4 ms·
Almost every country that has enacted a wealth tax has repealed it. And the version that Elizabeth Warren is proposing is fairly extreme - her 3% wealth tax rat
by throwawaysea 7y ago
Almost every country that has enacted a wealth tax has repealed it. And the version that Elizabeth Warren is proposing is fairly extreme - her 3% wealth tax rate would be double the 1.5% rate that France ended up repealing (https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-11-14/france-s-wealth-tax-should-be-a-warning-for-warren-and-sanders https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-11-14/france...). Personally I can’t get behind this idea because it just feels like it is taking away something you’ve already earned and own outright for whatever purpose you want. It waters down the concept of private ownership, which is a gateway for other erosions of individual rights.
I also just can’t see the government putting a large general fund to good use. This image shows what various billionaires would have been left with if a wealth tax were in place since 1982 (https://media.newyorker.com/photos/5d7a63377d7e360008bd5fbe/master/w_1454,c_limit/Cassidy-WealthTax-3-final.png https://media.newyorker.com/photos/5d7a63377d7e360008bd5fbe/...). Bill Gates would have only $36b left - and he’s donated around that much to his foundation. Clearly if he felt the government was good at allocating and efficiently spending large funds, he would have given the government a bigger payment (https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html) rather than starting his own foundation. This is why I don’t buy his recently claimed support for a wealth tax.