Annual income of richest 100 people enough to end global poverty four times over

[graham4anything]

7. The poorest don't pay any tax at all. And nothing taken out of a person not working

So those people already are NOT paying taxes, so one cannot lower their tax.

As for the rich, take 100% of their money away, then they are not working, and have none,
so what do you do next week? next month? next year?

See, the tear it down, burn it down don't work.

All that is gotten is some sort of revenge, gladiator arena style, but that does not put a penny in the hands of those with absolutely nothing(who already are not working).

but it makes good slogans.

Speaking of FDR-he never said the number would remain constant, nor did he say those
that are now under 50, should expect that SS will pay 100% of their money when they hit
age 67.
And FDR compromised all the time.
Look at how he compromised not going into WW2 for a good how many years was it til they finally went?

Actually, one needs to look at Wilson or LBJ along with FDR and not selectively say FDR.
LBJ was far more liberal than FDR 365 days a year.

BTW-wouldnt FDR be included back in being one of the 100 richest people around?
(of course ones money was worth a different amount, so it wouldn't have been the same number now).
Did you wish FDR to lose all his money too?(being that you brought up the name FDR to use.)

(btw-unemployment in FDR's time was, of course, so much less-
then, generally, only one person worked in a family, and then, all people of a certain age and male,were drafted, meaning they were out of the job market for 2 years or more.

So are you saying we should restart the draft to be like in FDR's time to help lower the unemployment rate?

Personally, my wish list would be full amnesty, citizenship and a million dollars to each of those for the hardships they have endured, but that is just silly to think it would happen, same as taking away the top 100 and thinking those dollars would trickle down to the poorest with no jobs.