4 ms·
This is such a straw man argument. No one is proposing something like that - most wealth tax proposals have a floor of like $100m, and a 1% tax seems extremely
by jmcgough 6y ago
This is such a straw man argument. No one is proposing something like that - most wealth tax proposals have a floor of like $100m, and a 1% tax seems extremely reasonable when most people can get 4-10% returns just from parking their money in a index fund.
I'm of the opinion that no one should have north of $100M. The difference in lifestyle between $100M and $1B isn't going to magically halt entrepreneurship or innovation, and it's immoral to have that much when most people living paycheck-to-paycheck in this country are miserable.
- 54mf 6y agoAgreed. If someone's barrier to creating a startup is "but when I get unimaginably rich, the government is going to take some of my money!" then good riddance. Take that self-centered, unethical nonsense elsewhere.
- logicchains 6y ago>Take that self-centered, unethical nonsense elsewhere. You're the one who feels you have a right to other people's hard-earned wealth merely by virtue of being born, and you're calling other people self-centred and unethical? What on Earth is ethical about envy-driven tax policy?
- 54mf 6y agoIt's telling that you conflate basic safety and healthcare rights with "envy". And that someone stuck in a poverty cycle, working multiple jobs for less than a living wage, is somehow less hard-working than a salaried 4-day-workweek white collar thought leader. "hard-earned wealth" is a myth. It's a combination of luck, connections, who your parents are, and where you were born, among other factors.