all risks.
The desire to destroy someone simply because they are successful doesn't stop once the "Bill Gates" has been taken down. It keeps going and going.
I love that MSFT has increased productivity, eliminated tiresome jobs, and given a launching board to many other innovators.
Bill Gates has paid ~%10 in taxes on his wealth and he seems fine with paying 20%. I too would like to pay 10% in taxes, or even 20%. How about all of you here on NYT? Would you be OK with 10% or even 20% if our government used it wisely? By that I mean no increased spending on war. More spending on healthcare, education, etc.
13
@Jay schneider To the feds? Nope. I'd like to see the federal government streamlined and cut to the basics first. Then push more control to the states. Push more control locally. That way the total amount paid I have much more say over to issues that are more important to my state and my locality vs a one size fits all federal program.
Many are tired of the waste and inefficiency and red tape of one size fits all programs that they have little control over.
@Jay schneider
My husband paid 14% on his slightly over 100K salary. Our refund? $1000. And that's with trump's supposedly great tax cut. Our refund prior to the great tax cut? $1000. And 12% of his pay went to federal taxes prior to the great trump tax break.
So Gates pays less in percentage of his taxable income of $100 Billion than my husband and I pay on $100K. Seems fair to me ;-I
Does anyone else feel nauseated that an American citizen has $100 billion (or even $5 Billion) and is at all concerned about paying “a lot” of taxes on this wealth?
And people wonder why “OK boomer”
Has become so popular.
13
@Jake I think it is wonderful that the current economic system allows the kind of innovation that produces this kind of wealth. If you feel nauseated, move to France, where there is absolutely almost no innovation or entrepreneurship.
@Jake Nope. American Dream. And look at all the folks Microsoft has lifted up, both directly and indirectly. Plus on top of all that he is a philanthropist.
As for your 'OK Boomer', that is both disrespectful and naive. The biggest wealth transfer in history will come as the boomers die off and leave their money. Given than many have a number of kids, grandkids and charities, the boomer wealth will be diluted and distributed by maybe a 5-1 factor. Given that boomers are active in retirement, much of that wealth will be spent by them. Not even counting the unprecedented and untold unpaid volunteer hours you get from boomers.
And I would much rather see the wealth be spent into the economy or given to charity than to go into the inefficient federal government.
@Marvin et al -
Every man for himself; Winner Take All - I get it.
I would get a kick out of your responses but as the United States becomes more and more like a 3rd world country, with little to no middle class; I feel sad for the younger generation and look forward to bold change for the better, which will hopefully be led by my kids and grandkids.
BOL!
1
Bill Gates cannot stand it paying taxes on a $100 billion? His wealth is obscene and no one should have so much while others sleep on streets and have nothing to eat including children. Even though he purports to do good with his money, public policy and how monies are spent should not be made by one individual. Decisions should be made democratically by elected officials and not by Bill Gates and his cohorts. Bill Gates making decisions on how billions of dollars are used amounts to dictatorship. So yes, tax him and his billionaires friends and use that money for good purposes that are decided through a democratic process. Bill Gates give up control and share your obscene wealth. We don't want your dictatorship. His his greed and hunger for control are what is destroying this country.
7
I would love to be a fly on the wall for that conversation.
Warren should sell tickets and stream it live.
4
Poor thing.
He has found billions make it hard for him to sit down with influential people.
He came up the hard way as the son of two of the most influential people in Seattle. Yet you would never know it. He is so professional despite his upbringing and while being shunned for his billions.
4
Well, I am quite disappointed, that grown up, educated people may seriously discuss utopical communwait pofristic ideas of Mrs Warren and similar. It looks like the end of 19 century right out there, and USSR of Lenin and Stalin has never existed. Do you really want to turn most prosperous, innovative and successful country ever into yet another socialistic swamp like Italy or France, where people wait for 5 years in order to get a job of grocery store cashier?
4
How about a debate between Warren and Gates. 90 minutes max. No moderators, no ads, no distractions. Lincoln-Douglas style, maybe even open air.
9
@whaddoino
I would pay $20 on PPV for that.
New fundraising means for Warren.
Disappointing, coming from Gates. I had the impression (which perhaps I should have investigated) that he has an inquisitive, open mind and is careful about jumping to conclusions without a deep dive into learning as much as he can first. But, here he is, shooting from the hip and pulling out the tired trope that smart successful women are closed minded you know what's.
"Dynastic wealth...creates a self-perpetuating aristocracy that is antithetical to democracy." -- Robert Reich
5
It’s not just about taxing the billionaires, they must be forced to stop rigging the game in their favor, no political donations, no bribes, no deals, no lobbyists,nothing. Shut them out from politics, dump Citizens United, close all loopholes, no offshore banking, no betting on the failure of others. Don’t be evil, stop being so morally bankrupt, no one needs a 200 ft yacht or 10 mansions.
9
@Colin christian You realize that when they purchase things it creates jobs, puts money into the economy and that money is further taxed as income by those earners. Folks are paid to build and maintain those yachts and houses.
Much better they buy a $100M yacht then pay $100M to the feds. Much more direct impact on the economy.
Yikes! If nothing else, I give Warren creds for bringing it on while other Democrats tuck their tails.
I’m the end, all of this has to be worked out through the Congress and the public. What we end up with will be the consensus of all parties. So I don’t worry when candidates go over the wall comparing their “bippies”. It is a bit frustrating to see the media spend so much time on it when there are so many more important and unsettled matters to test the candidates (eg. Will you support pardons for Trump and Co? Will you appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the corruption in the current Administration? What will you do regarding Russia and Putin? What will you do about the Trump enablers? What will you do regarding the Paris accords? I can go on....).
I do give credit to candidates who are willing to stake out their opening gambit instead of hiding behind the safe haven of “Obamacare”.
For anyone worried about “the government”, just remember: the government is YOU. If you don’t like it, get engaged and stop whining.
9
I will care what Hillary Clinton says now, if I want to lose an election. With all due respect, please stop helping Trump with almost everything you say.
I will gladly support whomsoever gets the nomination of the Democratic Party. Gladly. Go Elizabeth, Bernie, Andrew et al!
3
So it now begs the question Mr. Gates "How open minded are you or is this all bluster on your part". 100 Billion dollars is unfathomable, no one needs anywhere near that amount of wealth.
8
@Steve
I don't think anyone needs more than 2 kids. More than that is obscene, especially when there are people who can't have their own. Why don't we redistribute kids as well?
Funny but it looks like some folks are started to worry a bit for real... reminds me of france in 81... not that anything terrible happened afterwards (besides Macron's arrogant mid-80's mindset and failed policies)
Bill: Liz! great to see you! Sit down.
Elizabeth Warren: Nah, this will take just a sec. Empty your pockets.
Bill: Liz-
Elizabeth Warren: - I know. Just do it.
Bill Gates empties pockets. A lint covered, half-eaten dum-dum and a thumb tack come to rest on the table.
Elizabeth Warren: You still use the thumbtack? Anyway, see? How much money do you see on the table?
Bill: Well, from a cost-benefit analysts using a non-traditional-
Elizabeth Warren: -Bill! Don’t be a dork. How much?
Bill: None. Zip. Zero. Nada.
Elizabeth Warren: See? That’s how much my plan will cost you.
1. It doesn’t apply to current assets. It’s money you haven’t earned yet. You can’t spend what you don’t have, and you aren’t going to, er, what I mean is, it’s only on future - Look, Bill. Look at the table! Nothing!
Bill: Wow.
Elizabeth Warren: I know, crazy, right?
Elizabeth Warren: The second reason it will cost nothing is because - Look, everybody! Even Bill Gates says there’s no money on the table! Nothing! That’s what it will cost! Nothing hidden! Everything is on the table!
Bill: Don, you’re face mask peeling. Halloween is over.
DT: I like it better when you call me Liz.
1
OK, Boomer.
Wow, do Lizzie really think she’s smarter than he? Has she contributed anything to society on a scale like he has?
3
Last time I checked, Bill is not a brain surgeon.
2
Why are rich people like Gates so prejudiced and arrogant? Couldn’t he just have asked politely to meet with her like he did with Jeffrey Epstein?
15
So Bill Gates' money -- and his ideas -- have improved American education? Where exactly did he and Melinda derive their expertise on schools and teaching?
And their promotion of charter schools is really in the public interest?
It would fascinating to hear why Gates and his wife are better qualified to direct national policy than, say, movie stars, football players, janitors or concert pianists.
180
@jrd - I assume you are suggesting that government bureaucrats and people know how to manipulate the electorate to get votes are somehow more qualified to direct money than Bill Gates. By virtue of track record, I choose Gates over the Gov
20
@jrd "And their promotion of charter schools is really in the public interest?"
Yes, it is. Parents want choices and for many with kids with different needs charters are the best alternative.
"Where exactly did he and Melinda derive their expertise on schools and teaching?"
Research I presume, and I would be they are much more able to flexibly address problems than a cookie cutter federal government.
Federal funding and cookie cutter mentality are great for the middle of the bell curve public school system. Where the public schools fail is at the top of that curve and at the bottom of the curve and with exceptions, and this is where alternative, directed, more narrow focus wins out.
8
@jrd, Bill and Melinda Gates are both very smart people who have educated themselves on the issues. They don't casually fund causes or projects they know very little about. Also, their foundation employs people whose job it is to research and advise the Gates where best to spend their wealth. Most celebrities and the average Joe and Jane do not have the interest or resources the Gates' do. The Gates are donating their own money. They have just as much right to offer their opinion on national policy as anyone else. Finally, the Gates are funding causes neglected by our government.
That said, I'd much rather have a progressive government taxing the rich and deciding how our tax money should be spent. A Democratic government would, in theory, do a better job funding more needs than a few pet projects.
15
We are still cleaning up the mess from Gates's disastrous foray into education "reform." The takeaway is that in reality, money equals power. Should we spend our nation's wealth on space flight or healthcare? That's up to the billionaires to decide. Should individuals have that much power on the basis of business success/profit?
12
Oh goodness-- I just love her. What chutzpah, to match those smarts. I hope that that conversation happens, and that Mr Gates decides senator Warren is, in fact, the candidate this country needs at this point in time.
6
Warren might have a chance if the whole picture was not available.Warren is directly from the open border class ,the Soros group and for Globalism and socialism. When she says "for all" she most literally means everybody. With open borders added ,which incidentally would happen upon election ,you can automatically ad 50 million immigrants ,and refugees ,at least to the list. and that's not including the tens of millions which will rush the borders.What happens ,as documented throughout history is that quickly ,other peoples money runs out ,then banks come into play which means nationalization of monetary services ,which in effect has just already happened. Medicare for all is only the key that unlocks the door to the constitution and the rule of law for Americans and America as we know it.This is Marxism in the most profound sense and the major definition of Clinton and Liberal Politics today.
1
Even more laughable is that Gates just said he has paid over $10 billion in taxes in his life In reality he should of paid $40 billion for he is worth over $100 billion including his foundations. This proves how inequitable the tax system is. First he was allowed to operate a monopoly on software for years and now he has only paid $19 billion for he took a low salary but got huge stock options with low taxes Then he donated his wealth to a foundation to escape taxation. Tax system needs radical change where the wealthy do not escape taxation.
11
@Ralph Petrillo Some escape. Direct from the federal data:
"Top 1049 taxpayers pay more income tax than bottom 70 million taxpayers"
"The top 1 percent paid a greater share of individual income taxes (37.3 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (30.5 percent)."
"The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid a 26.9 percent individual income tax rate, which is more than seven times higher than taxpayers in the bottom 50 percent (3.7 percent)."
"Top 20% of Americans Will Pay 87% of Income Tax"
How much more progressive do we need to be?
Gates and other billionaires have made their billions by paying lawmakers to legalize large scale appropriation of money at the expense of we the people, and profiting off the backs of their workers and the public goods we the people have paid for in the forms of educating said workers, infrastructure -- of transport, electronic networks, utilities, law enforcement, justice system, and myriad other ways.
We the people just want some of our money back. And for those people who don't want it back -- fine, give it to the rest of us.
1
This demonstrates how even so-called "responsible" billionaires have lost touch with reality. No one is going to take all your money away, Bill. But you also don't get to unilaterally decide you are entitled to over $80 billion. That's obscene. We shouldn't have to rely on the wealthy to decide where they want to invest their philanthropic efforts. A strong middle class is the only thing that makes countries worth living in -- as things stand now we are headed toward a country in which Bill and the rest of the ultra wealthy live in a heavily guarded castle and everyone else fights for crumbs.
9
A 6% tax on wealth, compounded annually over 25 years, would take away ~80% of someone's wealth.
So Bills' numbers here are not absurd. If he was worth $125 billion, Warren's tax would have taken away $100 billion of that.
1
And he would still have $25 BILLION left over! How would he get by?
@Benjamin Winchester wealth compounds year over year on average at more than 6% per year if you invest it, so their wealth would actually be roughly equal on an average year even after taxation.
@Benjamin Winchester At 6% annually compounded interest and conservatively assuming Bill makes no additional contributions to his capital, which is false so this amount is a lowball figure for simplicity, Bill’s $100 billion, using an online compounded interest calculator, will be worth $429,187,071,974.35 in 25 years.
I don't recall voting for either of them in any election to represent me.
Who do they speak for and represent?
1
Warren’s proposals are for faceless bureaucrats to use the tax money collected from Gates and to use it without his explicit approval according to the laws and policies that her proposals produce after the Congress and the courts have thoroughly massaged them. Gates likes to choose his charities. So what will be Warren’s pitch to convince him to let others decide what happens to his tax money?
From a citizen’s point of view, Elizabeth Warren is the candidate to have in the office. Why, exactly?
Because she is not afraid to stand up to big business, to the ultra-wealthy, to the “military-industrial complex” that Dwight Eisenhower warned us of--she is fearless in confronting them. That is what we need. The pendulum has swung so exceedingly far to the advantage of big corporations and the powerful at the expense of the average citizen, it needs to swing back in the other direction. We write individual citizens off every day in favor of the powerful (I’m lumping people like Bill Gates and Jamie Dimon in with the Mercers and Werner Baumann, because they are all in it together) and think nothing of it--so what if the farmer across town dies of lymphoma, as long as Mark Zuckerberg and the head of Bayer, Baumann, have an incentive? And that thinking is just wrong. We have the most powerful chemical company in the world (arguably responsible for much damage to America’s farmland and farmers themselves) also being the owner of one of the most powerful pharmaceutical companies, and publicly declaring that water should be a commodity. What could possibly go wrong?
Warren would break up these goliaths, limit their incentive, restore balance, and propose measures that care for the planet. No wonder the powerful are fighting her.
8
Explaining to Bill Gates is once again very elitist. The average person understands that there is nothing "for free." The average person works hard for everything he or she gets. They pay off their student loans, pay their taxes, their medicare taxes, and that Warren would serve much better as a gadfly Senator than president, for which she has not been vetted.
Like many commentors herein, I find Bill Gates knee-jerk reaction disappointing. Yes, he has been pretty generous with his money and time and, yes, he has urged his fellow billionaires to contribute more, both in taxes and in efforts, but he should have jumped at the chance to talk with Sen. Warren. Maybe he can learn something . . .
1
If I could line up the administration of my choice, it would be Warren for President, Buttileige for Vice President, and Tulsi Gabbard for Secretary of State. I agree with the idea that in order to get a more efficient and fairer health system, Warren's approach is best. I was thinking as I was driving home from work, what if my employer stopped contributing to my health care and the only alternative was Cobra. Remember those days? The Affordable Health Care Act is the foot in the door of the massive dominated by insurance company health care system. Now it's time to blow it wide open.
We have more important and more immediate things to accomplish that are put at peril if we all get sidetracked by plans that aren't going to happen under any circumstances anyway.
Is Ms. Warren truly wanted to be elected president she would not now be caught out on this radical limb. It ain't gonna happen.
1
Senator Warren called your bluff, Mr. Gates. She is not intimidated. Good for her, and us!
5
Warren looks like the far more rational, reasonable and mature person after this exchange. Gates can make up for this flub by meeting with Warren and publicly explaining how she won him over (which she will).
Wealth inequity and income inequity are incompatible with democracy. At their extremes they are corrosive to social order. Gates can expect Warren to be polite but not deferential.
People seem to think Elizabeth Warren is attacking billionaires but I think she’s attacking a system that enables people to become billionaires but does not have them give back at all to the society that helped make them.
13
$100 billion to $50 billion in 10 years? This assumes that Gates, rather than hiring a crack investment team to maximize returns, stores the $100 billion under his mattress instead.
4
Why would the ultra-wealthy not be proud of contributing to making such historical and life-changing benefits like healthcare for all to the American people possible through their taxes? (I’m not even going to debate here if their outlandish wealth should truly be considered theirs in the first place, since it was made off the constant suffering, deprivation, and minimum-wage or even slave-labor of millions.) Oh, right, no ego-boost from seeing their names splashed across buildings and foundations. Maybe Warren should call it “Gates-et al-Medicare-for-All.” Not because he/they would actually be the ones personally paying for it, but to get billionaires on board by stroking their insatiable egos.
Let's shed this idea that people with oodles of money are wise. And the idea that Gates is some kind of computer genius. There were better operating programs for the original IBM portables, but by luck and commercial cleverness Microsoft got selected. Gate's recent investments in new types of nuclear reactors, for example, are simply foolish. He may be a decent guy personally, but let's not take his views on Elizabeth's tax plans too seriously. Rich guys generally don't want to pay higher taxes. Period.
1
That Mr. Gates has this opinion of her and was willing to express it publicly is a problem.
1
Bill Gates: "So you really want the incentive system to be there and you can go a long ways without threatening that.”
When Bill Gates founded Microsoft in 1975, the top marginal tax rate was 70% and the corporate tax rates were also higher. Yet still he founded Microsoft. What Warren's proposing would take much less from him than 1970s rates would, were he earning then what he earns now. (or what I assume he earns now)
What Warren and Sanders are seeking is somewhat of a restoration of taxation and economic structure before Reagan and Thatcher. Agree with it or disagree with it, it's not the radical plan as some argue it is.
381
@batavicus He's talking about her proposed wealth tax, not income tax rates. Gates probably doesn't earn anything from his labor at all anymore, but lives off his investment assets. We've never had a wealth tax in this country to my knowledge. European countries have tried them and mostly repealed them because the wealthy just put their assets elsewhere to avoid them.
11
@batavicus "What Warren's proposing would take much less from him than 1970s rates would, were he earning then what he earns now. (or what I assume he earns now)"
I don't think this is correct.
A 6% *annual* tax on wealth would have taken roughly 80% of Gates' wealth over the last 25 years. (He's been a billionaire at least that long). This is much, much higher than the ~25% effective capital gains tax rate from the 1970s.
7
@batavicus You are not making any reasonable comparison. There were many ways to reduce the effective tax rate in 1975 and nobody paid 70%. Secondly, United States industry was superior in almost every area and investors were able to reliably make a profit. Finally, the Liz "Wealth Tax" that just magically jumped from 3% to 6% would be paid if you still had any money left after all of your other taxes would make reasonable investment returns impossible. Investment would be futile and no reasonable person would do it. If you really look at it a truly fair tax system would divide the burden equally among all citizens with each person paying an equal share. However, in order to provide piratical funding the public agreed some unbalance is necessary. We are now at the point where the top 10% are providing about 80% of the federal income tax revenue. Once politicians like Liz convenience it is "fair" for a larger group to require a smaller group to provide them with "free" stuff any system is in a dangerous place.
Liz Warren's only objective is use envy to acquire power and replace the wealthy top 1% of 1% with the powerful 1% of 1%, her.
She does not care if it destroys our economic system because like all collectivist states no matter how bad things get the powerful live well.
She is not one of us and taking a swig from a bottle of beer won't ever make her one.
5
I think Warren should absolutely have a sit down with Gates. He and those on his income level are exactly the type that can afford to shield themselves from her proposed plan. The uber wealthy are not static. She may get one bite at the apple (no pun intended) on taxing them but the next time there won't be an apple because they'll have moved on or significantly restructure they're finances.
And once that money has run off where is the funding going to come from for the next year on these big programs she wants passed? The folks who can't move or restructure i.e. the middle class.
The EU countries and UK pull off it's massive social programs because they have a VAT and other high taxes on EVERYONE. That's the trade off they make. At least Sanders is honest by admitting that. Warren is not and it's starting to get irritating. Just come out and say it, "Yes, your taxes will go up BUT this is what you'll get in return." Don't lie and say we'll get lots of freebies and not have to pay for it. Because per Gates, he's not going to stick around for that.
37
@Mich, Honesty is a luxury Warren has decided she can't afford, not without reason. You can thank Republicans for that.
2
@Mich
"The EU countries and UK pull off it's massive social programs because they have a VAT and other high taxes on EVERYONE. "
I can assure you that rich people evade taxes in the EU and UK too.
Secondly, EW has explained that taxes will go up but overall costs will go down for middle class families (see her interview on Colbert). She is trying to avoid a soundbite that will be run on a loop by the Trump campaign. Do you blame her?
4
@Mich
Why take time to cynically prejudge a program designed to alleviate the worries of 99% ofAmericans ? Do I think our country is a mess under current "leadership"? You bet I do. Am i ready to support the ideas of a brainy financial person whose heart is also in the right place? You bet i am. The status quo has failed us.
12
I find this tweet from Gates insincere and irresponsible. Hyperbole is one thing, but people with very big microphones can now run with this number -- Bill Gates will owe 10 Billion! -- which is nothing like the actual amount she is suggesting. Also, Sanders number would be similar to Warren's but I notice he isn't calling Bernie out. What's not hyperbolic is that diabetics in this country have to ration their insulin and risk their lives. Asthmatic children of non-wealthy parents suffer as their parents spend to keep their kids breathing. Gates has done so much to aid health care in other nations but time after time the wealthy in this country refuse to believe that the rest of us have the right to life...forget liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I just want health care. Gates should go on camera with Warren, get an actual number and relax...you'll still be one of the richest people the earth has ever produced.
345
@Anon
"Forget liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I just want health care."
This would make a great bumper sticker for, after all, you have to be alive to enjoy liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
44
It’s not proposed as a one time tax. Do some math and he’ll be bled for much more than 10B over his lifetime. His foundation is a lot more effective than our government is. I’d rather he keep his money.
8
@Anon "...but people with very big microphones can now run with this number -- Bill Gates will owe 10 Billion! -- which is nothing like the actual amount she is suggesting. "
It actually is very much like the amount she is suggesting. Bill Gates' net worth is something around $100 Billion, which means her 6% wealth tax will be $6 Billion, right off the bat. But she's not proposing to exempt him from other taxes (income tax, tax on realized capital gains).
His total tax liability could quite plausibly hit $10B *per year*.
EW is capitalizing on people's willingness to attack a minority that doesn't include them (in this case, billionaires). Sure that's not a downtrodden minority that needs society's help to prop it up, but it's also not right to vilify that group while at the same time expecting them to fund EW's social programs.
I have considerably less wealthy than EW, and I'm not sure I'm 100% supportive of her public health plan, but if it does come to pass, I'm willing to pay my share. I'd like to see her come up with a plan that has more of us pay for the greater good (me included, and therefore her included, too), rather than disingenuously proposing a "freebie" to most of the population on the backs of a few.
7
So, let's see. Gates is worth about $100 Billion, so at 6% per year, so in 10 years the IRS will take 47% of his worth? And over 20 years, the IRS will take 71% of his wealth?
The total worth of all US citizens in 2018 was $98 trillion. The top 1% had a little over $25 trillion of this wealth. If you took every penny from the top 1% it wouldn't generate enough to pay the $30 trillion cost of Warren's various proposals.
Our healthcare system costs twice the average of industrialized countries, and can't be solved without first cutting costs and then spreading the remaining costs across more than just the 1%.
1
@kridge It's 3%.
From the article:
"She outlined a plan last week to pay for “Medicare for all,” which calls for $20.5 trillion in new federal spending over a decade, by increasing her proposed wealth tax on net worth above $1 billion to 6 percent annually and raising taxes on investment gains for the top 1 percent of households."
Gates number isn't accurate, but only because he's 64 years old and has already given a good deal of his wealth away already. Warren is not proposing a one time 3% tax on billionaires-- it's 3% every year. If you are a young multi-billionaire as Gates was, you are going to lose over half your wealth over your lifetime. 3% compounded over 40 years is a 70% tax. So for a founder of a Microsoft-like company, it is indeed a $100B tax. Gates himself would only end up paying about $50M, half his current wealth, over the next 20 years or so. It likely means he would have to sell most of his interest in Microsoft just to pay this tax.
1
@GKR why would you assume that Bill Gates is not well invested and earning decent returns every year? Lots of wealthy families have foundations which are obligated to donate 5% of principal each year. The goal if those who manage the funds is to do better than 5%. Bill Gates can too!
@GKR Good, except for the tax being too slow that's what we're looking for. Of course you also assume Gates makes zero income, I mean you make 2% in a savings bank alone meaning he'd be losing 1% a year, which is about 99% more than I'd leave him. If people like me have their way he wouldn't have to sell anything, we'd just take it.
If Mr. Gates were forced to give up half of his current net worth he would have more than 53 BILLION dollars remaining. I should think he could squeak by on that. It is true that he and Melinda Gates do a tremendous amount of good throughout the world with their money (most of which was earned in the U.S.) but his remaining $53 billon should allow that to continue. The sad truth is that there are too many who have abused the wonderful benefits of capitalism and the disparity between the very top and the middle and lower classes has simply become untenable. Ms. Warren deserves a fair hearing.
44
@Rex John Apparently you don't understand that if he gave up all his wealth, and all the billionaires did, poverty, ignorance, and poor health would not magically disappear.
1
@Rex John
Yes they need to share the wealth. Also, people in Palm Springs and Bakersfield should trade homes 6 months out of the year. It's only fair.
No worries Gates. Ms. Warren will not get the nomination. Bernie Sanders will also be out in the cold. A more moderate choice will get the nomination. People are not ready for the changes Warren and Sanders espouse.
3
I think Elizabeth Warren should be commended for her willingness to meet with Bill Gates. I hope he takes her up on the offer. After all, were she to be elected, she'd be president to him and other billionaires just as much as to less wealthy Americans.
It's easy to dismiss the ultra-wealthy -- they have more money than they need, along with (or because of) an abundance of loopholes that help them avoid the percentage of taxes the rest of us pay. However, with that wealth comes power. And I would much rather see Elizabeth Warren explain the principles and implementation of her policy proposals to Bill Gates than to see Bill Gates, absent that conversation, make large financial contributions to candidates who oppose what he THINKS a Warren victory might mean for him.
The rich aren't necessarily the enemies of progress. Some wealthy people do terrific things with their money (Micheal Bloomberg on climate change and gun initiatives, LeBron James on education, Oprah Winfrey in a variety of areas...) Better to get EVERYONE in on the conversation. America is too adversarial for its own good right now -- and that benefits people like Donald Trump.
17
@D Price
The problems, is that one's access to health care, or clean water, or air or education should not depend on the charity of those with very large pockets.
Those things we regard as necessary for the common good are exactly what government is good for. Taxes support programs that support Americans. And those the make the most should pay the most.
3
@cheryl
I totally agree w/you.
My point is just that not all wealthy people hoard their money, and if Elizabeth Warren (who probably has my primary vote) and Bill Gates (who has proven, through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a concern for the quality of life of those less fortunate than he) then why not? These are two influential people, and NOT sitting down together might represent a missed opportunity.
6
@D Price I disagree on letting wealthy people decide what is best for me. What you think of as terrific things I consider an infringement on the most basic of civil rights.
1
The problem is not that Warren is advancing big bold ideas, it's that she's talking about instant implementation of these. Logistically this simply doesn't work. The much wiser approach would be to offer a widespread public option, make it work better and more efficiently and cheaply that the private system, and the private side will eventually collapse on it's own as more and more people decide that the public option will work better than what they've got.
10
When I look at all the advances that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has accomplished in medicine, education and development, I suspect they're done more good than most of the United Nations efforts and those by the US government. I'm sure that Bill is willing to pay his share of taxes. However, I suspect that the healthcare initiative by billionaires Bezos, Buffet and Dimon may do more as a model to reform US healthcare than any of the plans of current presidential candidates.
4
@Don Cooke
The Gates Foundation was a disaster for education. Ask any educator.
1
Gates is worth $100 billion and he had paid over $10 billion in taxes?
I'm retired, living on SS and a small government pension. It's consoling to know Bill Gates and I pay the same rate.
71
@Occupy Government
Are you confusing wealth with income?
Gates’ income was considerably less than his total wealth of $100m.
2
@Occupy Government his wealth is mostly paper wealth. It's the value of his interest in Microsoft, the company he founded. It's not "income" per se.
1
@Occupy Government - Yes, why shouldn't you?
It is just. It is fair.
Progressive's jealously over billionaire's wealth will destroy our society.
4
Beginning negotiations re reforming healthcare requires a strong liberal position like Senator Warren's because starting from the middle ground will wind up with a center right policy.
65
The "strong liberal starting point" only works if it doesn't prevent you from being elected.
1
@kridge
Still early days re the polling. Tricky keeping the younger idealists engaged while not alienating the moderates. Assuming the Democrats win across the board in 2020, hopefully the newly elected president will adopt some of Warren's policies. More than a return to "normal" is going to be required to fix a lot of the problems we have.
1
@kridge
Centrists have controlled the Democratic party for decades.
In the last 20 years, Democrats have:
controlled the presidency for 2/5 terms,
controlled the House for 6 out of 20 years.
controlled the Senate for 4 out of 20 years.
controlled 1/3 (going up to 2/5 since Trump) of states, where election law is made.
That is a clear record of losing, by following your strategy.
Refusing to fight for Americans and refusing to oppose Republics has been a losing strategy for decades.
Its time to try to win.
When Warren is president with 60 seats in the Senate, we will make the Republicans beg for compromise for a change.
Senator Warren is one of the moderate liberals who find themselves with their backs to the wall of criticism for putting forth modest plans to take up the work that was begun during the New Deal. It's amazing, but predictable, how those with extreme wealth and a large segment of the mass media fall into line as if the senator's policy positions were anything besides mild reforms.
Consider a society that works for all people and not for the few and the very wealthy. Income inequality is at a 50-year high according to data from the Census Bureau.
103
@Howie Lisnoff Yes, yes, yes!!
6
I am for universal health insurance, low cost high quality education, rebuidling our infrastructure and taking immediate action to address global warming. I think Elizabeth Warren has done a service by putting out big, bold ideas for what could be done and how it might be paid for. So far, so good, as a public intellectual, which is what she is. As a politician running for the Presidency, I am not so sure.
Can she can be elected President with these big bold plans? Probably not. If she were elected President, would any of her plans be enacted into legislation? Probably not.
It seems quite risky to propose plans that may turn off people you need to get elected given the downsides of losing. And, where is the upside if her plans cannot be enacted into law in the unlikely event she were elected President, given that her overly ambitious plans are turning off many moderates and independents?
She is going to have a hard time moving to the center if she wins the nomination, because the left will feel betrayed, the moderates and independents will think she is not trustworthy, and the right wing will use her proposals against her in the general election.
I am having difficulty envisioning a happy ending if she wins the nomination. It is all about the politics. Ideas are not enough.
7
@MVonKorff Those are fair concerns but I have to think Warren is aware of them and has factored them in. Perhaps it's as simple as she plans to energize and motivate the base, and believes that is the path to winning versus running toward the center. It'd be a bit of a risky strategy but there's numbers and analysis to back it up, and how did running to the center play out for Hillary Clinton in 2016?
13
@MVonKorff
What have we gotten so far by playing it so careful, constrained by a mythical "common middle of the road" voter.
Where would the country be if these fears stopped FDR during the depression. We'd be living in mud huts paying the landlord a portion of what we raised as tenant farmers.
Or if Lyndon Johnson was scared to enact social security, we'd be in one of the thousand new homeless shelters we'd need for the elderly indigent.
Come on and see the big picture. Our country is only so great if the neediest among us is well taken care of. We can do it. Every westernized country has done it.
What's stopping us-- a couple of well placed ads of Harry and Louise warning us that universal health care would kill us?
I'm saying that NOT HAVING UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE IS ALREADY KILLING US.
3
@MVonKorff
"The left will feel betrayed"? I'll answer that, because my principles and sympathies are pretty far to the left, but I am also pragmatic. Some on the left are mired in cynicism, but I am inclined to push back against the "Probably not" attitude. The question is, What does the nation need? There's no one right answer, and a lot of wrong ones.
"Ideas are not enough," and nobody knows that better than Senator Warren. Her personal appeal is strong -- never mind that she has made some enemies and her voice is sometimes too professorial. It's unfortunate that the conventions of journalism stand in the way of a balanced account of proposals together with personality.
3
Gates has certainly done plenty to undermine funding of public schools K-12, pushing for-profit charters wherever politicians can be bought and unions destroyed, etc.
82
@Steve C Smart people try to make schools better, not just fund bad schools more. Schools have changed little despite the massive changes in tech, jobs of the future, etc. Public schools are a great idea, but they suffer the common disease of central planning monopolies where the student doesn't matter.
4
@David
Try doing some research. Most charter schools perform poorer than their public school counterparts and that's with selecting only the cream of the crop. They are not required by law to teach the learning disabled, the disruptive children, the children with health issues like Aspergers, Autism, Attention Deficit Disorder/Hyperactivity and other learning issues that public educators face and are mandated to deal with by the Americans With Disabilities Act.
In Massachusetts many charter schools have a poorer quality education, reflected in SAT scores, than even our vocational/technical schools do. The whole point of charter schools is to enrich a few by offering the cheapest costs available and the most profit that can be pulled from the cost of educating our children. Not everything done by society needs to have a profit motive.
10
@Steve C
Yes and they are also aggressively selling hardware and software to schools.
1
I would love to be in on that discussion. Bill Gates has contributed stunning technology to the Corporations of the USA that has generated profits to them for decades. Ms Warren has the most intelligent plans to improve the economy for everyone in the country, Rich and Poor. Will they agree on everything? No way. Will they listen to each other? Yes. Will there be changes to her Health plan. Absolutely, it will get better. The Autocrats in Washington would not publish a plan or invite discussion. They only answer to themselves. This discussion will have a Democratic Lead Dog (Ms Warren) and a guy with plenty of smarts,no ax to grind and good articulation. I hope the media will have no part on the inside of the event.
16
Bill Gates pays his taxes, is willing to pay more. He donates a tremendous of his money and time beyond what is asked of him, through his foundation. Wether he deserves to have so much money or not can be debated, but the fact is he is a model among billionaires.
The problem is, very few billionaires are like him. Most will never give more than asked (without hidden benefits), and will even exploit loopholes to pay less taxes. Those will only share their wealth through coercion.
This is why we need a plan like Warren's.
On a side note, Gate's comment about Warren's open-mindedness strikes me as ill-informed at best, in bad faith at worst. Very disappointing coming from him.
140
@jpp
Unless you have pledged 99% of your wealth to philanthropy, you are no different from the billionaires who haven't followed Gates's pledge. Oh they have billions and you do not? So that's what this is really about.
And anyone who contributes to an IRA or 401k (in the US) is also exploiting loopholes to pay less taxes.
1
Proof that even the "good" billionares will balk when it comes to taking some of their fortune away, even though they'd still be so fabulously wealthy that most normal people couldn't comprehend it. No one's trying take all of your $100 billion Bill. Not even the most agressive wealth tax contemplates anything close to that. Not to mention, they are all progressive taxes, so if you drop below the threshold, guess what, you stop paying.
Maybe just be happy with the fact that you could lose 99% of your total wealth and still see no discernible difference in your standard of living while tens of millions of people in this country can't even afford an unexpected $1,000 expense, instead of worrying that you might only be worth $75 billion dollars if there's a super aggressive wealth tax.
100
As much as Bill Gates is substantially less circumspect on the subject of taxing the wealthy, he is still a multi billionaire. He suggested that a spending tax would be a good idea, A tax on spending would make the tax more equitable for those that are more frugal with their money. I think that's a good idea but it isn't enough.
The idea of taxing net worth is quite reasonable. It's an incentive to put that money to work, a kind of use it or lose it scenario. Many of those holding vast sums of net worth inherited that wealth. Taxing those assets would only impose a 2% tax on net worth over $50 million. For someone at that threshold, they would pay only $1 million per year. Anyone with that much money can well afford to pay a small fee for the privilege of holding that which was created on OUR platform of laws that make it possible to collect so much wealth. Wealth isn't fundamentally a bad thing because it reflects those elements of our economy that make the greatest contributions to the common good.
We, as citizens of the US have consented to be governed. We collectively own everything by virtue of that consent. Much like a king that allows his landed lords to hold property at her pleasure, we set aside our rights to absolute freedom and liberty to create that system that allows wealth to be accumulated.
10
@J.I.M. Do you think VHNW people are just keeping their money in cash?
I would be shocked to see any VHNW person with more than 1% of their money in cash. Their money IS being put to work. It's being invested in companies across the nation to give them capital to grow. It's owning property, giving people access to rental properties. It is invested in their own small businesses where they employ hard working Americans. Even if it is sitting in cash, banks are using that cash to enable regular Americans to get loans to improve their own lives.
HNW and VHNW individuals are not sitting on mountains of cash like Scrooge McDuck. Their capital is hard at work to make the country work, and, of course, to also make themselves more money.
@J.I.M. Since we collectively own everything by virtue of our consent I am dropping by your house next week to raid your refrigerator, plop myself down on your sofa, drink your beers and watch TV. I do not hold my property because it pleases some person or persons; I hold my property under a system that grants all the freedom and liberty to accumulate wealth while respecting the rights of others to freedom and liberty.
PBS or CNN should invite them both to have a 30 minute discussion. Included at the table should be a minority graduate student in economics who has worked multiple jobs to put him or herself through school who can offer his or her perspective.
52
@Carolyn And the Greek chorus should include students with massive educational debt, people who've lost homes due to medical debt, etc. Bill Gates has no idea how much he doesn't know about life. He could learn a lot from us.
4
The idea that any Washington politician would be out of touch with wealthy interests is absurd. Mr. Gates is grossly out of touch. Washington lobbyists and their paymasters clearly are alarmed. Whether they will change their ways and work with the real America or continue to run roughshod over the rest of us remains to be seen, but I'm not hopeful.
6
This proves the most important point about Warren's zeal for working with all Americans: She is always willing to hear from and explain herself to anyone, in order to establish a true "meeting of the minds." That is the hallmark of a liberal. "This is my plan; now tell me how it can work to your benefit, as well, and whether it makes sense to you."
Liberals bring others into the fold; good leaders include ideas from all corners to develop great solutions to pressing problems.
There's nothing better than serious conversation to allay fears about using wealthy people's money to help the least fortunate among us.
And the best resource for redistribution of wealth is the stockpile of the wealthiest among us. I have no doubt the USA can, indeed, adequately fund both "Medicare for All" and an ancillary program, "Housing for All."
Waiting for a plan for the housing issue.....
9
I admire Bill and Melinda Gates' systematic and intelligent commitment to philanthropy. For that reason, I'm disappointed in his remarks about Elizabeth Warren. He knows how committed she is to adjusting the monstrous wealth gap in the US. And he knows that when it comes to understanding the tactics and dirty-dealing that created the wealth gap, all the give-aways to wealthy lobbying billionaires, Elizabeth Warren is as good as anyone. There's a phenomenon among the super-wealthy of giving large, tax-free donations to the local opera or land trust or hospital, while fighting tooth and nail against political proposals (universal healthcare, e.g.,) that would serve the non-wealthy. I thought Bill Gates was above that.
137
@John Mullen His only commitment to philanthropy is finding a way to use his money to gain further fame and adulation.
I commend the hard working people who find $10 to take out of their paycheck and donate to their local churh/charity. People giving away money they literally could never actually use is not nobel and we should stop cheering for it. It only further justifies their greed.
1
6% annually on billionaires? So over 10 years, Bill's $100 billion will be down to around $50 billion. If you needed 6% of $100 billion to fund the program, there's not enough to sustain it. And that's not even taking into account rising costs.
Eventually you run out of other people's money.
15
@Michael Did you account for the continued growth of his fortune?
32
@Michael Not to mention if all that $100 billion was actually in the foundation, it wouldn't be taxed. And not to ALSO mention that Warren's plan caps out at, what, 3%? If you can't earn 3% on your fortune, you need to get better financial advisers.
4
@Beerfelden Did you account for the fifty million immigrants and refugees that would automatically go on the taxpayers dole or the next 50 million that would quickly enter through Warrens open borders policy.
It is interesting that Bill Gates uses his foundation to save lives in other countries - which is a good thing - but is unwilling to use a small fraction of his money to directly help people in this this country with such things as true health care ( not just insurance). Over 530,000 families turn to bankruptcies a year because of medical issues, over 45,000 people die because of lack of healthcare a year. Medicare for All would provide medical care for everyone fairly, not just junk insurance.
197
@steve: I hope I'm wrong but I wonder if this is about him feeling that a woman might have significant power over him. And he doesn't like it.
11
@steve Billionaires certainly can and should contribute more of their income for the common good, including much higher taxes on capital gains. Even Gates is supportive of higher taxes. Perhaps the problem is what you consider fair (or as you called it - small). I doubt most of us would think paying 6% of your total assets each year is small.
'Tax the rich' is always an easy political promise to make. Most are not rich or not rich enough to be affected by any 'wealth tax' and the benefits people might gain from the increased government spending is always welcome. There's also a certain satisfaction in knocking down the ultra-wealthy a few pegs.
However wealth taxes are rarely effective and don't bring in anywhere near enough money to cover these ambitious spending promises. You also risk driving people out of the country. In an age of instant communication and global economies you don't need to live in the United States to run your businesses.
11
I appreciate Senator Warren's response to an unnecessary comment from Bill Gates about "whether she would even meet." That shows his attitude and open-mindedness, not hers. Good for her for reaching out.
157
@Caryn Fliegler Except she sounds ridiculous.
4
@Jackson
In what way? Gates was basically giving her plan a huge thumbs down and calling her out personally, and she met his bluff. How is that ridiculous?
19
@Caryn Fliegler
And did gates ever meet the people he helped globalization and economically destroy while not providing a strong social safety net in the US? He had his chance to help do the right thing but chose not to.
Now we are trying to find solutions to things that he himself helped cause and he NEVER sat down at the table with the rest of us. That is what angers me. Maybe some more wall street profiteers who care so much can cry on TV more.
Unbelievable how they will never know fear of material loss yet have waged it upon the masses and then act like the sky is falling when we have had enough and want responsible social responsibility to maintain the global system they championed!
Guess what rich dudes! If you don’t get a clue with Trump and read your history books you might want to do so. Globalization always fails because of greed over people. This is your chance to enjoy a life without material worries and help provide a stable social people oriented policy to maintain globalization. Such policy benefits is all.
If globalization fails as it has in the past it leads to war.
This is great. Liz should make a point to meet with Bill ASAP because the dialogue would be utterly refreshing- maybe the best thing that's happened in politics for the last decade- a genuine political discussion quite possibly devoid of talking points and think dank derived propaganda.
Bill might say that anything he loses to taxes is money he can't spend philanthropically unless he gets compensated equally by the government for what he gives.
He might rationally insist that he could spend that money more wisely than the government for the betterment of humanity.
That's where things get complicated. Most billionaires don't function with the same level of humanity as Bill Gates, and tax write-offs become loopholes.
At this point, I'm saying, "Go Liz!". The extremely wealthy here and all over the globe have a very long ways to go in sharing the extreme profits they've been enjoying in the last 40 years and many workers live lives full of stress as a direct consequence of the advantages that made this massive redistribution of wealth possible.
63
@alan haigh
"Most billionaires don't function with the same level of humanity as Bill Gates, and tax write-offs become loopholes."
Exactly. Thank you.
9
@alan haigh
I'm tired of hearing about how billionaires know how to spend money wisely while governments don't.
I know scientists and engineers who went to work for our government. Brilliant people who felt privileged to work for the government back in the day. What's happened over the decades, as our government has been constantly under attack and underfunded is that people no longer want to work for the government. They don't want to be looked at like another useless government employee.
My own supposedly liberal friends have commented that anyone who works for the government is by definition second rate....or else they'd be in private industry making gobs of money like Bill Gates.
The point of government is not to make 'gobs of money.' The point of government is to make sure the needs of its citizens are met.
I don't see that Mr. Gates is any great expert on that. Microsoft's home town, Seattle, is largely a tent city now.
Good job seeing to the needs of Americans, Mr. Gates.
But, yes, I agree--of the many billionaires we've spawned, Mr. Gates and his associate Mr. Buffett are two American billionaires who might open their minds to what Elizabeth Warren is saying. Oh, and that Sales Force billionaire, Mark Bienoff, also. For the rest of them, their money is just a scorecard.
18
@CF "I'm tired of hearing about how billionaires know how to spend money wisely while governments don't."
I'm just supplying one of the few reasonably rational arguments made by plutocrats in defense of their huge wealth. I welcome an honest exchange of opinions instead of the think-tank derived Koch-Murdoch nonsense that gets memorized by today's right wing, southern flavored, GOP.
The Rockefeller foundation has a very impressive list of accomplishments, including bringing modern medicine to the U.S. Rock didn't believe in it, but he sponsored its birth here.
I just would like to see the money left by such men for the pleasure of their great-great grand children to be taxed to death.
1
Medicare for All: A noble idea, BUT her projected $30 trillion over 10 years is unreal. Infrastructure needs, amongst others, need also to be addressed. Ms Warren, and other candidates, please plan, and campaign, "big picture".
1
@R.Hoffman
I say this over and over. We're already paying for our healthcare. Americans are already paying for health care whether its employer based, Obamacare based, Medicare based, or Medicaid based. We're paying for it. Who else would be paying for it?
We're paying twice as much per capita as other developed nations, with no better health outcomes.
We need to restructure how we deliver health care. As we do the restructuring, which will include wresting control away from rapacious health insurance companies, costs should go down. That's the "big picture."
8
A wealth tax is untenable.
1. How and who determines someone's net worth?
2. Wealthy people will simply leave America. France has seen 70,000 millionaires leave the country after they imposed their wealth tax in 2000. Macron wisely scrapped it.
15
@John
"Wealthy people will simply leave America."
Sounds good to me.
8
@John yes, this. What's the thought process here? That these uber wealthy will take a beating on their wealth year after year? No. They'll leave or restructure. Because they have the means to.
You want a buy in by these folks at this income level not chase them off.
And frankly, there's still not enough of them to sustain these proposed programs. You'd still have to dip down into the middle class.
1
@John the IRS does it constantly, it is a horrible bad faith argument that of all the complex problems our country solves, that somehow determining net worth is completely beyond the USA's capabilities. Gimme a break.
3
I personally think it is wrong to vilify successful people like Gates, Jobs, who made their own fortunes. We have gotten to be so nasty. These are brilliant people, who worked hard, who hit the lottery so to speak and now have billions of dollars, no fault of their won. Gates has been giving away his fortune bit by bit. But why vilify them? Is it jealousy?
14
Because their vast wealth buys them unparalleled political power that corrupts our country. That’s why.
4
@Sarah99 I love when average Americans feel the need to stand up for multi-billionaires.
1
@Sarah99
Who's vilifying him? Asking him to pay more in taxes is not vilification.
4
Hmmm ... great that they get together and have a productive discussion. I don’t have much empathy for Bill Gates - he hoards his $100 billion while I walk to my office in SF amongst the terrible homeless problem here and in cities all around the country. He should be paying $20M in taxes and he should start doing so tomorrow.
26
@James
I mean, he did help create an operating system that nearly EVERY person, company, and thing on the planet uses.
If I did something like that I'd hoard my wealth too.
2
@James
You can afford to live close enough to your office in SF to walk? After the billionaires, you are next. Hoarding money for a downpayment on a SF home like scrooge mcduck!
Some years ago, probably in the early 1990s, there was an excellent series of articles about Microsoft millionaires. They numbered in the hundreds.
Many used their wealth to go on to other adventures, create new businesses and set up charitable foundations.
Bill and Melinda Gates, Paul Allen and Steve Balmer created tremendous opportunities for untold numbers of people. Their wealth, and the wealth of those Microsoft millionaires, will positively impact society for many years to come.
14
@retiree
Many of those opportunities were created for people outside this nation. While I applaud that, I would like to have seen Seattle not turn into a tent city.
Charity begins at home.
24
Warren needs to stop and ask herself, what don’t I perceive. The first instinct of people in accomplishing a task is to perceive success. The result is that they miss the important and unexpected results which are there if they just look.
Gates is willing to give but he’s not going to squander it. Warren has not proven that her agenda can be accomplished, yet.
2
After a certain level of income is reached, numbers lose all meaning. It then morphs into a 'manhood' contest to see who has the biggest. Huge wealth tends to warp people into thinking that because they have a knack or the timing to hit it big, they are special and deserve deference in all areas of their life. Further, that they are somehow gifted with the ability and right to determine how others should live. It's a power game. Look at all the wealthy people in positions of power. Wealth buys power and influence and once power is attained, it's main concern is preserving and expanding that power.
180
@Tremolux
"look at all the wealthy people in positions of power" - that is selection bias. You and I don't know the humble billionaires, because they are humble, but we know the others, so we make unfair generalizations. If we look beyond the populist rhetoric, we'd find we have more in common with each other than politicians would have you believe.
A simple way to help with the lack of affordable housing in the United States is if the following plan I created is implemented. For to long we have heard of foundations set up to help the impoverished. Meanwhile the foundations were set up to escape taxation or the estate tax by the wealthy and the number of impoverished grows.
So if each state could receive a one time payment of $2 billion dollars that would be used as a 33% down payment on a four family residence costing one million the lack of affordable housing would decrease dramatically in one year. Over $100 billion would be raised through a tax on the wealthy including foundations , and trusts , and $300 billion in middle income and low income housing would be built.The remaining balance of the one million mortgage or approximately $667,000 would be taken by two
middle income families who would have two units for a 4 family residence. Two of the units would be for two low income families at a subsidized rent for 30 years The two middle income families would each have direct ownership of the property.
This plan creates equity.
How many units of housing would be built . Well if each four family cost one million to build then one thousand four family residences could be built for one
billion and 300,000 for $300 billion. The hundred billion of new taxes on the wealthy and or their trusts and foundations would build 300,000 four family residences or 1.2 million units housing approximately 5 million in one year.
4
Yes she COULD tax you Bill Gates but wouldn’t it be great if you by volunteering your time, money, and innovation could eliminate the lead out of Flint, or clean up a super sludge site saving families from cancer, or better yet reforest parts of California to remove carbon from air and get a tax break and maybe a plaque. Now that’s a quid pro quo I could live with.
19
@CathyK
The foundation was set up like all foundations to escape taxation. Maybe all foundations, trusts, and estates could be taxed at 40% to pay for the problems you mentioned.
14
@CathyK he already is a philanthropist. He gives in ways that he values and knows will make a difference. He is perfectly aware of all the ways he can give and impact the world. Why should he give in the way that you wish? Why should we, as citizens, get to decide how the wealthy spend their money?
4
@kate57
For they escape taxation which we do not. That is why we have deficits . The wealthy simply firm a foundation and escape taxation
4
To be frank, I don't really care if Bill Gates doesn't feel invited to the conversation. The fact is these people are invited to the "conversation" every time an employee asks for a raise and is denied or when economists trumpet that wages have been stagnant for 30 years. Gates had plenty of time to join the conversation.
I appreciate that he works on third world health crisis and education programs, but most know that more can be done if cash isn't hoarded.
Trickle down is proven to be a lie.
321
@Ian
I'd prefer to focus on the fact that Gates has been relatively "generous" with his wealth because he should be a role model for others. The top ten athletes in the world all made over $60 million dollars in the last year. What are they doing? And are we putting any effort into raising their awareness that they have more than enough? What about the top ten CEO's in this country? Why aren't their salaries made more public, and when there are lay-offs in their companies, why don't they feel an obligation to share their wealth to offset those lay-offs? The very wealthy will continue to hoard their billions until we make more efforts into boldly confronting them.
14
@Ian Picking on Mr. Gates is a big mistake. His
foundation The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is the largest foundation in the world. It is impossible in this reply to name all the great things they do. I do not work for the Foundation I just like to see what people with money do with their money.
13
@Tom
What generosity. He is worth over $110 billion and only paid 10 billion in taxes.
9
Bill Gates will not be affected by Elizabeth Warren’s wealth tax for one of the following two reasons:
1. If she is the Democratic nominee there is a very high probability Trump will win, or
2. And if she does against all odds win general election her wealth tax likely wouldn’t receive congressional approval and if it does it will be found unconstitutional.
Point 2 also means her platform is smoke and mirrors, because no wealth tax no Medicare for all.
7
@Midwest Moderate Could not disagree with you more. Point 1: Even Gates indicates he would be willing to pay $20B/yr taxes, so his wealth tax increase from his current $10B/yr taxes owed, would only be $2B/yr more than he currently is paying, far short than the $20B/yr he is willing to pay.
Point 2: There is nothing "smoke and mirrors" about having this nation adopt a M4All health insurance environment. If we keep the present health insurance environment in place, over the next 10 yrs, it will cost us, the taxpayers, much more than the $20.5B extra that can be absorbed by the extremely rich & upper class of this nation without discouraging innovation and investment. It's time for the ultra-rich, rich, and those making over $500K/yr to pay their fair share. Warren is just the messenger that we have reached that time once again in our history.
31
@Midwest Moderate
There is nothing unconstitutional about her wealth tax. Warren aims high, moderates aim low.
45
Actually Bernie Sanders is the messenger.
She just jumped on his bandwagon.
Warren should never have begun campaigning with such specificity for two reasons:
1) She is going to be nickel / dimed to death (even by billionaires) over the details of her tax plan and also her sweeping M4All.
2) There's very little chance any of her proposals with ever see the light of day in congress, and as congresswoman she should have known better.
Great consumer advocate and a terrific voice of conscience on the floor of the senate. A smart campaign strategist Warren is not.
Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar are claiming the middle path, which will be the winning high ground once the Democrat's convention begins and there has been no clear winner in the primaries.
12
@Gluscabi I'm donating to both Warren and Klobuchar, which sounds contradictory in demworld. I like Warren's not being afraid of the truth but Klobuchar would be a better solver of the problems Warren has so clearly defined.
Gates pays 10% of net worth in taxes? Does he realize that many pay more because their expenses prevent accumulation and that their highest expenses is income tax? He should take on the same tax burden and see how it goes.
46
The billionaire class bristles at the idea that they hold disproportionate power over society, yet even their purportedly political antagonists must explain themselves to them if they say anything that offends plutocrats' sensibilities.
110
@Vin
I think it is a good idea to keep the different types of crats separate:
Autocrats: Putin, Assad, Mohammed Bin Sultan
Bureaucrats: Blue Cross Blue Shield
Plutocrats: Gates, Buffet, Soros
Kakistocrats: any Republican
Kleptocrats: the de facto US government today
Many of these people also qualify as rats.
5
I personally would like to have such an exchange take place.It would not be a clash of political choices but an opportunity to fully air the details of Ms.Warrens plans.Mr.Gates is a whiz at math and even without a PC could challenge some of Ms.Warren’s assumptions.She is talking about very large numbers and most of the population cannot work with that many zeros.Mr.Gates can and could help everyone understand the consequences to business and finance.If she insists that health care costs would not go up every year she is using a faulty model.
20
@JANET MICHAEL
I think that you attribute a few too many abilities to Mr. Gates. He as well as the other .01 percenters have incredible access to nearly everything including politicians. Microsoft spent 8.5 million lobbying government last year and their total campaign contributions were 14.1 million. This excludes any personal contributions. When you have that many zeroes in your net worth it becomes incomprehensible to the best minds.
25
@JANET MICHAEL
Are you seriously assuming Ms. Warren cannot work with 'that many zeroes?'
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, her brainchild, works with giant numbers every day.
I fear for the future of this country.
47
@JANET MICHAEL Why oh why do you and others insist that health care costs will go up under Warren's plan? Health care costs of all other developed nations are significantly less on a per capita basis than US costs. So they will go down, not up. The transition to universal health-care might be a bit of a rough road, but if the other nations can do it, why in the world would the US not be able to. Please explain!
12
If Mr. Gates's fortune totals $100 billion, and Senator Warren wants to tax 2% of that wealth starting above $50 million, won't that amount to about $2 billion dollars of additional tax for him? Am I missing something in the math?
Even if Mr. Gates paid $10 billion in taxes, I think he and his foundation could still get by on $88 billion.
271
@jrinsc Exactly what I thought. How on Earth did Gates come up with the idea that he will be taxed out of his entire $1,000,000,000? That's a strawman argument and he probably knows it. Not impressive for someone with that stature.
Having said that, I share the concern of others here that Warren has gotten bogged down in the details of her health care plan too early in the game.
29
@jrinsc I think Warren is proposing an annual wealth tax of 2%, not a one-time-only wealth tax. So at 2% per year, as time passes, that will be a very substantial amount.
14
@jrinsc, what dadou said: compounding the amount annually works out to quite a large amount.
Moreover, Warren has recently increased her proposed wealth tax to 6%.
Gates has been a billionaire for at least 25 years. Take 6% of that wealth, annually, for 25 years, and you're down to just 20% of where you would have been.
In other words, Warren's plan would have taken at least $80 billion of Gates' wealth.
16