3 ms·

> Because unearned income is a lot harder to make. You realize that 50k salary is rather close to the median individual income in the US, right? Why should th

> Because unearned income is a lot harder to make. You realize that 50k salary is rather close to the median individual income in the US, right? Why should the fact that you've got 800k making money for you mean that you should be taxed less than someone that earned their 50k through wages and tips? Edit: Another way to think about it: Both the investor and the wage earner added value to their respective markets which was valued by their markets at 50k over the year. Why should one of these market actors be taxed lower than the other?

chii 9y ago
> Why should one of these market actors be taxed lower than the other? my prevailing theory is the common belief that an investor's money brings in more economic knock-on effects, and the $50k earned by the wage earner is less "powerful". in order to incentivise the investor, they are given a tax break. this isn't helped by the fact that those in position to make this sort of tax law are also beneficiaries of said law.
tensor_rank_0 9y ago
> Why should the fact that you've got 800k making money for you mean that you should be taxed less than someone that earned their 50k through wages and tips? the lower rate of taxation incentivizes one to invest that money in legit investments, rather than spend it on discretionary consumption or invest it in an illicit vehicle that provides an untaxed return. > Why should one of these market actors be taxed lower than the other? I personally don't think they should but another way of looking at it is that people usually have to work (the enormous pile of cash came from someone somewhere, even if it wasn't the person who has it now). so theres no incentive for the government to cut the worker a tax break. but when you have money in the bank you can do many things with it. a lower capital gains tax allows the government to earn some revenue on the money and helps keep that person from spending it all on fun stuff and driving up the cost of resources with 800k worth of bids.

chii 9y ago

> Why should one of these market actors be taxed lower than the other? my prevailing theory is the common belief that an investor's money brings in more economic knock-on effects, and the $50k earned by the wage earner is less "powerful". in order to incentivise the investor, they are given a tax break. this isn't helped by the fact that those in position to make this sort of tax law are also beneficiaries of said law.

tensor_rank_0 9y ago

> Why should the fact that you've got 800k making money for you mean that you should be taxed less than someone that earned their 50k through wages and tips? the lower rate of taxation incentivizes one to invest that money in legit investments, rather than spend it on discretionary consumption or invest it in an illicit vehicle that provides an untaxed return. > Why should one of these market actors be taxed lower than the other? I personally don't think they should but another way of looking at it is that people usually have to work (the enormous pile of cash came from someone somewhere, even if it wasn't the person who has it now). so theres no incentive for the government to cut the worker a tax break. but when you have money in the bank you can do many things with it. a lower capital gains tax allows the government to earn some revenue on the money and helps keep that person from spending it all on fun stuff and driving up the cost of resources with 800k worth of bids.