3 ms·

Ugh, this again. Net worth != income. I get the spirit of what you're saying but you can't tax net worth, you tax income.

by mbesto 8y ago

kungtotte 8y ago
You can absolutely tax net worth. It's not difficult at all. You can add/increase property taxes. You can tax wealth above a certain amount. You can add/increase taxes on stock market speculation and holdings, and other financial instruments. Whether you'd want to is a different matter, but saying you can't do it is factually incorrect.
- moate 8y ago
  right. The story told is that the money in the market (stocks, shares of companies, holdings, real estate, etc) is playing a part in creating wealth for everyone, and therefor better served by being left where it is. there's 0 reason you can't say "this person is reporting holding, assets and liquid wealth of 2 billion dollars, so he owes X% back to the state." The issue is that typically the wealthy have the most influence over tax code, and they use net worth as a way to keep their money out of play. But, like, you know, Amazon being worth so much money is really helpful to everyone because...reasons.
LyndsySimon 8y ago
> you can't tax net worth Sure you can, although not all at once. Both property and capital gains taxes are examples of this. Basically, the only way off the top of my head to hold capital and not have it taxed is to leave it at rest - either in something like precious metals (which is a very poor choice as a vehicle for growth) or long-term investment (which makes it available for use by others). Also, there's inflation. Inflation obviously devalues liquid capital, but it also impacts debts. If someone loans money at 1% APR, but inflation is 2.5%, then 1.5% of the value of the outstanding debt is being transferred from lender to the debtor each year.
losvedir 8y ago
That is explicitly the point. Taxing income is stupid; the richest people don't necessarily have incomes at all. To the extent that inequality is problematic, it's from inequality of wealth. In the U.S. you "can't" tax wealth without a Constitutional amendment, maybe you were getting at that. If we could administer a low wealth tax of ~3-5% or something, productive people like Bezos would continue to amass wealth, but you wouldn't have unproductive rentier family dynasties as over time their wealth would be taxed away. edit: I should add that Saudi and Oman already effectively tax wealth, since they have no income tax and Sharia requires donating a percentage of your net wealth to the community.

Ugh, this again. Net worth != income. I get the spirit of what you're saying but you can't tax net worth, you tax income.

by mbesto 8y ago

Ugh, this again. Net worth != income. I get the spirit of what you're saying but you can't tax net worth, you tax income.

kungtotte 8y ago

You can absolutely tax net worth. It's not difficult at all. You can add/increase property taxes. You can tax wealth above a certain amount. You can add/increase taxes on stock market speculation and holdings, and other financial instruments. Whether you'd want to is a different matter, but saying you can't do it is factually incorrect.

moate 8y ago
right. The story told is that the money in the market (stocks, shares of companies, holdings, real estate, etc) is playing a part in creating wealth for everyone, and therefor better served by being left where it is. there's 0 reason you can't say "this person is reporting holding, assets and liquid wealth of 2 billion dollars, so he owes X% back to the state." The issue is that typically the wealthy have the most influence over tax code, and they use net worth as a way to keep their money out of play. But, like, you know, Amazon being worth so much money is really helpful to everyone because...reasons.

LyndsySimon 8y ago

> you can't tax net worth Sure you can, although not all at once. Both property and capital gains taxes are examples of this. Basically, the only way off the top of my head to hold capital and not have it taxed is to leave it at rest - either in something like precious metals (which is a very poor choice as a vehicle for growth) or long-term investment (which makes it available for use by others). Also, there's inflation. Inflation obviously devalues liquid capital, but it also impacts debts. If someone loans money at 1% APR, but inflation is 2.5%, then 1.5% of the value of the outstanding debt is being transferred from lender to the debtor each year.

losvedir 8y ago

That is explicitly the point. Taxing income is stupid; the richest people don't necessarily have incomes at all. To the extent that inequality is problematic, it's from inequality of wealth. In the U.S. you "can't" tax wealth without a Constitutional amendment, maybe you were getting at that. If we could administer a low wealth tax of ~3-5% or something, productive people like Bezos would continue to amass wealth, but you wouldn't have unproductive rentier family dynasties as over time their wealth would be taxed away. edit: I should add that Saudi and Oman already effectively tax wealth, since they have no income tax and Sharia requires donating a percentage of your net wealth to the community.