One of the problems is ambivalence. For many, PV is "nifty" but unnecessary- if I go to a fast food joint and I have a choice between a pretty good hamburger fo

One of the problems is ambivalence. For many, PV is "nifty" but unnecessary- if I go to a fast food joint and I have a choice between a pretty good hamburger for 1/3 the price of a pretty good hamburger made from beef substitute, which do you think I'm gonna buy? But if I'm told that I can get the beef substitute version for just a few dollars more than the regular version because of a tax break, you can bet I'm far more willing to try it out. "Rich" (which is a relative term anyway) people are, by and large, the same. Get rid of the incentive and you'll get rid of the progress that comes with it. Saying "oh take away the incentive because not everyone pays the same amount" is a great way to get people to stop investing in it at all. It's not like poor people are going to say "oh wow, the rich people won't get a tax break for investing in this, now I'll definitely invest!" right? So poor people still won't be able to invest and now rich people will have less of a reason to overcome their ambivalence. Shockingly enough, taking away incentives will deincentivize people. Who knew?