4 ms·

> If your net worth is $10+ million and isn't increasing by at least ~4% a year you're doing something very wrong. So the argument a tax is good is that it's y

> If your net worth is $10+ million and isn't increasing by at least ~4% a year you're doing something very wrong. So the argument a tax is good is that it's your fault if you don't make enough money? Is it everyone's purpose in life to make enough money to pay taxes? > So ~1% of your wealth going to taxes is eminently affordable. Being affordable does not mean it is right. I can afford a $1200 iPhone, but I will never spend that kind of money on a phone, so asking me to pay $1200 for a phone is not right just because I can afford it.

patmcc 6y ago
I was responding to a specific point - that a wealth tax means that someone will lose control of their company. That's all I was arguing against with those points.
- AdrianB1 6y ago
  And I responded to your arguments, word for word.
  - patmcc 6y ago
    No, you responded to arguments you thought I made, namely: 1) That a wealth tax is good because you should be making more money than the tax. 2) That a wealth tax is right simply because it's affordable. I didn't make either of those arguments. For 1 - regardless of whether you're making or losing money, any sensible wealth tax is marginal, only on net worth of amounts over $10mil (or whatever). So the very worst a wealth tax will do is keep you at that cap - you don't pay anything on your first $10mil (or whatever). For 2 - no, I'm saying a wealth tax is affordable, so it's clearly not wrong based on that alone. I'd say a wealth tax is right because it's progressive, not unaffordable, and ultimately not significantly impactful on the people it would impact (rich people). We need to have taxes of some kind. What do you think is the most "right" kind to have? Why is it more right than a wealth tax?
    - tekknik 6y ago
      Perhaps a flat sales tax? Or something fair? Why is there an attempt to punish the rich here? We need some taxes, but this shouldn’t be a blank check. At what point do you think the government should stop taking taxes? By your logic should we not just give 100% of our pay to the gov and start issuing cars, houses and other needs? Also why is anything good simply because it’s progressive? Is there no other factor?
      - patmcc 6y ago
        What exactly is "fair"? There are lots of ways we could tax people, that some or other people would declare to be fair. Sure, we could tax all sales at 20%, or 45%. That would be fair. Can you see any problems? We could tax everyone a flat amount - $10k or something. That would be fair. Can you see any problems? We could tax everyone a flat percentage - 15%, say. That would be fair. Can you see any problems? We could tax everyone such that we all have the same income - $50k perhaps. That would be fair. Can you see any problems? The idea that higher taxes "punish" the rich doesn't make sense to me. We have the money! Of course that's where taxes should come from. What, we're going to shake down the people making $12 /hour? They don't have any money. Here is my thinking: we should decide, as a society, what is essential. Defense, roads, fire departments, schools, etc. And then we figure out the best tax system to pay for that. We should aim for that system to: 1) Gather as much money as we need to pay for the essentials. 2) Cost as little to administer as possible. 3) Discourage harmful societal behaviour and/or encourage beneficial societal behaviour (generally, the more you tax something, the less of that thing you get). 4) Impact people's lives as little as possible. This is where progressive taxation wins - if you tax a poor person, that's money they really, really need. They were going to spend that on essentials. If you tax a rich person, their quality of life isn't meaningfully impacted. If Jeff Bezos has to pay more taxes, that impacts his day-to-day life exactly not at all. 5) Be conceived from behind the 'veil of ignorance', as much as possible. (This is where the 'fairness' argument comes in)
        tekknik 6y ago
        So as a society we are saying it’s ok to tax the wealthy, but we also give people the opportunity to become wealthy and encourage it but then once you make it bad, time for punishment via taxes? What exactly did Bezos do that requires him to pay more taxes? He didn’t “get a small loan”, he earned his and now your saying people who have no desire in life to be anything more than a store clerk deserve some of his money. Can they afford it? Sure. Is it fair, absolutely not.

patmcc 6y ago

I was responding to a specific point - that a wealth tax means that someone will lose control of their company. That's all I was arguing against with those points.

AdrianB1 6y ago
And I responded to your arguments, word for word.
- patmcc 6y ago
  No, you responded to arguments you thought I made, namely: 1) That a wealth tax is good because you should be making more money than the tax. 2) That a wealth tax is right simply because it's affordable. I didn't make either of those arguments. For 1 - regardless of whether you're making or losing money, any sensible wealth tax is marginal, only on net worth of amounts over $10mil (or whatever). So the very worst a wealth tax will do is keep you at that cap - you don't pay anything on your first $10mil (or whatever). For 2 - no, I'm saying a wealth tax is affordable, so it's clearly not wrong based on that alone. I'd say a wealth tax is right because it's progressive, not unaffordable, and ultimately not significantly impactful on the people it would impact (rich people). We need to have taxes of some kind. What do you think is the most "right" kind to have? Why is it more right than a wealth tax?
  - tekknik 6y ago
    Perhaps a flat sales tax? Or something fair? Why is there an attempt to punish the rich here? We need some taxes, but this shouldn’t be a blank check. At what point do you think the government should stop taking taxes? By your logic should we not just give 100% of our pay to the gov and start issuing cars, houses and other needs? Also why is anything good simply because it’s progressive? Is there no other factor?
    - patmcc 6y ago
      What exactly is "fair"? There are lots of ways we could tax people, that some or other people would declare to be fair. Sure, we could tax all sales at 20%, or 45%. That would be fair. Can you see any problems? We could tax everyone a flat amount - $10k or something. That would be fair. Can you see any problems? We could tax everyone a flat percentage - 15%, say. That would be fair. Can you see any problems? We could tax everyone such that we all have the same income - $50k perhaps. That would be fair. Can you see any problems? The idea that higher taxes "punish" the rich doesn't make sense to me. We have the money! Of course that's where taxes should come from. What, we're going to shake down the people making $12 /hour? They don't have any money. Here is my thinking: we should decide, as a society, what is essential. Defense, roads, fire departments, schools, etc. And then we figure out the best tax system to pay for that. We should aim for that system to: 1) Gather as much money as we need to pay for the essentials. 2) Cost as little to administer as possible. 3) Discourage harmful societal behaviour and/or encourage beneficial societal behaviour (generally, the more you tax something, the less of that thing you get). 4) Impact people's lives as little as possible. This is where progressive taxation wins - if you tax a poor person, that's money they really, really need. They were going to spend that on essentials. If you tax a rich person, their quality of life isn't meaningfully impacted. If Jeff Bezos has to pay more taxes, that impacts his day-to-day life exactly not at all. 5) Be conceived from behind the 'veil of ignorance', as much as possible. (This is where the 'fairness' argument comes in)
      - tekknik 6y ago
        So as a society we are saying it’s ok to tax the wealthy, but we also give people the opportunity to become wealthy and encourage it but then once you make it bad, time for punishment via taxes? What exactly did Bezos do that requires him to pay more taxes? He didn’t “get a small loan”, he earned his and now your saying people who have no desire in life to be anything more than a store clerk deserve some of his money. Can they afford it? Sure. Is it fair, absolutely not.