4 ms·
Tax assets and not income. Income = social mobility, and is directly related to "money you earn" and cannot effectively be inherited (you're dead, you are no l
by buro9 7y ago
Tax assets and not income.
Income = social mobility, and is directly related to "money you earn" and cannot effectively be inherited (you're dead, you are no longer earning).
Assets = wealth, and is directly related to "money previously earned" and can be inherited essentially forever ( https://anarchimedia.com/2019/01/15/rich-families-in-florence-today-are-the-same-rich-families-from-600-years-ago/ https://anarchimedia.com/2019/01/15/rich-families-in-florenc... https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/apr/17/who-owns-england-thousand-secret-landowners-author https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/apr/17/who-owns-engla... )
I now believe that the only effective way to end the excesses of inequality is for effective tax on assets, land being the most obvious but all assets should be up for taxation.
And as strict as asset taxation should be, so should income taxation be reduced.
- roywiggins 7y agoA real inheritance tax with teeth, or a land tax, would be worth trying. In the US, an asset tax is probably unconstitutional.
- crazygringo 7y agoProperty taxes are asset taxes. What makes you think there's anything unconstitutional about it whatsoever?
- roywiggins 7y agoProperty taxes as we know them are levied by states and localities... whether the feds can do the same is the question. Apparently there are actually decent arguments that it would be constitutional after all: https://itep.org/the-u-s-needs-a-federal-wealth-tax/#constitutional https://itep.org/the-u-s-needs-a-federal-wealth-tax/#constit... The history of the Federal government's ability to tax is pretty tangled though. http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/02/constitutional-concerns-are-a-major-risk-for-a-wealth-tax.html http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/02/constitutional-concer...