jump to last post 1-6 of 6 discussions (10 posts)

Millionaire Tax to Help the Homeless

  1. gmwilliams profile image85
    gmwilliamsposted 20 months ago

    According to yesterday's Yahoo News, there will be a proposal by Los Angeles County to institute a millionaire tax in order to find homes & more services for the homeless.  Los Angeles County supervisors want to impose  more taxes on people whose earnings exceed $1M dollars annually.  They feel that with the tax collected on millionaires, homelessness will be significantly reduced.   They intend to collect $243M dollars per year.  Your thoughts on the millionaire tax in Los Angeles.  Do you believe that more states should forcefully propose, even impose a millionaire tax on people earning $1M dollars or more per year?

    1. PrettyPanther profile image83
      PrettyPantherposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Well, "forcefully impose" is one way to describe it, although I would say that is not quite accurate.  Los Angeles County supervisors are proposing to lobby state legislators to introduce legislation to allow for the tax.  Given that legislators are elected by the people to represent their wishes, this does not qualify as "forcefully imposing" a tax.  Now, should their constituents overwhelmingly oppose such a tax, and they enact it anyway, their constituents can vote them out and vote in representatives who would repeal it.  That is how the system works.

      Personally, I cannot say one way or another if I would support it without knowing more details.  Not all taxes are a good idea.

    2. rhamson profile image78
      rhamsonposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      This is just a shortcut "feel good" way the government is trying to make up for all of the inadequacies and inequality the system has turned out to be. With stagnant wages and horrible jobs that require three part time jobs to make up the failing system, government is seeking a solution with another horrible choice.

      Taxing our way out of this is the easiest solution yet it is the worst way as it won't change the way things are. Raising minimum wages and stabilizing the trade deficit would be a great start.

      1. wilderness profile image98
        wildernessposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        You can't "tax our way" out of this - raising taxes will do very, very little to address the homeless problem and nothing at all to address the causes of it.  You're right - it is a political sop - a "feel good" solution that is no solution at all.

        Nor will raising wages or stabilizing the trade deficit (provide jobs) - given that half the homeless have a drug problem and another quarter are mentally ill, neither one will accomplish anything as far as the homeless go.  Raising wages or even providing more jobs won't help the addict or mentally ill that can't hold a job regardless of what it pays.

  2. ahorseback profile image60
    ahorsebackposted 20 months ago

    This entire social media war against the rich is such hog-wash .     There is probably NO ONE in America who helps out the lower income class than those WITH MONEY , and no I'm not one of them .   But I do recognize  true  hypocrisy  when I see it .     The new American Boogey -Man  is a rich guy ! After all , the government can't provide any more entitlements without bankrupting itself ,  the  lower and middle class haven't cured homelessness yet by any means - So lets blame the rich guy ? 

    Of all of the THOUSANDS of different  taxes raised by government and all of the rolling over the voting American public  does in tax regards. One might think there would be no such thing as homelessness anymore .   Yet it remains , Why ?,  I'd like to read  the psychological profile of the average  homeless person in America and know just how much and what percentage  of homelessness is personally voluntary .

  3. Live to Learn profile image78
    Live to Learnposted 20 months ago

    I don't see it as blaming the rich for homelessness; as the last poster suggested. It is simply asking those who are in the least position to be inconvenienced by the tax to help. I don't know that I agree that the rich contribute more to help anyone.

    Anyway. I've noticed most celebrities are liberals and CA is mostly liberal. I wouldn't think the rich there would have any problem with that tax.

  4. wilderness profile image98
    wildernessposted 20 months ago

    Several questions come to mind.  Just how many in the county earn over 1M$, and just how much of that earning does the county intend to grab?  There are some 82,000 homeless in LA county on any given night - how many will be given housing on the backs of the "rich"?  Housing is expensive in the area; if it were possible to find housing for $1,000 per month (doubtful), that would mean the paltry sum of 1B$ would cover all of them for a year.  Are there enough "rich" to cover a "significant" portion of that through confiscation of their earnings?  Will a 10% confiscation rate of income for anyone earning over 1M be a significant part of 1B? 

    Unlikely IMO (without researching it), and even that would mean an additional 10% tax (on all income, not just the taxable portion) on those already paying 60 or 70% of their income in taxes.  How long will they remain in LA county if the plan goes through? 

    There are also other considerations - over half of the homeless do not receive benefits to which they are already "entitled".  What happens to this great new source of endless money when the homeless don't accept it?  Some 1/3 have a BA degree (higher than the general rate in the area) but are still homeless - why?  As many as 2/3 have drug problems - is the county really proposing to give homes to addicts so they can continue their abuse more easily and comfortably?  About 1/4 are mentally ill - shouldn't they already be in institutions that are already funded?  Is there any place to put 82,000 additional residences, and only at the very cheapest rates?

    The liberal mind is a fascinating thing - as PrettyPanther says, most of California is very liberal, and particularly the rich residents of that county.  Many are likely to be willing to take a hit (though not 10%) to their income...to fund another failed attempt at curing homelessness.  Money has been thrown at it for years, with almost no effect - what makes the county think another big hit is going to do any good?  Simply giving the poor whatever they need is a total failure and always will be, but the liberal will always do it as long as they can force someone else to cover the cost. 

    So no, it isn't a reasonable plan.  While the Robin Hood Syndrome is a popular liberal concept, it is also a failed one that mostly grows dependency and an entitlement philosophy in those receiving it.  Put money into mental health, stopping drug use, creating jobs - even make work jobs - and education.  Not into simply providing needs in an endless stream of additional entitlements.


  5. Castlepaloma profile image76
    Castlepalomaposted 20 months ago

    The fastest group of people keep growing, the poor. Don't believe cold blooded rich and Government would become like Jesus and become honest then help the sick and poor. There is more homeless people than pubic servants. If the rich cared, why don't they allow tent cities on the their golf courses. Not when America is on the edge of total  collapse told by Ron Paul, Priminester of Japan Greenspan and many others. When ever did the rich not have war against the poor, meanwail they own the Politicians.

    They would rather cover the news about the Gorilla and boy toy. Anything for distraction from real world events.

  6. ahorseback profile image60
    ahorsebackposted 20 months ago

    If one does any studying about the "robin hood "syndrome  of Democratic America , you find cities like  Detroit , Chicago ,  Baltimore , L.A.. San Francisco , D.C.  , where liberals have been taxing the hell out of everybody , creating  more  entitlements and  welfare programs !
    And what you end up with are enclaves of most everyone "  On the system ", The most violent , murderous ,poorest inner cities  , gang  affiliated ,crime riddled areas in the country !   And you wish now to expand that with more taxes  and  homeless  too. ?  Sounds like another  great plan.

    1. Castlepaloma profile image76
      Castlepalomaposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      That is why Jesus would never get elected in America. He would be too soft on crime, help the sick and poor . Then he would get very irate over the huge money changers and hide from the military.

      Even if Jesus promise not to destory the world in his second coming. Funny how the Zionist (fake Jews) are fulfilling the scripted predictions from the Bible in war and in stealing.