3 ms·
The discussion is always around increasing or decreasing the size and expense of the government. So I like that the author is advocating increasing efficiency
by eric_b 8y ago
The discussion is always around increasing or decreasing the size and expense of the government. So I like that the author is advocating increasing efficiency instead. Doing more with the same amount of spending is a good goal. And I think there are a lot of places the government could be made more efficient.
But, as a staunch capitalist myself, I believe we do need to start raising taxes on the rich. I think the 70% marginal rate on people making 10M a year is a good start, but ultimately more a token gesture than anything meaningful. It won't raise enough money, since there aren't enough of those people.
We need to start counting capital gains as income. No more long term 15% rate. If your investments are kicking out money that you live on, that should be taxed at the same marginal rates as my wages!
The problem of course is that the true rich have influence over the politicians. So they point the politicians at the upper middle class, and say "hey, raise the marginal rates on these people instead!" Pretty soon the narrative is "oh, you make more than 100k a year, that's immoral!" And the wealth divide would just get bigger and bigger.
TLDR: We need to tax wealth in some capacity. There are many many approaches to this, but we need to find a way to actually tax the rich, not just fleece the upper middle class.
- dantheman 8y agoIf you tax capital gains then no one will invest unless things are 100% guaranteed. Your winnings need to cover your losses. Capital gains aren't wages