What to do about Jeff?

[caveman1917]

No, he wasn't, not in the real world. Apparently you never really read any Marx so you should be aware that there are an awful lot of false quotations attributed to him.

Apparently you never really read any Marx other than his main books, so you should be aware that he was indeed quite capable of being polemic.

That you willingly spread the lies of anti-communists makes me wonder what your intentions are.

A ridiculous accusation, please share how you have determined whether I quoted it to "willingly spread the lies of anti-communists."

 

[dann]

Did I claim that Marx wasn't capable of being polemic? What I wrote was that he wasn't stupid!
You actually are spreading the lies of anti-communists! Are you saying that you don't do it deliberately?


ETA There's a lot of this **** on the internet!

 

[Darat]

For each of the items I talk about in the post you quoted, please name the legal entities that own that item, and how that ownership works to minimize his personal tax liability. Thanks in advance.

When you demonstrate the facts behind your initial claims of his tax situation I'll consider linking to the many on line reports of how his wealth is structured....

 

[theprestige]

Marx was stupid, though.

 

[caveman1917]

Did I claim that Marx wasn't capable of being polemic? What I wrote was that he wasn't stupid!

What you said was that he would never even dream of saying that.

You actually are spreading the lies of anti-communists! Are you saying that you don't do it deliberately?

I hadn't verified the quote because I assumed it probably came from one of the sarcastic and/or polemic bits littered throughout his minor articles and private correspondence.

The question isn't whether the quote can be traced to him, you've already shown that it can't, but whether he would have said something like that. I'm still with yes on that one, more in a sarcastic or polemic fashion that an actual reasoned proposal, but I can definitely imagine him say it.

 

[dann]

Marx was stupid, though.

No, he wasn't. Your post is, however.

 

[dann]

... but I can definitely imagine him say it.

So can all the anti-communists, apparently, but the weird thing is that they need to invent stuff like that! They wouldn't have to do so if they could find it in his actual writing.

 

[Elagabalus]

My Amazon prime package has not even shipped yet! And I ordered it 6 days ago! Clearly Jeff must step down!

 

[arthwollipot]

*Looks at thread title and initial post quoting his PERSONAL wealth, then back again at the above quote*

WUT?

I think it's pretty obvious that his personal wealth and his company's wealth are tightly interconnected.

 

[caveman1917]

So can all the anti-communists, apparently, but the weird thing is that they need to invent stuff like that! They wouldn't have to do so if they could find it in his actual writing.

Some inventions are more believable than others. Many of them are obviously inventions, such as that "Revolutionary Holocaust where the weak must make way" one, even if we crank up the sarcasm and polemics on Marxist philosophy we'd never get anywhere close to that. But the rope one isn't all that unbelievable, if we crank up the sarcasm and polemics then that's something he may very well have said sometime.

 

[dann]

Now that you know that it's concocted by an anti-communist (and now has been distributed all over the internet attributed to Marx by other anti-communists), consider the intention:
They're trying to convince capitalists that the Marxist revolution intends to kill them, warning them that they should under no circumstances do business with Marxists. If they do, they're suicidal.
Your readiness to buy into the lie, i.e. to believe that this is a Marxist (or Leninist) idea, isn't due to Marxist polemics. It's due to your own bias, which becomes apparent in your sig line about devastation, destruction and annihilation.
Marx (and Lenin) wanted to do away with capitalism because of the way it affected working and unemployed people's lives, whereas you seem to dream primarily of revenge and misinterpret Marx accordingly.

 

[theprestige]

I think it's pretty obvious that his personal wealth and his company's wealth are tightly interconnected.

What does that even mean? It's not like his personal wealth is so tightly connected to Amazon that it gets taxed as if it were Amazon's wealth - nor could it be, really.

Bezos's taxable wealth comes from the sale of stock he owns. The value of the stock is connected to the value of his company, but I don't think of that as a "tight interconnection". And possibly (I don't know for sure) from income he receives from the company for work he does for the company. This is essentially the same as any other employee. Again, not what I would consider a tight interconnection.

And there doesn't seem to be any connection at all between the tax strategy of Amazon and the tax strategy of Jeff Bezos personally. It's not clear to me what discussion of Bezos's personal tax strategy actually has to do with the topic.

 

[Elagabalus]

...It's not clear to me what discussion of Bezos's personal tax strategy actually has to do with the topic.

TBF, the topic of Karl Marx has managed to strongarm its way into the discussion so ...

"Jeff Bezos's personal tax strategy ...

Come on down!"

 

[caveman1917]

Now that you know that it's concocted by an anti-communist (and now has been distributed all over the internet attributed to Marx by other anti-communists), consider the intention:
They're trying to convince capitalists that the Marxist revolution intends to kill them, warning them that they should under no circumstances do business with Marxists. If they do, they're suicidal.
Your readiness to buy into the lie, i.e. to believe that this is a Marxist (or Leninist) idea, isn't due to Marxist polemics. It's due to your own bias, which becomes apparent in your sig line about devastation, destruction and annihilation.
Marx (and Lenin) wanted to do away with capitalism because of the way it affected working and unemployed people's lives, whereas you seem to dream primarily of revenge and misinterpret Marx accordingly.

You seem to dream primarily of "doing business with" the bourgeoisie. Tell me, what kind of anti-capitalist revolutionary (whether it be Marx, Lenin, Parsons or Bakunin - since you felt the need to bring my sig line into it) gets his panties in a knot over the thought that the bourgeoisie might not "do business with" them? If you think Marxism is a way of doing business with the bourgeoisie then I'd posit you are the one misinterpreting Marx according with your own bias.

ETA: Since you seem so concerned with anti-communist inventions of fake quotes and brought my sig line into it. Here's a fake quote the Chicago Tribune attributed to Lucy Parsons:

Let every dirty, lousy tramp arm himself with a revolver or a knife, and lay in wait on the steps of the palaces of the rich and stab or shoot the owners as they come out. Let us kill them without mercy, and let it be a war of extermination.

You know what the response of Parsons and the other anarchists was when this fake quote was attributed to her? They owned it, recuperated it and started using it as if true. A bit like how gay people recuperate the term faggot. You know what they didn't do? Get all upset that it would make their position unappealing to the bourgeoisie who might not "do business with them" anymore.

 

[kellyb]

Stop fighting, comrades.

Hopefully we all agree that the states should "internationalize" Amazon and seize most of Jeff's assets for redistribution, at least?

 

[Myriad]

Stop fighting, comrades.

Hopefully we all agree that the states should "internationalize" Amazon and seize most of Jeff's assets for redistribution, at least?

A living minimum wage law is the same thing as that, I suppose.

 

[kellyb]

A living minimum wage law is the same thing as that, I suppose.

Works for me, but I wasn't really joking about also taking most of his assets/wealth. Money is power, and that is far too much for any one person to have.

 

[Venom]

What an entertaining third page.

 

[HarryHenderson]

Marxism....and this is not a new observatation...works a lot like a religion.
Infallible source of all wisdom, blind obedience to dogma a virtue,violent persecution of non beleivers and heretics,and a willingness to indulge in mass slaughter because God..or in this case The Party..tells you it is necessary.

When I first read this I just laughed a little (internally) and thought surely there can't be anyone on this quasi-mature, well seasoned and mostly savvy though left leaning forum who thinks Marx was right about much more than what goes up must come down, and then just a few posts later...

Did I claim that Marx wasn't capable of being polemic? What I wrote was that he wasn't stupid!...

I'm always amazed at the people who genuinely think Marx was on to something. And "not stupid" is only one opinion. Regardless, consider yourself amazing.

I'm not a tax accountant. Don't ask for details from me. But it is pretty common knowledge that the hyper-rich don't pay a fair share of taxes. Take that however you will. Ignore it if you like. I don't care.

The sky must be falling because I agree with you even though you're not a tax accountant arthwollipot. Through many 'legitimate' government acts intended solely to protect their seeming insatiable greed, the ultra wealthy have been allowed by law to pay less than their proper share in taxes.

[Judge Bjorn Bjork] "What's that, you have so much cash Mr. Bezos that simply counting it has turned into a cost overrun logistical nightmare and therefore you can't afford to pay much of it in taxes or you'll go broke? Well okay, but just this one time. Until you get back on your feet. Next!"

TBF, the topic of Karl Marx has managed to strongarm its way into the discussion so ...

"Jeff Bezos's personal tax strategy ...

Come on down!"

Jeff Bezo's personal tax strategy was born a poor...ly spelled note his accountant had written to him about that strategy. It said simply "SELL! SELL! S3LL!" And that's what he did, starting with copies of the book 'How To Sell Anything To Anyone With A Dial Tone'. He then used that money to buy a big river somewhere and the rest is history. He files a basic 1040 EZ every year and always deducts for his service iguana Rufus. He leads a very simple life and will spend all that other ultra cash later after he's dead and has eternity to finally enjoy it.

 

[eeyore1954]

Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
I'm not a tax accountant. Don't ask for details from me. But it is pretty common knowledge that the hyper-rich don't pay a fair share of taxes. Take that however you will. Ignore it if you like. I don't care.

The sky must be falling because I agree with you even though you're not a tax accountant arthwollipot. Through many 'legitimate' government acts intended solely to protect their seeming insatiable greed, the ultra wealthy have been allowed by law to pay less than their proper share in taxes.

Depends upon what you consider to be a fair share.

The top .1% do typically pay the highest rate.
https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2016-update/
Table 8. 27.67%

Or The top 1 percent paid a greater share of individual income taxes (39.5 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (29.1 percent).