4 ms·

The $47T Heist

16 points by MattGrommes 6y ago

clairity 6y ago
> “Could we ask for our $47 trillion back? Not directly, but we could certainly tax the 1 per cent at 90 per cent or higher for the next century or two, and not feel guilty about it. Their wealth came from us, not their own brains and hard work. We might remind them that the Saudis cut off pickpockets’ right hands, and billionaires in China who get out of line get serious jail time.” i’m down for a return of the 90% top marginal tax rate. better yet, make the tax function continuous rather than a step function to remove the temptation to try to game the system.
- LeegleechN 6y ago
  The tax function is continuous. There are steps in the _incremental_ tax rates, which results in the overall tax rate increasing smoothly with income. The bigger problem is that the rules are written to apply effectively to wage earners but the truly rich are not wage earners, they're capital holders who get discounted dividend and capital gains rates and can structure themselves as corporations (again with favorable rates).
  - spacemanmatt 6y ago
    This is crucial: Individuals are not businesses but American tax code allows for that fiction.
  - hexbinencoded 6y ago
    The rich bought tax chicanery with some billions to rake in trillions. Besides that, they're killing us all and the planet by preventing net negative carbon emissions, capture, and sequestration. No luxury prepper bunker can save them, us, or anything from this man-made catastrophe apart from spending tens of trillions on CCS. Money won't matter if you're and everything is dead.
jayparth 6y ago
From the article: > “Trends in Income,” which hasn’t yet been peer reviewed, estimates what would have happened in the U.S. if the 1945-1975 tax regime had continued until 2018. This isn't what the paper says though. From the abstract: > [We] estimate that aggregate income for the population below the 90th percentile over this time period would have been $2.5 trillion (67 percent) higher in 2018 had income growth since 1975 remained as equitable as it was in the first two post-War decades. From 1975 to 2018, the difference between the aggregate taxable income for those below the 90th percentile and the equitable growth counterfactual totals $47 trillion. The paper doesn't say anything about the cause of income inequality or attribute it to tax policy or anything. Am I missing something? It seems like the article author grossly misinterpreted the paper. (Disclaimer: not agreeing with, or disagreeing with the article. Just pointing out that it's proposition is false.)

16 points by MattGrommes 6y ago

> “Could we ask for our $47 trillion back? Not directly, but we could certainly tax the 1 per cent at 90 per cent or higher for the next century or two, and not feel guilty about it. Their wealth came from us, not their own brains and hard work. We might remind them that the Saudis cut off pickpockets’ right hands, and billionaires in China who get out of line get serious jail time.” i’m down for a return of the 90% top marginal tax rate. better yet, make the tax function continuous rather than a step function to remove the temptation to try to game the system.

LeegleechN 6y ago
The tax function is continuous. There are steps in the _incremental_ tax rates, which results in the overall tax rate increasing smoothly with income. The bigger problem is that the rules are written to apply effectively to wage earners but the truly rich are not wage earners, they're capital holders who get discounted dividend and capital gains rates and can structure themselves as corporations (again with favorable rates).
- spacemanmatt 6y ago
  This is crucial: Individuals are not businesses but American tax code allows for that fiction.
- hexbinencoded 6y ago
  The rich bought tax chicanery with some billions to rake in trillions. Besides that, they're killing us all and the planet by preventing net negative carbon emissions, capture, and sequestration. No luxury prepper bunker can save them, us, or anything from this man-made catastrophe apart from spending tens of trillions on CCS. Money won't matter if you're and everything is dead.

jayparth 6y ago

From the article: > “Trends in Income,” which hasn’t yet been peer reviewed, estimates what would have happened in the U.S. if the 1945-1975 tax regime had continued until 2018. This isn't what the paper says though. From the abstract: > [We] estimate that aggregate income for the population below the 90th percentile over this time period would have been $2.5 trillion (67 percent) higher in 2018 had income growth since 1975 remained as equitable as it was in the first two post-War decades. From 1975 to 2018, the difference between the aggregate taxable income for those below the 90th percentile and the equitable growth counterfactual totals $47 trillion. The paper doesn't say anything about the cause of income inequality or attribute it to tax policy or anything. Am I missing something? It seems like the article author grossly misinterpreted the paper. (Disclaimer: not agreeing with, or disagreeing with the article. Just pointing out that it's proposition is false.)