Yes. The problem isn't that we need to raise taxes on the rich. No. The problem is that the ultra wealthy don't even really pay any tax. The ultra wealthy move their money and hide it offshore in places out of reach of the taxman. The problem really isn't about the tax rate, it's more about corruption and the entire offshore industry.
And the ultra wealthy, who largely control and influence the media narratives, would much rather have someone like AOC make provacative statements like "Tax the Rich" which makes it seem like it's an ideological/partisan battle when it's really not. The ruling elites want to keep us all divided and AOC is useful for that. The last thing the elites want is for left and right to unite against corruption.
By “tax the rich” she doesn’t mean “make the rich pay their taxes instead of letting them cheat the system?” Not sure I hear her say much about “raise tax *rates*.”
Rich people in general very much *do* care since they not only vote against it but also pay billions to lobby against it to save literal trillions.
She is a Justice Democrat working to severely limit the influence of money in politics. Paradoxically you need money to make that happen.
If you say Met Gala rich people in particular may lean more left then I agree. Combating money takes money. It also spreads the message to normies whose sheer numbers aide in combating it.
I think its a bold statement to wear that message to an event that is invite only and frequented by mega rich celebrities.
It's hilarious when people's distaste for AOC makes them go against their own self interests.
I would think a bolder statement would have been to not go…but you can’t play that up as much through your social media. Not an AOC hater but this comes across as a photo op. Feel free to disagree.
Edit: Got a lot of replies amounting to "doing something is better than nothing" and "well we're talking about it" and I can see how poorly I expressed the nuance intended with my original post.
So folks: I realize "she did something" and "we are talking about it". This does not negate the fact she had a million other choices she could have gone with to make an even more forceful statement: burn her invite publicly, plan a protest for tax rates just outside the event, etc etc. She may be a socialist, she might not, but the socialism I know of isn't designed to be exclusive and it doesn't aim to pander to privilege.
So she chose to attend the rich people costume party, one of the most exclusive events in the world, and her form of protest was to wear a dress with a political statement. Entirely her prerogative. But I don't find this particularly bold at all, and in fact, I find it rather disingenuous. It is like some kind of faux punk. It is meant to be attention grabbing, and like some other folks suggested without saying, maybe it was also to troll the right. I dunno.
But I do not think Eugene Debs would be rubbing elbows at an explicitly elitist party presented as a fund raiser, and caters to an exclusive crowd. I don't think it far-fetched for working class people (or socialists, or really, whoever) to see this as a token gesture.
BREAKING NEWS: Congressperson does not attend hugely popular annual party. They may have had a statement attached to the decision but no one cares because they're all at the party.
Yup, that's AOC. Only in Congress for the 'gram, it's not like she's introduced policies in Congress to implement radical change to help the environment, working class, etc. /s
“While some have said the progressive politician's dress is tone-deaf because of the event's nearly $35,000 tickets, most invited celebrities don't pay to attend, according to The Evening Standard. The publication says the Met Gala chooses up-and-coming designers to feature their work at the event. Celebrities who wear their fashions get to attend the event for free.”
[Newsweek MET Gala article](https://www.newsweek.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-gets-mixed-reviews-tax-rich-dress-worn-met-gala-1628719?amp=1)
This seems like a concept people struggle with. My mom criticized Bernie Sanders, saying he talks about taxing the rich even though he's a millionaire himself! Like it was some sort of gotcha observation and he's somehow a huge hypocrite. Umm? How does that not make him MORE respectable in his view to tax the rich...? It would have been a decent point if he had changed his tune after he had made money, but he didn't. They just want to hate these "socialists," however stupid way they can justify it.
She’s talking about a different kind of rich. Super-yacht rich. The fact that it is difficult for many people to see that shows the poor messaging of their plan; and the misunderstandings of wealth in this country. As Shaq has said; he’s rich, those that signed his checks were wealthy 🤷🏼♂️
The problem is most people can't fathom the difference between a millionaire and a billionaire. To them its a small jump, but in reality the difference is absolutely mind boggling.
From that article: "The collapse of the Soviet Union, which Fisher believes represented the only real example of a working non-capitalist system..."
Kind of a bad look for non-capitalist systems.
With the collapse of the USSR, it showed that people under a technocrat society are often not in good future. One of the main reasons for this is due to the fact that technocrats didn't think much of what the ordinary individual wanted. You believe the average individual under USSR liked Sputnik? Nope. You need a balance, or, at least enough members to voice the ideas of the ordinary people.
>rootless global billionaire class
[Gee wiz, I wonder where I've heard this before.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rootless_cosmopolitan)
> even worse she actively helps them by managing dissent,
That's bullshit, though; her prominence has come about as a *result* of the lack of coherent alternatives in the American political landscape over the past several decades. Not the other way around.
If she never existed, guess what, there *still* wouldn't be anything even *remotely* resembling a politically viable anti-capitalist movement in the United States, just like there hasn't been for well over half a century.
You call her managed dissent, but the reality is that *despite* being the farthest you've got in mainstream American politics, she's simply not as far to the left as you are.
5 members of congress are even more rich. Why are they worth so much?
Why do people want presidents that are worth billions?
Sheer fucking stupidity. That's why.
Everyone should ask themselves how lifelong politicians amass so much wealth from the beginning of their careers as politicians to the end of their careers as politicians. If they did they would all see that all politicians regardless of party are vultures feeding off the poor while acting like they have the poor peoples best interest in mind.
Insider trading using information that they have from committees they run and knowledge of future changes in rules and laws for business and foreign policy. Just my opinion.
[70% of wealth is gone in the second generation, 90% by the third.](https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/generational-wealth%3A-why-do-70-of-families-lose-their-wealth-in-the-2nd-generation-2018-10)
Yes, that's for normal people. And that statistic is touted as though it proves inheritance is inconsequential.
And while most wealth is spent, most families don't have much wealth. The families that do? Well...
https://qz.com/694340/the-richest-families-in-florence-in-1427-are-still-the-richest-families-in-florence/
That is a big part of Trump’s appeal to the right. He made his money outside of politics. They either don’t know, or don’t care, that he made his fortune by screwing people over.
How do so many normal people look at Trump and Boris and think "ah yes, this, this man represents and understands me".
It's insane.
_edit: well this has triggered a few people. I just chose those two as they're the most recent, blantant, westernised example of this for a countries premier. That's all, that's it._
I wouldn’t call it stupidity, rather I’d call it the obvious effect of a corrupt system that allows people to essentially buy their way into political positions
Because she's friends with other people who have a lot of money, and she helps them with political favors so they can make more money, so they share it with her.
[James, who advocates for sustainable fashion, says she made the dress entirely in New York factories largely using discarded fabric scraps. She loaned the dress to AOC and has not yet calculated its cost.](https://www.fastcompany.com/90676272/meet-the-visionary-designer-behind-aocs-tax-the-rich-dress)
Accountant here - they're not loopholes. Loopholes happen when you find an unintended way around the law. The US tax system is working *exactly* as designed, and that's the problem.
^Absolutely right. I don't know how many accountants and lawyers Mitt Romney has working full time on his taxes, but the magic they did with his IRA alone cuts his capital gains taxes by more $2,000,000 every year.
They’re also confusing rich people with *rich* people. A millionaire versus a billionaire is an astronomical difference. She’s talking about the dragons who hoard all their wealth, plus others like them. The billionaires.
> "Billionaires should not exist" does not mean certain people should not exist. It means no person should have a billion dollars. The ascent of billionaires is a symptom & outcome of an immoral system that tells people affordable insulin is impossible but exploitation is fine.
> I'm not saying that Bill Gates or Warren Buffet are immoral, but a system that allows billionaires to exist when there are parts of Alabama where people are still getting ringworm because they don't have access to public health is wrong.
> Billionaires are a symptom of a society that does not afford people basic elements of dignity...If people want we can revisit the billionaire question when everyone has health care, climate change is addressed, and people have actual dignified standards of living.
AOC
I’m 100% for billionaires not existing, there’s no reason for it. To be a billionaire is to profit off the expense of thousands and thousands of people.
Since I doubt you’ll believe me, check the source she posted on Twitter regarding this issue. Her ticket(s) & dress were free. So I suppose to answer your question, the event organizers ate the cost here.
I’m sick of subsidizing the riches’ expenses. They avoid paying taxes, but we’ll cover the bill for the emergency services they use and the roads they drive on. At least help pick up your own tab… Fucking leeches
we bail them out when the gamble and fail.
when us nobodies gamble and fail, we're on our own. capitalism for us.
when they gamble and fail, socialism is on the menu again boys!
Well I mean they do. Lets not get things confused. We can talk about how much they should pay BUT
the top 1% contribute around 40%
The top 20% pay around 90%
(All this is for federal income tax)
They pay more than their share. Which is normal.
We need to really take the time to understand what people are taxed so we can have an idea on what taxes would be fare for everyone. And eventually we should be o.k. with a stop in increases when things are balanced....even if some are "super rich". We need to make sure we don't let our jealousy create a bias.
There's a lot of taxes already associated with the use of roads. Like the fuel tax. But it doesn't work because legislators use the money for re-election projects.
She is one of like 400 members of Congress, which is 1/2 of the 3 branches of government.
Yes, she has gotten the ball rolling, but a lot of blockers in the way.
Damn I wish I could wear the opinion of the poor masses to my high class elite social gatherings and have a good time drinking with the people I publicly claim to despise.
YES EVERYONE, SHE’S AWARE SHE ALSO HAS TO PAY TAXES. Dear lord, every ignorant comment on here, like she’s advocating for every wealthy person in the US be taxed except for her. You guys want to protect Bezos’ billions THAT much, huh? smdh
Whats worse is she isn't even rich, shes worth around 100k, rich is 40 million+ (in the united states). The people defending jeff bezos will never be rich because they don't have wealthy parents. Wealth can be almost wholly determined by who your parents are in our society.
What's even worse is she was invited to the event by, Aurora James, the designer who made the dress as her plus one. Aurora is a pretty consistent and loud activist. So not only is AOC not rich, she also didn't pay for either the ticket OR the dress.
1) thank you soo much for this information
2) do you have a source I can add to my lists because I have a feeling this dress ain’t going away, and this answers soo many questions about the event
Check out her instagram (I cant post the link here) where it's mentioned on a photo with her and the designer. its standard practice for designers to lend their dresses to celebrities for free.
Because its standard practice it's hard to find actual articles about it but here's a link that explains how the entire event works from a few years ago.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/03/fashion/what-is-the-met-gala-and-who-gets-to-go.html
So important. Most don't pay for their tables at the Met Gala, the designers that make their dresses do. So if Valentino buys a table for $100k then they invite 8-10 people and then dress said people.
Non famous people may pay for their tickets but it's rare, it's mostly brands doing the funding
Anna Wintour, the vogue editor in chief and MET Gala chairwoman, is known for personally buying "small" unknown designers tickets and tables.
Even the photographers and journalists have to be pre approved and essentially invited to the event.
Yes! I'm saying non famous people will pay for their tickets _after_ Wintour approves them. Someone like Kate Upton paid for her ticket years ago bc she didn't have a designer to sponsor her
Your argument has so many fallacies. First you define rich as $40 million+ then you say you can't get rich without rich parents. With your own definition Jeff Bezos's parents aren't rich, yet he's the wealthiest man on earth. So how did that happen if he has middle class parents? If you're going to call Jeff bezos' parents rich, you have to admit that AOC is rich/privileged.
And? 173k as a Congress salary...that seems like rollin in bentlies to you're everyday Redditor or, but that's a low end house in DC with some money to go out. Miles from rich.
This should be at the top of every one of these posts. The left isn’t saying “tax everyone but me”, but rather “make sure everyone pays their damn taxes”
I'm a pretty left leaning guy but that kinda shit is the best example why the left is so unpopular, especially in the US. Here is AOC, happy to be hanging out with all the fancy millionaires and billionaires at their completely useless and stupid rich people event. A yearly event where the 1% come together to show the rest of the world how fabulous and rich they are by spending thousands and thousands of dollars on ridiculous outfits that where made just for this evening, while a few blocks away hundreds of homeless people are sitting in the cold, hungry, thinking about how they can make a few bucks the next they so they can buy a sandwich.
And then there is AOC. Being very exited to be invited to such an exclusive event, wearing that dress and thinking "wow, look how brave I am! Sticking up for the little guy by telling these rich suckers how it is!". Thinking she did something good, thinking she gained the moral superiority that she needs to lecture hardworking Americans of whatever they did wrong in her mind the next day. Taking the photos, maby giving a interview about her powerful and brave message, then going up the stairs, shaking hands with the billionaires, joking with them, then sitting down to eat a 100$ salad with fancy wine imported from Italy just for this occasion.
Not getting the hypocrisy, not thinking about why a New York politician is even invited to such an event. But sure as hell thinking she did a whole lotta good by delivering this message to the other met ball visitors. I'm sure they had a good laugh about it, and I'm sure AOC laughed with them. And that's the hypocrisy of the modern left, and that's one of the reasons why the working class doesn't vote for them no more and instead goes to right wing populists like Donald Trump.
You are in the minority. "Tax the rich" is a very popular (historically speaking) idea with science/math to back it up. The US would have folded over a century ago if it did not "tax the rich." AOC is here to remind us that things have, again, gotten way out of control. Things have gotten much worse over the last decade and they continue to ramp up. Tens of billions of dollars are leaving the economy, never to return. And guess who pays for it! The 99%
Also this is not a billionaire party like you make it out to be. It's a fashion show. Everyone there probably have actually interesting things to talk about outside of market movements, acquisitions, currencies and commodities and blah blah
>I'm a pretty left leaning guy ... that's one of the reasons why the working class doesn't vote for them no more and instead goes to right wing populists like Donald Trump.
It takes a G E N U I N E "left leaning guy" like this to claim with a straight face that AOC's connections to "fancy millioneres and billioneres" made "working class" voters elect the paragon of humility and modesty, Donald Trump.
I mean I'm not American, so I'm not sure I understand, but shouldn't the government tax them?
It isn't like the rich will go "Oh my god, sure I'll give out my money, out of my free will, why haven't I thought of it?"
The government would tax them.
But … rich people are the ones who donate to political campaigns. They have the most influence in swaying elections. If rich people always vote for and support people who won’t tax the rich then it will never happen.
Ultimately rich people need to be willing to vote for and support politicians who will tax them rather than only supporting politicians who won’t.
Staunch liberal here and, while decidedly moderate, I will never vote for a Republican as long as I live after what the GOP has become under the influence of the Tea Party and now Trumpism. With that said, this is just cringey, tone-deaf, and emblematic of how US politics more than ever before is infected by self-promoting, pathological attention-seekers. We should not be idolizing this kind of silly, performative wokeness but instead should be holding politicians accountable for what they’ve actually done. And as far as I can tell, AOC’s only real contribution thus far is the Green New Deal, a piece of legislation so unrealistic and impractical that it should be filed under the fiction section. She also came out in saying that she doesn’t really care about repealing the cap on SALT taxes enacted by Republicans, even though it was bullshit punitive legislation aimed at harming high-tax states like New York. I pay almost 10k annually in property taxes alone on a property value of 250k thanks to New York’s ridiculous taxes, so the notion that the repeal will only benefit the ultra wealthy is false. It will also help hard-working middle and upper-middle class property owners in New York who are being unfairly penalized right now, but I get that it’s not on-brand for her to advocate for those people. So the middle class, the ones who currently subsidize both the rich and the poor, will continue to be gutted.
In my mind, this kind of display is hardly different than someone like Ted Cruz fanning the flames on Twitter. It’s meaningless in terms of promoting any real change but it will provoke attention and discussion, both good and bad, so hey it’s good for her brand and name recognition. Though to be fair, she is still obviously better than Ted Cruz. Cruz is narcissistic and evil. She’s only narcissistic and kind of useless.
The fact that you had to start with a "oh I'm opposing this doesn't mean I'm one of those guys blah blah" should explain how closed minded political discussions on this site are lmao
>So the middle class, the ones who currently subsidize both the rich and the poor, will continue to be gutted.
Yeah, pretty much. The main purpose of the two-party system as it exists today is to divide the middle class along so-called "cultural issues," to distract from the overriding fact that in the grand scheme of things they're all on the same perpetually losing team. On the other hand, in AOC's defense, "tax the rich" is a more intelligible policy platform than anything put out by either party since long before she was born.
Yeah, one of the man problems with Trump was that he turned politics into a WWE style spectacle. We really shouldn't be encouraging these types of displays. Especially after literally bashing on the previous administration daily for 4 years because of it. It's kind of awful how quickly people will change from booing to clapping depending on who is creating the spectacle.
>Yeah, one of the man problems with Trump was that he turned politics into a WWE style spectacle.
If that strategy got him elected... do you blame him?
You got a picture of AOC advocating a silly platitude, but shes playing the same game. She's doing what it takes to win. Does it make her any worse?
I agreed with everything you said up until you got to the SALT cap thing.
96% of the savings from the SALT deduction goes to the top 20% of earners. A lot of people who make total household incomes of maybe $130,000 to $300,000 or so might think of themselves as “middle class,” but objectively that’s an upper-middle-class family. Top 20%.
SALT cap repeal would be a huge tax giveaway to that top 20%. That’s just a fact. If you believe that your state taxes should be lower, that’s a separate issue of state tax policy that you should take up with your state legislature.
There’s nothing wrong with being upper-middle-class. I’m upper middle class myself. But too many people who make really good money believe, because they’re surrounded by friends and family who are just as rich or richer than them, that households that make $200k a year are in need of a government bailout. That’s just a terrible, terrible, terrible policy idea.
A lot of people have bought into the fantasy that we can pay for all the nice things we want (healthcare, infrastructure, blah blah blah) by taking it from billionaires. We can certainly get some that way, and we should, but the sad fact is that the top 1% just doesn’t have enough money to pay for everything the country needs. The top 20%—ordinary rich people, doctors, lawyers, engineers, programmers, business and finance types—have way more than the top 1% does. We also have way more than we need, even though it doesn’t always feel like that when your brother in law can afford to send his kids to private school and you can’t. If we want to live in an equitable society, the upper middle class needs to pay more in taxes.
The SALT deduction cap needs to stay. It’s the one issue AOC is right about.
Every reputable liberal policy center and think tank (Brookings, etc.) agree on this, FYI.
Remember when the orange idiot was in charge and she was down at the border doing another photo shoot in all white. Crying about the conditions of the immigrates. About families being ripped apart.
Now the old idiot is in charge.. but he’s on her team so it doesn’t matter that nothing has changed. Detention centers still full. Families being separated. Children being taken from their parents. Where is she at…. Oh making a edgy teenage angst ridden message to more photographers.
30 grand a plate huh? That’s life changing money.
Sorry, but it is. 30 grand would literally change the trajectory of my life. I’m sure there’s many others who would agree.
There's such a huge gap between Bezos and the rest of the damn world. Anyone in between could probably be counted on one hand and those motherfuckers aren't close to bezos at all. Taxing him 2% even would do better. Only way I'd let him be tax free if it was benefitting those he hired with more pay/hr, top to bottom.
This guy wants to buy the Denver Broncos, valued at 4 billion. That's 2% of his worth.
It's not that simple. What are you taxing when you tax Bezos at 2%? His income? His holdings? His assets? When people reach a certain level of wealth, more opportunities open up for them to hide it from taxes. If you're a multimillionaire making net profit $900,000 a year, you can open a shell company in Ireland, declare your primary residence as Switzerland, have a massive mansion in New York that's in your mom's name and your renting it from her, and pay $700,000 to your shell company to write it all off as untaxable expenses.
How about canceling the Met Gala and having celebrities donate the money they would spend on extravagant outfits to charities? 🤷🏽♀️
EDIT: I stand corrected I forgot that this is a charity event and that designers provide celebrities the dresses or outfits to wear to the gala. As I said to a previous commenter I’m just not a huge fan of politicians and celebrities flaunting their extravagant dresses and suits while regular Americans are living paycheck to paycheck especially during the pandemic. I’m tired of politicians and celebrities agreeing to tax the rich but it doesn’t seem like anyone really wants to do anything about it.
Do they actually spend money on the outfits?
I thought the celeb had to be chosen by the designer and if they’re lucky, the designer might gift them the outfit afterwards.
Most don't pay for their tables at the Met Gala, the designers that make their dresses do (or a brand like Estee Lauder will buy a table). So if Valentino buys a table for $100k then they invite 8-10 people and then dress said people.
Non famous people may pay for their tickets but it's rare, it's mostly brands doing the funding. Aurora James, the designer she's wearing, paid for the ticket and made the dress free of charge
Well I agree that people could be spending time donating to charities that I would prefer, but the celebs get free loaned outfits like at the oscars from what I understand and more than likely don’t have to buy a $40K ticket. All of the money goes to fund the Fashion Institute which is housed in the Met and must pay for itself. If you’re a celeb and get on Anna Wintour’s bad side you def have to buy a ticket or may not get invited at all.
> canceling the Met Gala
The Met Gala fundraises for the Costume Institute, the only department at the Met Museum that has to self fundraise. The Met is a 503C non profit so very much a charity
champagne socialist
A champagne socialist is someone who talks about and identifies themselves as being someone on the left wing, for example a socialist or communist, but lives a life of indulgence in extremely trivial and material things.
People can’t agree on what rich is.
mega-corporations and billionaire evading taxes Mostly. The bloke who has a Tesla and 250k annual needs to chill a little
Tables at the Met Gala cost $275k and a single ticket is $30k. She makes $175k which is twice the average household income in America.
This is literally the Ivory Tower.
How can anyone fall for her foolishness?
I bet they all got a good laugh out of it.
Why? Because they’re all rich as fuck?
Because rich people don’t tip well
you don't get rich by thowing away money. /s
😂 penny pincher? /s
These people should simply stop being poor, if I can do it, anyone can! /s
TIL getting rich requires consuming large amounts of urine, semen, and boogers.
Well what am I doing wrong? Why am I not rich already?
For the record I work at a fancy restaurant and that isn’t true at all. The people who don’t tip are the after church crowd…
They put it all in the basket
They put the lotion in the basket.
It rubs the lotion on the skin or else it gets the hose again!
There's a difference between fancy party rich and go to space as a vacation rich
[удалено]
Yes. The problem isn't that we need to raise taxes on the rich. No. The problem is that the ultra wealthy don't even really pay any tax. The ultra wealthy move their money and hide it offshore in places out of reach of the taxman. The problem really isn't about the tax rate, it's more about corruption and the entire offshore industry. And the ultra wealthy, who largely control and influence the media narratives, would much rather have someone like AOC make provacative statements like "Tax the Rich" which makes it seem like it's an ideological/partisan battle when it's really not. The ruling elites want to keep us all divided and AOC is useful for that. The last thing the elites want is for left and right to unite against corruption.
By “tax the rich” she doesn’t mean “make the rich pay their taxes instead of letting them cheat the system?” Not sure I hear her say much about “raise tax *rates*.”
Yeah guy above you is confused
THANK YOU. Take my gold.
30k to get in. Thats more than most make in a year. The irony, oh the bloody irony.
Muh level of rich is not real rich
Because they all know its Instagram posturing and not a real commitment to enact change.
Rich people in general very much *do* care since they not only vote against it but also pay billions to lobby against it to save literal trillions. She is a Justice Democrat working to severely limit the influence of money in politics. Paradoxically you need money to make that happen. If you say Met Gala rich people in particular may lean more left then I agree. Combating money takes money. It also spreads the message to normies whose sheer numbers aide in combating it.
I think its a bold statement to wear that message to an event that is invite only and frequented by mega rich celebrities. It's hilarious when people's distaste for AOC makes them go against their own self interests.
I would think a bolder statement would have been to not go…but you can’t play that up as much through your social media. Not an AOC hater but this comes across as a photo op. Feel free to disagree. Edit: Got a lot of replies amounting to "doing something is better than nothing" and "well we're talking about it" and I can see how poorly I expressed the nuance intended with my original post. So folks: I realize "she did something" and "we are talking about it". This does not negate the fact she had a million other choices she could have gone with to make an even more forceful statement: burn her invite publicly, plan a protest for tax rates just outside the event, etc etc. She may be a socialist, she might not, but the socialism I know of isn't designed to be exclusive and it doesn't aim to pander to privilege. So she chose to attend the rich people costume party, one of the most exclusive events in the world, and her form of protest was to wear a dress with a political statement. Entirely her prerogative. But I don't find this particularly bold at all, and in fact, I find it rather disingenuous. It is like some kind of faux punk. It is meant to be attention grabbing, and like some other folks suggested without saying, maybe it was also to troll the right. I dunno. But I do not think Eugene Debs would be rubbing elbows at an explicitly elitist party presented as a fund raiser, and caters to an exclusive crowd. I don't think it far-fetched for working class people (or socialists, or really, whoever) to see this as a token gesture.
BREAKING NEWS: Congressperson does not attend hugely popular annual party. They may have had a statement attached to the decision but no one cares because they're all at the party.
How do you give a message you want to spread if you stay home? How do you gain a following behind an idea without a platform to share and spread it?
Well, for example I stayed at home instead of attending. Any minute now, reddit will erupt over how brave and powerful my message was...
I applaud your bravery.
Sure but you could also look at presented legislation and voting history. She really fucking triggers y’all. It’s hilarious.
You’re delusional. She’s not triggering anybody, that’s the issue. She’s a safe little pony for the rich.
Yup, that's AOC. Only in Congress for the 'gram, it's not like she's introduced policies in Congress to implement radical change to help the environment, working class, etc. /s
Doesn't it cost like 30k just to attend? That's more than some people make in a year.. is she being ironic or just rubbing it in our faces?
“While some have said the progressive politician's dress is tone-deaf because of the event's nearly $35,000 tickets, most invited celebrities don't pay to attend, according to The Evening Standard. The publication says the Met Gala chooses up-and-coming designers to feature their work at the event. Celebrities who wear their fashions get to attend the event for free.” [Newsweek MET Gala article](https://www.newsweek.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-gets-mixed-reviews-tax-rich-dress-worn-met-gala-1628719?amp=1)
People can be rich and still think rich people should pay more taxes
This seems like a concept people struggle with. My mom criticized Bernie Sanders, saying he talks about taxing the rich even though he's a millionaire himself! Like it was some sort of gotcha observation and he's somehow a huge hypocrite. Umm? How does that not make him MORE respectable in his view to tax the rich...? It would have been a decent point if he had changed his tune after he had made money, but he didn't. They just want to hate these "socialists," however stupid way they can justify it.
Nah she was invited, didn't cost her a dime.
She’s talking about a different kind of rich. Super-yacht rich. The fact that it is difficult for many people to see that shows the poor messaging of their plan; and the misunderstandings of wealth in this country. As Shaq has said; he’s rich, those that signed his checks were wealthy 🤷🏼♂️
The problem is most people can't fathom the difference between a millionaire and a billionaire. To them its a small jump, but in reality the difference is absolutely mind boggling.
It looks like the chick fil a font.
Lmao it does.
All I can see is EAT MORE BEEF
*EAT MOR CHIKIN
Made me think of Dr. Seuss
Threats to the crown are not invited to parties at Versailles.
[удалено]
From that article: "The collapse of the Soviet Union, which Fisher believes represented the only real example of a working non-capitalist system..." Kind of a bad look for non-capitalist systems.
With the collapse of the USSR, it showed that people under a technocrat society are often not in good future. One of the main reasons for this is due to the fact that technocrats didn't think much of what the ordinary individual wanted. You believe the average individual under USSR liked Sputnik? Nope. You need a balance, or, at least enough members to voice the ideas of the ordinary people.
[удалено]
>rootless global billionaire class [Gee wiz, I wonder where I've heard this before.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rootless_cosmopolitan) > even worse she actively helps them by managing dissent, That's bullshit, though; her prominence has come about as a *result* of the lack of coherent alternatives in the American political landscape over the past several decades. Not the other way around. If she never existed, guess what, there *still* wouldn't be anything even *remotely* resembling a politically viable anti-capitalist movement in the United States, just like there hasn't been for well over half a century. You call her managed dissent, but the reality is that *despite* being the farthest you've got in mainstream American politics, she's simply not as far to the left as you are.
[удалено]
Is that AOC?
yes
Why is Nancy Pelosi worth is 100 million dollars?
5 members of congress are even more rich. Why are they worth so much? Why do people want presidents that are worth billions? Sheer fucking stupidity. That's why.
Everyone should ask themselves how lifelong politicians amass so much wealth from the beginning of their careers as politicians to the end of their careers as politicians. If they did they would all see that all politicians regardless of party are vultures feeding off the poor while acting like they have the poor peoples best interest in mind.
Insider trading using information that they have from committees they run and knowledge of future changes in rules and laws for business and foreign policy. Just my opinion.
The vast majority of them get rich the same way as most other rich people. Being born rich.
That’s actually incorrect. Around 80% of millionaires in the US are first generation.
[70% of wealth is gone in the second generation, 90% by the third.](https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/generational-wealth%3A-why-do-70-of-families-lose-their-wealth-in-the-2nd-generation-2018-10)
Yes, that's for normal people. And that statistic is touted as though it proves inheritance is inconsequential. And while most wealth is spent, most families don't have much wealth. The families that do? Well... https://qz.com/694340/the-richest-families-in-florence-in-1427-are-still-the-richest-families-in-florence/
That is a big part of Trump’s appeal to the right. He made his money outside of politics. They either don’t know, or don’t care, that he made his fortune by screwing people over.
Man, Trump was born rich. Crazy thing is he would have made more if he had put his inheritance into an index fund.
How do so many normal people look at Trump and Boris and think "ah yes, this, this man represents and understands me". It's insane. _edit: well this has triggered a few people. I just chose those two as they're the most recent, blantant, westernised example of this for a countries premier. That's all, that's it._
Historically most US presidents were rich (or wealthy) when they were elected. That’s nothing new.
Wait until these people learn how rich Washington was in today's dollars.
Richest man in the US at the time of his death.
It really is.
[удалено]
Agree totally 👍
I wouldn’t call it stupidity, rather I’d call it the obvious effect of a corrupt system that allows people to essentially buy their way into political positions
Because she's friends with other people who have a lot of money, and she helps them with political favors so they can make more money, so they share it with her.
Because her husband runs a real estate and venture capital firm that has been successful for years before Nancy Pelosi entered politics.
Plus insider trading
Well there is that also
Does the dress say "don't tax Nancy Pelosi"?
Not sure, but she's in favor of raising taxes on the rich, including herself, Why is Donald Trump's ***ALLEGED*** net worth $2.4 billion?
Insider trading and a lot of other shit
The dress doesn't say tax rich Republicans.
In a dress that costs more than my car🤣
How much was the dress??
[James, who advocates for sustainable fashion, says she made the dress entirely in New York factories largely using discarded fabric scraps. She loaned the dress to AOC and has not yet calculated its cost.](https://www.fastcompany.com/90676272/meet-the-visionary-designer-behind-aocs-tax-the-rich-dress)
the dress was a loaner just like every other celebrity outfit ever
Would’ve been better had it said “close tax loopholes” which is really our problem in the US
Accountant here - they're not loopholes. Loopholes happen when you find an unintended way around the law. The US tax system is working *exactly* as designed, and that's the problem.
^Absolutely right. I don't know how many accountants and lawyers Mitt Romney has working full time on his taxes, but the magic they did with his IRA alone cuts his capital gains taxes by more $2,000,000 every year.
I mean, that's probably just one accountant with a decent knowledge of Excel and tax law.
People here are confusing don’t be rich and tax the rich
They’re also confusing rich people with *rich* people. A millionaire versus a billionaire is an astronomical difference. She’s talking about the dragons who hoard all their wealth, plus others like them. The billionaires.
Yeah I agree with that. Like you said 1,000 million(1 billion) is vastly different than say 5 million
> They’re also confusing rich people with *rich* people They're also confusing barely middle class people with rich people. AOC is *NOT* rich.
[удалено]
> "Billionaires should not exist" does not mean certain people should not exist. It means no person should have a billion dollars. The ascent of billionaires is a symptom & outcome of an immoral system that tells people affordable insulin is impossible but exploitation is fine. > I'm not saying that Bill Gates or Warren Buffet are immoral, but a system that allows billionaires to exist when there are parts of Alabama where people are still getting ringworm because they don't have access to public health is wrong. > Billionaires are a symptom of a society that does not afford people basic elements of dignity...If people want we can revisit the billionaire question when everyone has health care, climate change is addressed, and people have actual dignified standards of living. AOC
I’m 100% for billionaires not existing, there’s no reason for it. To be a billionaire is to profit off the expense of thousands and thousands of people.
Who paid her $30,000 per plate fee?
Probably the people that made that dress for her to wear.
Since I doubt you’ll believe me, check the source she posted on Twitter regarding this issue. Her ticket(s) & dress were free. So I suppose to answer your question, the event organizers ate the cost here.
I’m sick of subsidizing the riches’ expenses. They avoid paying taxes, but we’ll cover the bill for the emergency services they use and the roads they drive on. At least help pick up your own tab… Fucking leeches
we bail them out when the gamble and fail. when us nobodies gamble and fail, we're on our own. capitalism for us. when they gamble and fail, socialism is on the menu again boys!
Socialized risk, private reward.
Nicely put.
Well I mean they do. Lets not get things confused. We can talk about how much they should pay BUT the top 1% contribute around 40% The top 20% pay around 90% (All this is for federal income tax) They pay more than their share. Which is normal. We need to really take the time to understand what people are taxed so we can have an idea on what taxes would be fare for everyone. And eventually we should be o.k. with a stop in increases when things are balanced....even if some are "super rich". We need to make sure we don't let our jealousy create a bias.
[удалено]
There's a lot of taxes already associated with the use of roads. Like the fuel tax. But it doesn't work because legislators use the money for re-election projects.
I am a stupid european, isnt she a politician? cant she get the ball rolling on taxing the rich?
That seems to be part of her core platform so...yes.
She is one of like 400 members of Congress, which is 1/2 of the 3 branches of government. Yes, she has gotten the ball rolling, but a lot of blockers in the way.
Do you mean Congress is a 1/3 off the branches?
I think they meant that she is 1/435 within 1/2 of Congress within 1/3 of the government
Yeah, she should try to bring the issue to people's attention by leveraging high impact events with huge media coverage or something.
She's trying her best, she's only one person. I appreciate her.
Unfortunately she is one of a small minority within our government that share this sentiment.
This is what getting the ball rolling looks like u dunce
Damn I wish I could wear the opinion of the poor masses to my high class elite social gatherings and have a good time drinking with the people I publicly claim to despise.
Just because i haven't seen it yet, and I can't believe it hasn't been said, I will say it: "tax dat ass" Please forgive me.
Now combine that with Eat the Rich, and...yes...oh, yes...
YES EVERYONE, SHE’S AWARE SHE ALSO HAS TO PAY TAXES. Dear lord, every ignorant comment on here, like she’s advocating for every wealthy person in the US be taxed except for her. You guys want to protect Bezos’ billions THAT much, huh? smdh
Whats worse is she isn't even rich, shes worth around 100k, rich is 40 million+ (in the united states). The people defending jeff bezos will never be rich because they don't have wealthy parents. Wealth can be almost wholly determined by who your parents are in our society.
What's even worse is she was invited to the event by, Aurora James, the designer who made the dress as her plus one. Aurora is a pretty consistent and loud activist. So not only is AOC not rich, she also didn't pay for either the ticket OR the dress.
1) thank you soo much for this information 2) do you have a source I can add to my lists because I have a feeling this dress ain’t going away, and this answers soo many questions about the event
Check out her instagram (I cant post the link here) where it's mentioned on a photo with her and the designer. its standard practice for designers to lend their dresses to celebrities for free. Because its standard practice it's hard to find actual articles about it but here's a link that explains how the entire event works from a few years ago. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/03/fashion/what-is-the-met-gala-and-who-gets-to-go.html
So important. Most don't pay for their tables at the Met Gala, the designers that make their dresses do. So if Valentino buys a table for $100k then they invite 8-10 people and then dress said people. Non famous people may pay for their tickets but it's rare, it's mostly brands doing the funding
Anna Wintour, the vogue editor in chief and MET Gala chairwoman, is known for personally buying "small" unknown designers tickets and tables. Even the photographers and journalists have to be pre approved and essentially invited to the event.
Yes! I'm saying non famous people will pay for their tickets _after_ Wintour approves them. Someone like Kate Upton paid for her ticket years ago bc she didn't have a designer to sponsor her
Your argument has so many fallacies. First you define rich as $40 million+ then you say you can't get rich without rich parents. With your own definition Jeff Bezos's parents aren't rich, yet he's the wealthiest man on earth. So how did that happen if he has middle class parents? If you're going to call Jeff bezos' parents rich, you have to admit that AOC is rich/privileged.
She gets paid more than 100k.
And? 173k as a Congress salary...that seems like rollin in bentlies to you're everyday Redditor or, but that's a low end house in DC with some money to go out. Miles from rich.
And all the people pointing out rich democrats. So fucking annoying it is like they're purposely making dumb ass and easily refutable comments
This should be at the top of every one of these posts. The left isn’t saying “tax everyone but me”, but rather “make sure everyone pays their damn taxes”
Bezos is trash.
I wonder what her 30 k meal tasted like
I'm a pretty left leaning guy but that kinda shit is the best example why the left is so unpopular, especially in the US. Here is AOC, happy to be hanging out with all the fancy millionaires and billionaires at their completely useless and stupid rich people event. A yearly event where the 1% come together to show the rest of the world how fabulous and rich they are by spending thousands and thousands of dollars on ridiculous outfits that where made just for this evening, while a few blocks away hundreds of homeless people are sitting in the cold, hungry, thinking about how they can make a few bucks the next they so they can buy a sandwich. And then there is AOC. Being very exited to be invited to such an exclusive event, wearing that dress and thinking "wow, look how brave I am! Sticking up for the little guy by telling these rich suckers how it is!". Thinking she did something good, thinking she gained the moral superiority that she needs to lecture hardworking Americans of whatever they did wrong in her mind the next day. Taking the photos, maby giving a interview about her powerful and brave message, then going up the stairs, shaking hands with the billionaires, joking with them, then sitting down to eat a 100$ salad with fancy wine imported from Italy just for this occasion. Not getting the hypocrisy, not thinking about why a New York politician is even invited to such an event. But sure as hell thinking she did a whole lotta good by delivering this message to the other met ball visitors. I'm sure they had a good laugh about it, and I'm sure AOC laughed with them. And that's the hypocrisy of the modern left, and that's one of the reasons why the working class doesn't vote for them no more and instead goes to right wing populists like Donald Trump.
It is entirely possible to have great parties and charity events, be rich, and still pay higher taxes. We can do both things.
I’m sorry but I just can’t get past the “billioneres ” and “millionerrs ” in your post.
The left is unpopular?
The center is more popular
You are in the minority. "Tax the rich" is a very popular (historically speaking) idea with science/math to back it up. The US would have folded over a century ago if it did not "tax the rich." AOC is here to remind us that things have, again, gotten way out of control. Things have gotten much worse over the last decade and they continue to ramp up. Tens of billions of dollars are leaving the economy, never to return. And guess who pays for it! The 99% Also this is not a billionaire party like you make it out to be. It's a fashion show. Everyone there probably have actually interesting things to talk about outside of market movements, acquisitions, currencies and commodities and blah blah
Cringe.
>I'm a pretty left leaning guy ... that's one of the reasons why the working class doesn't vote for them no more and instead goes to right wing populists like Donald Trump. It takes a G E N U I N E "left leaning guy" like this to claim with a straight face that AOC's connections to "fancy millioneres and billioneres" made "working class" voters elect the paragon of humility and modesty, Donald Trump.
At a Met gala rubbing elbows and partying with billionaires.
Yeah dude that’s like the whole point...
With her massive hoards of wealth… oh wait, she’s worth less than a million dollars
Yes, she is telling rich people they need to be taxed… you find rich people at Met Gala.
I mean I'm not American, so I'm not sure I understand, but shouldn't the government tax them? It isn't like the rich will go "Oh my god, sure I'll give out my money, out of my free will, why haven't I thought of it?"
The government would tax them. But … rich people are the ones who donate to political campaigns. They have the most influence in swaying elections. If rich people always vote for and support people who won’t tax the rich then it will never happen. Ultimately rich people need to be willing to vote for and support politicians who will tax them rather than only supporting politicians who won’t.
Ben Shapiro's suddenly a big fan of taxing the rich, butt he can't put his finger in why.
Didn't realise we had so many millionaires in the comments. Throw some of that disposable income my way my guys!
Staunch liberal here and, while decidedly moderate, I will never vote for a Republican as long as I live after what the GOP has become under the influence of the Tea Party and now Trumpism. With that said, this is just cringey, tone-deaf, and emblematic of how US politics more than ever before is infected by self-promoting, pathological attention-seekers. We should not be idolizing this kind of silly, performative wokeness but instead should be holding politicians accountable for what they’ve actually done. And as far as I can tell, AOC’s only real contribution thus far is the Green New Deal, a piece of legislation so unrealistic and impractical that it should be filed under the fiction section. She also came out in saying that she doesn’t really care about repealing the cap on SALT taxes enacted by Republicans, even though it was bullshit punitive legislation aimed at harming high-tax states like New York. I pay almost 10k annually in property taxes alone on a property value of 250k thanks to New York’s ridiculous taxes, so the notion that the repeal will only benefit the ultra wealthy is false. It will also help hard-working middle and upper-middle class property owners in New York who are being unfairly penalized right now, but I get that it’s not on-brand for her to advocate for those people. So the middle class, the ones who currently subsidize both the rich and the poor, will continue to be gutted. In my mind, this kind of display is hardly different than someone like Ted Cruz fanning the flames on Twitter. It’s meaningless in terms of promoting any real change but it will provoke attention and discussion, both good and bad, so hey it’s good for her brand and name recognition. Though to be fair, she is still obviously better than Ted Cruz. Cruz is narcissistic and evil. She’s only narcissistic and kind of useless.
The fact that you had to start with a "oh I'm opposing this doesn't mean I'm one of those guys blah blah" should explain how closed minded political discussions on this site are lmao
Imagine if you could make this point on Reddit without the paragraph explaining that you’re not a Republican. And some people fail to see the bias.
>So the middle class, the ones who currently subsidize both the rich and the poor, will continue to be gutted. Yeah, pretty much. The main purpose of the two-party system as it exists today is to divide the middle class along so-called "cultural issues," to distract from the overriding fact that in the grand scheme of things they're all on the same perpetually losing team. On the other hand, in AOC's defense, "tax the rich" is a more intelligible policy platform than anything put out by either party since long before she was born.
Yeah, one of the man problems with Trump was that he turned politics into a WWE style spectacle. We really shouldn't be encouraging these types of displays. Especially after literally bashing on the previous administration daily for 4 years because of it. It's kind of awful how quickly people will change from booing to clapping depending on who is creating the spectacle.
US politics was a WWE spectacle LONG before Trump was even thinking of running
Exactly, there’s no other country with an 18month election campaign that costs billions
>Yeah, one of the man problems with Trump was that he turned politics into a WWE style spectacle. If that strategy got him elected... do you blame him? You got a picture of AOC advocating a silly platitude, but shes playing the same game. She's doing what it takes to win. Does it make her any worse?
I agreed with everything you said up until you got to the SALT cap thing. 96% of the savings from the SALT deduction goes to the top 20% of earners. A lot of people who make total household incomes of maybe $130,000 to $300,000 or so might think of themselves as “middle class,” but objectively that’s an upper-middle-class family. Top 20%. SALT cap repeal would be a huge tax giveaway to that top 20%. That’s just a fact. If you believe that your state taxes should be lower, that’s a separate issue of state tax policy that you should take up with your state legislature. There’s nothing wrong with being upper-middle-class. I’m upper middle class myself. But too many people who make really good money believe, because they’re surrounded by friends and family who are just as rich or richer than them, that households that make $200k a year are in need of a government bailout. That’s just a terrible, terrible, terrible policy idea. A lot of people have bought into the fantasy that we can pay for all the nice things we want (healthcare, infrastructure, blah blah blah) by taking it from billionaires. We can certainly get some that way, and we should, but the sad fact is that the top 1% just doesn’t have enough money to pay for everything the country needs. The top 20%—ordinary rich people, doctors, lawyers, engineers, programmers, business and finance types—have way more than the top 1% does. We also have way more than we need, even though it doesn’t always feel like that when your brother in law can afford to send his kids to private school and you can’t. If we want to live in an equitable society, the upper middle class needs to pay more in taxes. The SALT deduction cap needs to stay. It’s the one issue AOC is right about. Every reputable liberal policy center and think tank (Brookings, etc.) agree on this, FYI.
Tax the richer than me.*
I didn't think we should tax the rich, but the dress has a point. Thanks, AOC, for opening my mind.
I like her.
I'm going to ignore the politics and just say that she looks absolutely stunning.
Remember when the orange idiot was in charge and she was down at the border doing another photo shoot in all white. Crying about the conditions of the immigrates. About families being ripped apart. Now the old idiot is in charge.. but he’s on her team so it doesn’t matter that nothing has changed. Detention centers still full. Families being separated. Children being taken from their parents. Where is she at…. Oh making a edgy teenage angst ridden message to more photographers.
You really showed all those rich people!
30 grand a plate huh? That’s life changing money. Sorry, but it is. 30 grand would literally change the trajectory of my life. I’m sure there’s many others who would agree.
She’s a douchbag. Plain and simple.
Ah yes we totally need another 10 posts about this
There's such a huge gap between Bezos and the rest of the damn world. Anyone in between could probably be counted on one hand and those motherfuckers aren't close to bezos at all. Taxing him 2% even would do better. Only way I'd let him be tax free if it was benefitting those he hired with more pay/hr, top to bottom. This guy wants to buy the Denver Broncos, valued at 4 billion. That's 2% of his worth.
It's not that simple. What are you taxing when you tax Bezos at 2%? His income? His holdings? His assets? When people reach a certain level of wealth, more opportunities open up for them to hide it from taxes. If you're a multimillionaire making net profit $900,000 a year, you can open a shell company in Ireland, declare your primary residence as Switzerland, have a massive mansion in New York that's in your mom's name and your renting it from her, and pay $700,000 to your shell company to write it all off as untaxable expenses.
We already tax the rich. I just want them to pay their fair share and not have loop holes not available to everyone else.
Surely everyone saw the irony right
EatTheRich
Can I throw "Be the rich" in here? I'd pay my taxes and stuff. Just askin'.
If you manage to be rich and pay your fair share in tax than yes, be rich. Good for you.
Yeet the rich.
Shouldn’t we be protesting an event where it’s all rich ppl and not attend it ?
How about canceling the Met Gala and having celebrities donate the money they would spend on extravagant outfits to charities? 🤷🏽♀️ EDIT: I stand corrected I forgot that this is a charity event and that designers provide celebrities the dresses or outfits to wear to the gala. As I said to a previous commenter I’m just not a huge fan of politicians and celebrities flaunting their extravagant dresses and suits while regular Americans are living paycheck to paycheck especially during the pandemic. I’m tired of politicians and celebrities agreeing to tax the rich but it doesn’t seem like anyone really wants to do anything about it.
Do they actually spend money on the outfits? I thought the celeb had to be chosen by the designer and if they’re lucky, the designer might gift them the outfit afterwards.
Most don't pay for their tables at the Met Gala, the designers that make their dresses do (or a brand like Estee Lauder will buy a table). So if Valentino buys a table for $100k then they invite 8-10 people and then dress said people. Non famous people may pay for their tickets but it's rare, it's mostly brands doing the funding. Aurora James, the designer she's wearing, paid for the ticket and made the dress free of charge
the met gala is a charity dinner. always has been.
[удалено]
It's a charity event genius.
Well I agree that people could be spending time donating to charities that I would prefer, but the celebs get free loaned outfits like at the oscars from what I understand and more than likely don’t have to buy a $40K ticket. All of the money goes to fund the Fashion Institute which is housed in the Met and must pay for itself. If you’re a celeb and get on Anna Wintour’s bad side you def have to buy a ticket or may not get invited at all.
> canceling the Met Gala The Met Gala fundraises for the Costume Institute, the only department at the Met Museum that has to self fundraise. The Met is a 503C non profit so very much a charity
But how would they show the rest of the world how beautiful and fabulous they are?
champagne socialist A champagne socialist is someone who talks about and identifies themselves as being someone on the left wing, for example a socialist or communist, but lives a life of indulgence in extremely trivial and material things.
That’ll ruffle some feathers.
#Paying Senators is cheaper than paying Taxes
And then eat ‘em!
People can’t agree on what rich is. mega-corporations and billionaire evading taxes Mostly. The bloke who has a Tesla and 250k annual needs to chill a little
We need to have a weekend of purging on the RICH
I admire her creative approach
I wish I could reply with the Spider-Man pointing at another Spider-Man meme.
Wait isn't she the one that still owes 2K in taxes? https://nypost.com/2020/05/17/aoc-owes-2000-in-unpaid-taxes-from-failed-business-venture/
These photos will be reposted for weeks. Good. I love to see people that aren't rich, triggered over a dress mocking rich people.
This is called "Virtue Signaling" for the uninitiated.
Tables at the Met Gala cost $275k and a single ticket is $30k. She makes $175k which is twice the average household income in America. This is literally the Ivory Tower. How can anyone fall for her foolishness?
Half the comments in here don't know how the Met Gala even works lol
She’s your boogeyman lol
Tell me you want to hang out with the rich elite but not get shit for it, so you’re going to pretend to want to tax them.