Millionaires are like unicorns! Oh and they dont employ anyone

I'm going to go for 'the win' on this one - Steve Wynn that is. Every quarterly earnings call, Steve waxes poetic on some political matter or other. This past quarter, it happened to be Occupy Wall Street, and he touched on the concept of 'tax the rich'. Given that Wynn is widely regarded as the best casino operator in the world, his thoughts are probably worth at least a quick read.

Full text: http://seekingalpha.com/article/300720-wynn-resorts-ceo-discusses-q3-20…

SteveWynn:

There comes a moment when the population realizes that it has to stop, and sometimes it takes a form of tax the rich people, which is a reflection more of a lack of understanding of how the economy works. Rich people are now being defined by the administration as people who make $1 million. Well, most of the businesses in America, other than giant corporations, are paying taxes under Chapter S, partnerships or individual proprietorships. So somebody shows that they've made $3 million or $2 million this year, and they paid personal taxes on that money. They subtract the cost of living and then what's left, after -- and that does not show that probably 25% or 30% of their profits are tied up in accounts receivable or inventory, stuff that they can't spend or get their hands on, but to support their business and their employment. And then they take whatever is left, these so-called millionaires, and they open up another shop or another office. And that, that is the only known engine of growth in the United States of America. And we have an administration that is fanning the fires that this is somehow undeserved, profligate millionaires, and it is worse than hypocrisy. It is totally dishonest. It represents by young people who don't know the difference, simple misunderstanding and lack of understanding of how the economy works or what's going on in America. But if it's a politician that does it or a union leader, then it represents something much more pernicious. It represents a deliberate misleading of the public. And I think that Americans are waking up to this. And it's taking the form of anger and dissatisfaction with the government. And I think that's probably just right, because until there is a change, until this all stops, it's only going to get worse. No matter what anybody says in some fancy speech, even if it's a President, it is going to get worse. People say we're angry at the government for not compromising both sides. Well, we don't really have a situation that lends itself to what reasonable people would call compromise. We've got a situation that requires a change. That is to say one side is right here and the other side is wrong. You cannot sustain these deficits. You cannot undercut the people that form the jobs and create the employment in this country.

Wynn actually has it wrong--the Obama administration defines as rich anyone who earns $250k per year. Actually, to be more precise, the Obama administration defines as "millionaires" and "billionaires" anyone who earns $250k per year. Because we all know that $250,000 = $1,000,000,000 according to Democrat math.

Rich people create some of the jobs. They also spend money on things like 100 hooker parties and Ferarris that contribute nothing to the middle class. The rich get more out of the system than anyone, so I think the current trend of some wealthy people being misers is pretty shameful. There ARE some rich people that generate so much wealth for themselves and others that they aren't paid enough and deserve more.

(by rich/wealthy, I mean people with millions of dollars or more, not the pissant $100K that fancy themselves to somehow have some kind of influence)

Ilooking at both sides to this argument and there's more than the left/right battle of class warfare v capitalism...this thing called common fucking sense is absent. Why not just increase revenue and decrease expenditures? That makes sense in my mind...why is this so fucking difficult??

Warren Buffet doesn't employ anybody. Does he? Neither does Bill Gates or Larry Page.

To be clear, I don't advocate raising taxes, but I'm also not going to sit back and listen to bullshit arguments against raising them.

UFOinsider, with all due respect, you're transparently wrong in your assessment about the rich. You said that spending money on Ferraris does nothing for the middle class. I'm sorry, but who exactly builds and sells the Ferrari? You think Bill Gates builds the parts for a Ferrari or works on the manufacturing line? What if you put a 1000% tax on Ferraris or made it illegal to purchase them? That wouldn't hurt the wealthy, that would hurt the person on the manufacturing line.

If a rich person buys a Ferrari, how does this not benefit everyone. The people who make it, the guy who sells it, the person who owns the dealership, the people who detail the car, the guy who owns the dealership and makes money selling the cars buys real estate or employs cleaners or donates to charity, etc.

Everyone benefits. Money doesn't dead end. Someone makes the items or provides the service.

We do not live in a world of finite wealth. If a CEO is paid a trillion dollars, it does not effect me or my value. I fail to see the point people make when they compare how much a CEO is paid compared to the average worker. As if some fairy should take money from the CEO and give it to someone else.

If is a criminal logic. People who rob tell themselves that they need something more than the other person. The CEO is paid when the shareholders think is appropriate. The mail room guy is paid when is thought to be appropriate.

Agreed. I've made it a point to start following politics less in the new year and to get less angry about it. It's such a mess and a time suck, nothing good comes from it.

Your point on pay disparity for CEOs and the average employee is where it's at. We'd be better off if things were a bit more moderated all around. Instead of taking home $40 million as CEO, take home $25 million and pay employees more so there is more money to flow through the economy at large. In the long run, this type of thinking is better, but it's not something that can easily be engrained in society at this point.

This is absurd reasoning. Either the companies reallocate more of their earnings to the employee or we tax it from them and allocate it to a federal blackhole that has created enormous wealth for the Washington, D.C. area without showing discernable returns for the rest of the nation?

This is what you leftists don't seem to understand--taxing the rich only leads to greater wealth concentrated in Washington, D.C. My branch services D.C. area clients. They are fantastically wealthy on a whole because of this mindless belief that taxing the rich somehow ends up in fairness or better quality of life for everyone else.

Are CEOs paid too much? Yes! Does taxing them and allocating that wealth to a federal contractor in DC improve the lives of people Mississippi or Connecticut? If you believe that than I've got some oceanfront property to sell you in Arizona.

CEO wages are probably too high, but they should not be redirected to other employees. The wages should be cut and the difference given back to shareholders. Workers are paid what the market says they are worth. This ain't a charity.

Lets also throw in a caveat to all this; not all CEOs are created equal. CEO's that are also founders tend to drive more value than 'serial exectives' the jump from one C suite to another.

The earnings of a company are the property of the shareholders. If CEO compensation is deemed too high, the excess wages should be returned to the rightful owners, the investors in the business. If a worker fees that they are not compensated according to their market worth, they should go elsewhere and seek employment.

Governments to alter the economic landscape, without a doubt. We are all players within the framework that is set for us by law creating bodies. The problem is there are unintended consequences that cannot be foreseen. This is where things go wrong.

1) This is exactly why big government is bad. Those with influence will push rules that benefit themselves. Everyone is included in this, not only big business.

2) I frankly do not see the lower class winning any battles. The world has changed. Automation does the work that unskilled labor once did and right now, Chinese labor is cheaper than investing in machines. This will only increase.

We live in an information age where education and service is valued. The idea that the proletariat is going to rise up against the machine and strike back is rather comical. Once could argue that these uprisings around the world only worked because the USA and western world supported them. We've seen how successful the people have been at revolting when the USA doesn't give a shit (Syria).

Unfortunately, education is key. People need to be smart, hard working and inventive. The day of coast through school and expecting a middle class life is gone, as it should be.