4 ms·

To be fair, the accumulated wealth of the rich person has already been taxed.

dragonwriter 9y ago
The accumulation of wealth (income) has been, the accumulated wealth (property) has not (except insofar as they wealth is held in asset classes subject to property taxes.) Whether income alone, property alone, or some (and if so, what) particular combination of those two should be taxed is a matter of some debate.
- toasterlovin 9y ago
  You have to buy assets. The income used to buy them has already been taxed. Then, whenever those assets generate further income, that additional income gets taxed. You can quibble about what the tax rates should be, but I was responding to somebody who made it sound like wealthy people pay no taxes, which is an utter misrepresentation of the situation.
  - NervousTechno 9y ago
    > I was responding to somebody who made it sound like wealthy people pay no taxes, which is an utter misrepresentation of the situation. Who? Because that didn't happen.
  - mistermann 9y ago
    > but I was responding to somebody who made it sound like wealthy people pay no taxes, which is an utter misrepresentation of the situation I wish you were right, however: https://globalnews.ca/news/3773729/richmond-incomes-downtown-eastside/ https://globalnews.ca/news/3773729/richmond-incomes-downtown... A huge percentage of recent sales are to overseas investors (untaxed money), most of the appreciation wealth is accumulated by people who bought > 10 years ago, so no tax as it is their primary residence. So even though it seems hard to believe, in fact the majority of the money in this system is untaxed. And if you're not familiar with the downtown eastside: https://www.straight.com/news/847631/photos-three-months-downtown-eastside-fentanyl-crisis-grows-bad-worse https://www.straight.com/news/847631/photos-three-months-dow...
    - toasterlovin 9y ago
      I find it hard to complain too much about untaxed wealth in the form of primary residences. This is a vehicle that is available to vast swathes of the American & Canadian public. As such, it doesn’t really bolster the argument that wealthy people somehow pay less taxes, which is what I was responding to.
      - mistermann 9y ago
        Does this bolster the argument? https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/3ddbwb/vancouver-dirt-now-earns-twice-as-much-as-all-of-the-citys-workers-combined https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/3ddbwb/vancouver-dirt-now... In case the logic isn't obvious: If you own a house, you are wealthy. Houses earn more than wages. No taxes are paid on capital gains of primary residence. Why should I have to pay higher taxes because I worked my ass off in school and continue to work my ass off, but someone who lucked into winning the modern day Canadian lottery gets a free ride? The legislation wasn't written with this scenario in mind I can tell you that for sure. Our historic social contracts are starting to break down, if the state doesn't uphold it's end of the bargain, I don't see why I should uphold my end.
        toasterlovin 9y ago
        I know plenty of non-wealthy, middle and working class people (born to middle and working class parents) who own houses. They aren't wealthy because they still have a mortgage for most of the value of the house. They may be wealthy in 30 years when their mortgage is paid off, but they aren't now. Wealthy citizens of the U.S. and Canada all had to pay income taxes on the money they used to buy the assets they own. People who are wealthy enough to get by entirely on income generating assets were probably at one time in the top income tax bracket, which means they forked over about 50% of their income to the government. Which, btw, is a much higher percentage rate than people in the lower tax brackets. So, do wealthy people have it easier than non-wealthy people? Yes. But they had to earn an unbelievable amount of money (since they had to pay half of it in taxes) to get to that point. So maybe it's not actually that unfair. And, since high earners pay a higher tax rate, maybe it's actually kinda fair.
DamnYuppie 9y ago
I believe taxation on capital gains from investments is much less then on salary. Also another fun game the wealthy can play is they can fund a company with large sums of capital. Then make themselves officers of the company. Then the cars, houses, flights, and clothing budgets are all expenses of the company. So they personally pay no taxes and the "company" can write them off as a lose for the year.
mistermann 9y ago
If it was earned in Canada, which is increasingly not the case. How much, the government says it doesn't know. Funny that.

The accumulation of wealth (income) has been, the accumulated wealth (property) has not (except insofar as they wealth is held in asset classes subject to property taxes.) Whether income alone, property alone, or some (and if so, what) particular combination of those two should be taxed is a matter of some debate.

toasterlovin 9y ago
You have to buy assets. The income used to buy them has already been taxed. Then, whenever those assets generate further income, that additional income gets taxed. You can quibble about what the tax rates should be, but I was responding to somebody who made it sound like wealthy people pay no taxes, which is an utter misrepresentation of the situation.
- NervousTechno 9y ago
  > I was responding to somebody who made it sound like wealthy people pay no taxes, which is an utter misrepresentation of the situation. Who? Because that didn't happen.
- mistermann 9y ago
  > but I was responding to somebody who made it sound like wealthy people pay no taxes, which is an utter misrepresentation of the situation I wish you were right, however: https://globalnews.ca/news/3773729/richmond-incomes-downtown-eastside/ https://globalnews.ca/news/3773729/richmond-incomes-downtown... A huge percentage of recent sales are to overseas investors (untaxed money), most of the appreciation wealth is accumulated by people who bought > 10 years ago, so no tax as it is their primary residence. So even though it seems hard to believe, in fact the majority of the money in this system is untaxed. And if you're not familiar with the downtown eastside: https://www.straight.com/news/847631/photos-three-months-downtown-eastside-fentanyl-crisis-grows-bad-worse https://www.straight.com/news/847631/photos-three-months-dow...
  - toasterlovin 9y ago
    I find it hard to complain too much about untaxed wealth in the form of primary residences. This is a vehicle that is available to vast swathes of the American & Canadian public. As such, it doesn’t really bolster the argument that wealthy people somehow pay less taxes, which is what I was responding to.
    - mistermann 9y ago
      Does this bolster the argument? https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/3ddbwb/vancouver-dirt-now-earns-twice-as-much-as-all-of-the-citys-workers-combined https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/3ddbwb/vancouver-dirt-now... In case the logic isn't obvious: If you own a house, you are wealthy. Houses earn more than wages. No taxes are paid on capital gains of primary residence. Why should I have to pay higher taxes because I worked my ass off in school and continue to work my ass off, but someone who lucked into winning the modern day Canadian lottery gets a free ride? The legislation wasn't written with this scenario in mind I can tell you that for sure. Our historic social contracts are starting to break down, if the state doesn't uphold it's end of the bargain, I don't see why I should uphold my end.
      - toasterlovin 9y ago
        I know plenty of non-wealthy, middle and working class people (born to middle and working class parents) who own houses. They aren't wealthy because they still have a mortgage for most of the value of the house. They may be wealthy in 30 years when their mortgage is paid off, but they aren't now. Wealthy citizens of the U.S. and Canada all had to pay income taxes on the money they used to buy the assets they own. People who are wealthy enough to get by entirely on income generating assets were probably at one time in the top income tax bracket, which means they forked over about 50% of their income to the government. Which, btw, is a much higher percentage rate than people in the lower tax brackets. So, do wealthy people have it easier than non-wealthy people? Yes. But they had to earn an unbelievable amount of money (since they had to pay half of it in taxes) to get to that point. So maybe it's not actually that unfair. And, since high earners pay a higher tax rate, maybe it's actually kinda fair.

DamnYuppie 9y ago

I believe taxation on capital gains from investments is much less then on salary. Also another fun game the wealthy can play is they can fund a company with large sums of capital. Then make themselves officers of the company. Then the cars, houses, flights, and clothing budgets are all expenses of the company. So they personally pay no taxes and the "company" can write them off as a lose for the year.

mistermann 9y ago

If it was earned in Canada, which is increasingly not the case. How much, the government says it doesn't know. Funny that.