The Meerkat Responds: Those Poor Billionaires

Time for something a little bit different. Recently, Tom of Citizen Tom and I had a brief debate about Donald Trump’s self-described Big Beautiful Bill, over at Insanity Bytes. Rather than clog up a third-party site with this, I figured I would ponder some of Tom’s general messaging (such as his unwavering adherence to a system of corporate greed that has done untold damage to this world).

Tom has regularly rejected the idea of more taxes on the wealthy, on the grounds that they A: already pay a lot of tax and B: I want to see the government spend other people’s money, which is unfair.

Let’s look at these two points.

Do the Wealthy Pay Their Share?

If we take a look at the wealthiest people in the USA, we see the top 10 have a combined wealth of $1.548 trillion. Granted, some of this will be tied up in stock, property etc, but no matter how you slice it, they have staggering sums of money at their disposal. Do they need to horde so much wealth? Is it really wrong to think that maybe, just maybe, they are not paying their fair share, not least of all when as many as 38 millions Americans live below the poverty line, in what is supposedly the most powerful country on earth? That’s 11.6% of the population, and that’s not considering those who are close to the line either.

The other matter to consider here is that I’m only focusing on the top 10. The top 400 are worth an incredible $5.4 trillion.

If 25% of that figure was taxed, it would raise $1.35 trillion. What might $1.35 trillion afford?

Well, it’s estimated to cost $20 billion to end homelessness in the USA. You’d still have $1.33 trillion left.

To bring every US household out of poverty, it’s estimated to cost $168 billion. You’d have $1.162 trillion left.

That’s two serious problems, which are both fixable, and you’d still have more than a trillion dollars to put to use. The billionaires would still remain billionaires.

What is lacking here is not the money, it is the will. The people at the top would prefer to keep their wealth for themselves. They could comfortably afford to pay their employees much better wages, but that would chip into their billions, and we can’t have that now can we? instead, we are fed lies about inflation, and the bogeyman of socialism is waved in our faces (often conflated with communism for good measure). This ensures that the wealthy – who are heavily in bed with Trump and his cronies – can maintain their positions of privilege and exploitation, without anyone batting an eye (and to fair, it’s not just Trump and his Republican lapdogs, successive Democrat governments are a part of this too, despite dog-whistle claims the Democrats are somehow Marxists).

Is it Unfair to Spend Other People’s Money?

Taxation is fundamentally about governments spending public money. It is unavoidable. How else might a government raise funds for, well, anything? Those who object to government spending also tend to be quite selective with this. Are GOP supporters objecting to ICE receiving extra public funds, or this is absolutely fine, because it’s something they like? Why not do what so many of the conservative right advocate, and privatise ICE? After all, governments can’t be trusted with public funds can they? Why not turn everything over to private contractors, since privatisation is so good.

People talk of robbing Peter to pay Paul, and that is ironically quite true. The poor are often expected to shoulder the greatest burden, so that the rich can be coddled and protected. Those who complain, and become upset that the idea that having billionaires pay more tax, have allowed themselves to become thoroughly indoctrinated by a system that loves money and power more than actually helping those in need.

What of Charity, and the Goodwill of Humanity?

What of it? Charities are important, but their existence highlights just how badly the poorest in society are treated by those in power. There should not be a requirement for homelessness charities in the USA (or in the UK for that matter), because the resources are there to resolve this problem, with a lot of money to spare. Again, it comes down to will, and greed. We cannot entrust the well-being of humanity to the chance that the billionaires will take pity on the poor, especially when the politicians they support have no interest in meaningful change.

Concluding Thoughts

The conservative, religious right desires a better world, but they wish to accomplish this by doing absolutely nothing of significance to achieve it. They clutch at pearls, repeating worn-out mantras. Instead, they repeat the same mistakes, advocate for the same broken policies, then wonder why nothing changes.

Back to The Meerkat Responds