7 ms·

Define "rich". IMO the correct threshold is "earns more than needed over some longish period of time", which is another way of saying "has income that isn't sp

by Arnt 8y ago

Define "rich". IMO the correct threshold is "earns more than needed over some longish period of time", which is another way of saying "has income that isn't spent". If you use that definition, everyone who spends all of their income gets that treatment, because their unspent income is zero and the tax on that is zero.

candiodari 8y ago
Not really. The very lowest level I would consider someone rich is that he/she has enough passive income (income independent of any day to day activity) to support himself anywhere they want to for an indefinite period of time. Very rich is to be able to do that for both themselves and a staff. Also: you should broaden your economic knowledge ... it's cute that you think unspent income isn't taxed. Directly taxed ... perhaps not. Now what happens if you want to do anything with that money (different from spending it). Tens of different taxes suddenly apply.
- Arnt 8y ago
  I do not think so, and I did not say so. On the contrary. What I said that people who have zero unspent income are taxed zero on that amount.
  - DoctorOetker 8y ago
    poor homeless people don't sell products, and hence don't collect sales tax. analogy with your example: shops don't need to pay sales tax because homeless people sell zero things.
- hondadriver 8y ago
  In some countries, for example the Netherlands, unspent income is taxed if it is above EUR 25000 per person.
  - walshemj 8y ago
    So would you not just spend that money investing into stocks / property etc and presumably you paid tax on receiving that income in the first place.
    - antientropic 8y ago
      There is no "unspent income tax" in the Netherlands. There is however a tax of 1.2% on savings and investments over 25000 euros.
      - hondadriver 8y ago
        You're right it is a tax on the possessions (except your primary home) you have. so if you've bought a second home, it is also taxed, so not unspent , but if you put more than 25.000 on a current account with 0% interest rate, you still have to pay tax as if you have made 4% (the system changed, this is to keep it simple for non Dutch readers). In that case it at least feels like unspent income tax. Anyway, if you're in the position you need to pay this tax, you usually have nothing to complain about financially..
        walshemj 8y ago
        Maybe but around 25 k euros would not be an uncommon deposit on a house / flat - so your not exactly taxing the super rich here.
        hondadriver 8y ago
        True, but until recently it was very uncommon to save first to buy a house. This is because you could get a mortgage for up to 125% of the price of the house bought and the interest on this loan could be fully deducted from income tax. And to worsen things, you were not obliged to pay back on a monthly basis, but after 30 years you cannot deduct interest anymore the bank can ask for their money back (in practice it is mostly no problem if you can still pay the interest) Now you can 'only' get a loan upto 100% of the price and need to at least save up for the extra costs (bank, notary, taxes) And you have to pay back a monthly amount to be allowed to deduct the interest paid from income tax. But saving up very large amounts, which is common in many other countries, still is not done by most people...
giantsloth 8y ago
You are propping up a very weird straw man definition to tear down which has absolutely no basis in material reality, so that you can simply state that taxes are bad. From an actual real world level, it’s unfair that the stock market is used to decide how good the economy is when 84% of the stock market is controlled by the top 10% richest segment of the population. It’s unfair that corporations get massive tax breaks provided by local municipalities for short term political wins in the establishment of jobs that they will summarily destroy if another town comes in wit better incentives 5 or 10 years down the line living that town in ruin when they leave. It’s unfair that companies are allowed to offshore their headquarters and pay no income tax at all to their countries of origin. It’s unfair that these giant companies can control and manipulate our political system with money. The point is it’s irrelevant how you define rich, we have real unfair realities that we can look at and address. Coming up with an arbitrary definition of rich is a distraction rooted in no reality. This is a very naive statement, with a heavy helping of dog whistling libertarian utopian memes and philosophical navel gazing.
- tedunangst 8y ago
  > it’s unfair that the stock market is used to decide how good the economy is But the stock market swings in response to economic reports like unemployment rate. The government doesn't report unemployment based on stock prices.
  - Latteland 8y ago
    There's a bit of a feedback cycle :-). If stock prices fall, then they fall more usually. Then that can hurt the economy for real, instead of just the stock market part.
- walshemj 8y ago
  Most of the stock market is owned by John and Jane Doe's pension funds
  - Noumenon72 8y ago
    A quick Google said pension funds own [16%](http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-stock-market-ownership-2013-3 http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-stock-market-ownership-...).

by Arnt 8y ago

candiodari 8y ago

Not really. The very lowest level I would consider someone rich is that he/she has enough passive income (income independent of any day to day activity) to support himself anywhere they want to for an indefinite period of time. Very rich is to be able to do that for both themselves and a staff. Also: you should broaden your economic knowledge ... it's cute that you think unspent income isn't taxed. Directly taxed ... perhaps not. Now what happens if you want to do anything with that money (different from spending it). Tens of different taxes suddenly apply.

Arnt 8y ago
I do not think so, and I did not say so. On the contrary. What I said that people who have zero unspent income are taxed zero on that amount.
- DoctorOetker 8y ago
  poor homeless people don't sell products, and hence don't collect sales tax. analogy with your example: shops don't need to pay sales tax because homeless people sell zero things.
hondadriver 8y ago
In some countries, for example the Netherlands, unspent income is taxed if it is above EUR 25000 per person.
- walshemj 8y ago
  So would you not just spend that money investing into stocks / property etc and presumably you paid tax on receiving that income in the first place.
  - antientropic 8y ago
    There is no "unspent income tax" in the Netherlands. There is however a tax of 1.2% on savings and investments over 25000 euros.
    - hondadriver 8y ago
      You're right it is a tax on the possessions (except your primary home) you have. so if you've bought a second home, it is also taxed, so not unspent , but if you put more than 25.000 on a current account with 0% interest rate, you still have to pay tax as if you have made 4% (the system changed, this is to keep it simple for non Dutch readers). In that case it at least feels like unspent income tax. Anyway, if you're in the position you need to pay this tax, you usually have nothing to complain about financially..
      - walshemj 8y ago
        Maybe but around 25 k euros would not be an uncommon deposit on a house / flat - so your not exactly taxing the super rich here.
        hondadriver 8y ago
        True, but until recently it was very uncommon to save first to buy a house. This is because you could get a mortgage for up to 125% of the price of the house bought and the interest on this loan could be fully deducted from income tax. And to worsen things, you were not obliged to pay back on a monthly basis, but after 30 years you cannot deduct interest anymore the bank can ask for their money back (in practice it is mostly no problem if you can still pay the interest) Now you can 'only' get a loan upto 100% of the price and need to at least save up for the extra costs (bank, notary, taxes) And you have to pay back a monthly amount to be allowed to deduct the interest paid from income tax. But saving up very large amounts, which is common in many other countries, still is not done by most people...

giantsloth 8y ago

You are propping up a very weird straw man definition to tear down which has absolutely no basis in material reality, so that you can simply state that taxes are bad. From an actual real world level, it’s unfair that the stock market is used to decide how good the economy is when 84% of the stock market is controlled by the top 10% richest segment of the population. It’s unfair that corporations get massive tax breaks provided by local municipalities for short term political wins in the establishment of jobs that they will summarily destroy if another town comes in wit better incentives 5 or 10 years down the line living that town in ruin when they leave. It’s unfair that companies are allowed to offshore their headquarters and pay no income tax at all to their countries of origin. It’s unfair that these giant companies can control and manipulate our political system with money. The point is it’s irrelevant how you define rich, we have real unfair realities that we can look at and address. Coming up with an arbitrary definition of rich is a distraction rooted in no reality. This is a very naive statement, with a heavy helping of dog whistling libertarian utopian memes and philosophical navel gazing.

tedunangst 8y ago
> it’s unfair that the stock market is used to decide how good the economy is But the stock market swings in response to economic reports like unemployment rate. The government doesn't report unemployment based on stock prices.
- Latteland 8y ago
  There's a bit of a feedback cycle :-). If stock prices fall, then they fall more usually. Then that can hurt the economy for real, instead of just the stock market part.
walshemj 8y ago
Most of the stock market is owned by John and Jane Doe's pension funds
- Noumenon72 8y ago
  A quick Google said pension funds own [16%](http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-stock-market-ownership-2013-3 http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-stock-market-ownership-...).