4 ms·
To be fair, there isnt much content to this post other than an inflammatory remark ("he is almost moronically ignorant of basic economics") and some graphs whic
by chacham15 6y ago
To be fair, there isnt much content to this post other than an inflammatory remark ("he is almost moronically ignorant of basic economics") and some graphs which can be summarized by "tax rate is offset by growth rate". What would be more useful would be some discussion of the research about how this has played out in France, Switzerland, etc.
- jakelazaroff 6y agoSure, but Paul Graham had the same chance to do that analysis. Instead, he opted for 500 words and a chart that can be summarized as "wealth taxes compound annually".
- pjschlic 6y agoOne thing I haven't seen in the discussion is the effect of the tax on the distribution of outcomes. I'm not sure what the latest numbers are, but if 90% of startups are near 0 return for founders, and 1% are the home run swings which made it worth starting the company to begin with - then when do proposals affect the expected value for starting a company. This notebook doesn't show anything other than 'if you were going to make a bunch, you'll still have more than zero' which isn't useful. Startups are in the land of "fat tails" - so talking about a policy saying it's fine for for most people since the people at the extreme in the fat tail are doing fine seems to be thinking under-critically.