4 ms·

> Wouldn’t taxing wealth reduce the real value of properties? Yes. That's almost like magic. You get cheaper properties, the property tax revenue is used to re

> Wouldn’t taxing wealth reduce the real value of properties? Yes. That's almost like magic. You get cheaper properties, the property tax revenue is used to reduce your other taxes so your net income does not decrease (on average, of course). So you actually get more money to spend otherwise than into your mortgage. Almost like alchemy. Turning taxes to wealth...

Konnstann 7y ago
You don't get reduced taxes though, so your net income does decrease. The wealth tax isn't going to take the place of any other tax, it is in addition to the taxes already in place. Whether you believe in the legitimacy of the wealth tax or not the people paying it won't be better off, nor will most of the people not paying it (disregarding benefits of the programs funded by the tax).
- beefield 7y ago
  If the other taxes do not decrease, then that means you get some other benefit where the money is democratically being allocated. Tax money generally does not just disappear in a modern relatively free society. (Of course you can argue that western democracies are kleptocracies by default and all taxes just disappear to the pockets of the thieves and you get no benefit from them, but I personally do not consider that as a feasible starting point for a reasonable discussion)
  - Konnstann 7y ago
    That's why I put a disclaimer in parentheses. I was responding to the claim that a wealth tax would result in unchanged or higher income, which is patently false. My answer to getting some sort of "benefit" is programs like corn subsidies, which are not democratic, and are one cause of the obesity epidemic in the US, because corn syrup is shoved into anything and everything, fed to animals, etc. Again, not arguing against the wealth tax, just the assumptions behind taxation that are being made.

4 ms·

> Wouldn’t taxing wealth reduce the real value of properties? Yes. That's almost like magic. You get cheaper properties, the property tax revenue is used to re

by beefield 7y ago

Konnstann 7y ago
You don't get reduced taxes though, so your net income does decrease. The wealth tax isn't going to take the place of any other tax, it is in addition to the taxes already in place. Whether you believe in the legitimacy of the wealth tax or not the people paying it won't be better off, nor will most of the people not paying it (disregarding benefits of the programs funded by the tax).
- beefield 7y ago
  If the other taxes do not decrease, then that means you get some other benefit where the money is democratically being allocated. Tax money generally does not just disappear in a modern relatively free society. (Of course you can argue that western democracies are kleptocracies by default and all taxes just disappear to the pockets of the thieves and you get no benefit from them, but I personally do not consider that as a feasible starting point for a reasonable discussion)
  - Konnstann 7y ago
    That's why I put a disclaimer in parentheses. I was responding to the claim that a wealth tax would result in unchanged or higher income, which is patently false. My answer to getting some sort of "benefit" is programs like corn subsidies, which are not democratic, and are one cause of the obesity epidemic in the US, because corn syrup is shoved into anything and everything, fed to animals, etc. Again, not arguing against the wealth tax, just the assumptions behind taxation that are being made.