3 ms·

Do you have another proposal for implementing a wealth tax in a way that's easily enforced? I don't necessarily support a wealth tax via stocks, but it seems p

Do you have another proposal for implementing a wealth tax in a way that's easily enforced? I don't necessarily support a wealth tax via stocks, but it seems pretty close to the way startup stock options get taxed for employees pre-IPO, so it's not like there isn't a precedent here.

gorgoiler 7y ago
Wealth is how much money you have to spend, not what your theoretical paper worth is. The government can’t buy medicine or fix roads with theoretical paper worth, and until you can buy food with stocks / shares / yachts / art, it shouldn’t be treated as if it is taxable currency. Taxing the flow of money is the only moral way a government can bring in revenue and the only way to increase that revenue is to raise taxes. Higher income tax and higher capital gains tax means the more you benefit from sharing this society with everyone else, the more responsibility you take for funding it through taxation.
- ac29 7y ago
  Conflating stocks with yachts or art doesn't make sense. The stock market is extremely liquid (unlike the market for yachts or art), so from a practical standpoint assets in the form of stocks are extremely close to cash in terms of "money you have to spend".
- bitbang 7y ago
  Yes, but at the same time stocks can be used as collateral for loans.
  - gorgoiler 7y ago
    I’d be comfortable seeing anything that puts a real value on the stock becoming a taxable event.
- mdorazio 7y ago
  I don't really agree with any of your points. Wealth is a measure of your total assets at any given point in time. If you can liquidate it for cash, it's part of your wealth. Additionally, non-cash assets can be and are used as collateral all the time, so your statement about what the government can and can't do doesn't make much sense. Also, taxing the flow of money is not enough. Earning more in investments than you spend is pretty much the entirety of getting wealthy in the first place. If you only tax money flows, you're doing very little to combat inequality at a fundamental level, and at the same time leaving open giant loopholes to avoid paying taxes for things like MfA.

gorgoiler 7y ago

Wealth is how much money you have to spend, not what your theoretical paper worth is. The government can’t buy medicine or fix roads with theoretical paper worth, and until you can buy food with stocks / shares / yachts / art, it shouldn’t be treated as if it is taxable currency. Taxing the flow of money is the only moral way a government can bring in revenue and the only way to increase that revenue is to raise taxes. Higher income tax and higher capital gains tax means the more you benefit from sharing this society with everyone else, the more responsibility you take for funding it through taxation.

ac29 7y ago
Conflating stocks with yachts or art doesn't make sense. The stock market is extremely liquid (unlike the market for yachts or art), so from a practical standpoint assets in the form of stocks are extremely close to cash in terms of "money you have to spend".
bitbang 7y ago
Yes, but at the same time stocks can be used as collateral for loans.
- gorgoiler 7y ago
  I’d be comfortable seeing anything that puts a real value on the stock becoming a taxable event.
mdorazio 7y ago
I don't really agree with any of your points. Wealth is a measure of your total assets at any given point in time. If you can liquidate it for cash, it's part of your wealth. Additionally, non-cash assets can be and are used as collateral all the time, so your statement about what the government can and can't do doesn't make much sense. Also, taxing the flow of money is not enough. Earning more in investments than you spend is pretty much the entirety of getting wealthy in the first place. If you only tax money flows, you're doing very little to combat inequality at a fundamental level, and at the same time leaving open giant loopholes to avoid paying taxes for things like MfA.