5 ms·

PG is tone deaf and missing the mood of the nation here. He says: > Even a .5% wealth tax would start to keep founders away from a state or country that impos

PG is tone deaf and missing the mood of the nation here. He says: > Even a .5% wealth tax would start to keep founders away from a state or country that imposed it. Mr Graham doesn't consider the possibility of startup founders leaving / kept away from a place that doesn't impose a wealth tax. I am not a successful startup founder (yet), but I would consider it my duty to live in /start a company in a place with better laws and taxes that are more equitable for everyone. Money is not the only thing that drives startup founders to do big things. Complaining about a wealth tax and suggesting it will ruin things in the valley / CA due to people leaving completely ignores the societal improvements that could come from those tax dollars. The idea behind increasing taxes on the wealthy is to build a better society for everyone - including the wealthy! Why would the future prospective wealthy startup founders want to live in a massively unequal society, that is bent on increasing incoming inequality (the topic of another recent PG essay, where he argues that decreasing wealth inequality is a bad idea)? I sure wouldn't. Mr Graham, a lot of startup founders may leave if large measures to improve society like a wealth tax are not 'imposed'. You said, > Taxes are a necessary part of a functioning modern economy. Wealth tax is not. But you don't back this up. Why should wealth tax not be a part of modern economy? Modern economies are broken right now, obviously, for most people anyway, so keeping the status quo is a red flag and a bad sign. > Could Mr. Graham not be against this tax because it's an objectively bad tax with many unintended consequences? If that is his position, he does not explain it very well. Especially with the context of many of his recent essays, he does seem especially concerned with his image and wealth. What about the unintended consequences of adopting policies that specifically intend to increase wealth inequality? PG doesn't seem to much consider the consequences that his models/opinions/plans would have on other people if implemented.

macspoofing 6y ago
>PG is tone deaf and missing the mood of the nation here. Twitter is not 'the mood of the nation'. You are not representative of 'the mood of the nation'. In fact, you're an outlier. >The idea behind increasing taxes on the wealthy is to build a better society for everyone - including the wealthy! You're trying to pull the same fast one as OP. Wealth tax is not the same as increasing taxes on the wealthy. You can make an argument that taxes should be increased and at the same time see that the wealth tax is a terrible way to do it. > Why should wealth tax not be a part of modern economy? Because it's a bad tax. It doesn't work. It doesn't bring revenue you think it does. It's expensive to administer and enforce. And it has many bad unintended consequences.
- cryptoz 6y ago
  Not sure what Twitter has to do with any of this. ?? Anyway.. Am I an outlier? Then I only know outliers in real life, I guess, since I only know people who share this opinion? I get that I'm in my bubble, but it seems like a really really widely shared bubble. > Wealth tax is not the same as increasing taxes on the wealthy. A wealth tax is a form of increasing the taxation against people who are wealthy. Are you saying this is false? What do you mean by that? > see that the wealth tax is a terrible way to do it. Why though? You haven't backed any of this up. I think a wealth tax is a great idea. Why are you so certain that it isn't? > Because it's a bad tax. It doesn't work. What do you mean by bad tax? You don't explain this and my googles turned up nothing. What about this tax makes it "bad"? Why does it "not work"? > It doesn't bring revenue you think it does. I don't think it brings in any particular revenue specifically. What do you have in mind by this statement? > It's expensive to administer and enforce. So are most good things that we have in this world. Something being expensive doesn't make it bad. > And it has many bad unintended consequences. What are these, though? Can you list any?
- xtian 6y ago
  > Twitter is not 'the mood of the nation'. Are you saying that, presented with the facts, most Americans would express satisfaction with the current distribution of wealth and its trajectory?
- lemmsjid 6y ago
  >Twitter is not 'the mood of the nation'. You are not representative of 'the mood of the nation'. In fact, you're an outlier. According to a Reuters poll from this beginning of this year a large majority of Democrats and a slim majority of Republicans support the idea of a wealth tax. While there isn't a large amount of polling on the subject (that I can see), that somewhat undercuts the Twitterspace argument. The specific question people responded to in that poll was "the very rich should contribute an extra share of their total wealth each year to support public programs" so you can dissect it at your will.
  - twblalock 6y ago
    > According to a Reuters poll from this beginning of this year a large majority of Democrats and a slim majority of Republicans support the idea of a wealth tax. That's only because they haven't seen the specifics.

macspoofing 6y ago

>PG is tone deaf and missing the mood of the nation here. Twitter is not 'the mood of the nation'. You are not representative of 'the mood of the nation'. In fact, you're an outlier. >The idea behind increasing taxes on the wealthy is to build a better society for everyone - including the wealthy! You're trying to pull the same fast one as OP. Wealth tax is not the same as increasing taxes on the wealthy. You can make an argument that taxes should be increased and at the same time see that the wealth tax is a terrible way to do it. > Why should wealth tax not be a part of modern economy? Because it's a bad tax. It doesn't work. It doesn't bring revenue you think it does. It's expensive to administer and enforce. And it has many bad unintended consequences.

cryptoz 6y ago
Not sure what Twitter has to do with any of this. ?? Anyway.. Am I an outlier? Then I only know outliers in real life, I guess, since I only know people who share this opinion? I get that I'm in my bubble, but it seems like a really really widely shared bubble. > Wealth tax is not the same as increasing taxes on the wealthy. A wealth tax is a form of increasing the taxation against people who are wealthy. Are you saying this is false? What do you mean by that? > see that the wealth tax is a terrible way to do it. Why though? You haven't backed any of this up. I think a wealth tax is a great idea. Why are you so certain that it isn't? > Because it's a bad tax. It doesn't work. What do you mean by bad tax? You don't explain this and my googles turned up nothing. What about this tax makes it "bad"? Why does it "not work"? > It doesn't bring revenue you think it does. I don't think it brings in any particular revenue specifically. What do you have in mind by this statement? > It's expensive to administer and enforce. So are most good things that we have in this world. Something being expensive doesn't make it bad. > And it has many bad unintended consequences. What are these, though? Can you list any?
xtian 6y ago
> Twitter is not 'the mood of the nation'. Are you saying that, presented with the facts, most Americans would express satisfaction with the current distribution of wealth and its trajectory?
lemmsjid 6y ago
>Twitter is not 'the mood of the nation'. You are not representative of 'the mood of the nation'. In fact, you're an outlier. According to a Reuters poll from this beginning of this year a large majority of Democrats and a slim majority of Republicans support the idea of a wealth tax. While there isn't a large amount of polling on the subject (that I can see), that somewhat undercuts the Twitterspace argument. The specific question people responded to in that poll was "the very rich should contribute an extra share of their total wealth each year to support public programs" so you can dissect it at your will.
- twblalock 6y ago
  > According to a Reuters poll from this beginning of this year a large majority of Democrats and a slim majority of Republicans support the idea of a wealth tax. That's only because they haven't seen the specifics.