8 ms·

I'm neither wealthy nor the media and I believe that wealth taxes are a bad idea, too.

by commandlinefan 6y ago

flashyfaffe2 6y ago
Would you consider volontarily contribution instead?
- mhh__ 6y ago
  Possibly not what you mean but I very strongly believe tax rates should he a minimum where you can set your own (and displayed publicly) tax rate above a certain level for your income. Both physically and online, as someone who grew up not poor but far far from rich i.e. I've still only been abroad from the UK twice in my (so far short) life, I am absolutely sick of rich people saying "I'd pay more tax if I could" as a throwaway gesture. I increasingly think an underlying motive of why I study fairly intensely is just to end up better than those who were born better than me. If you really believe that, put your money where your mouth is.
  - lostcolony 6y ago
    Oh please. Of course they don't meant that. Because you can totally give money to the government. https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.h... What they actually mean is "I wish you made me pay more". Because they can't bring themselves to write a check to -give- it away, but -do- feel they should have to pay more. Part of that is the social aspect; why should I, as a rich person, be paying more than other people of similar wealth? But I support all of us paying more.
    - PeterStuer 6y ago
      Saying "I wish you made me pay more" while then turning around and hire the best tax accountants to avoid paying even one cent, and lobbying, funding and grooming politicians that will block any wealth taxes, is just adding insult to injury and insulting hypocrisy.
      - lostcolony 6y ago
        Well, it's the same motivation, isn't it? "All my peers are doing this - I would be a sucker not to do the same". It's that feeling of being taken advantage of that they want to avoid. Let's be clear, there are three kinds of mindsets here: "I don't want to be taxed at all" - lots of lobbying and such to keep taxes on the rich low, and lots of loopholes. "I think people of my bracket should be taxed higher, but I am going to avail myself of every existing loophole and itemization I can" - doesn't want to feel like a sucker, but agrees people in their bracket, themselves included, should pay more. "I think people of my bracket should be taxed higher, and I'm going to give money away anonymously or similar to put my money where my mouth is, even if others of my bracket are not" - a unicorn.
  - lhopki01 6y ago
    This is very similar to saying that charities should deal with these issues (homelessness, drug additction, etc) not the government. Charities rely on donations. I strongly think that the government should be dealing with these things. I think I should be taxed more but I also don't think that me voluntarily paying 1% more tax will change anything. However everyone playing 1% more tax will so fundamentally change everything that it's worth doing. I don't say "I'd pay more tax if I could" I say "I should pay more tax and so should everyone else earning as much as me" >I increasingly think an underlying motive of why I study fairly intensely is just to end up better than those who were born better than me. You might want to consider the fact then that social mobility is generally higher in countries with higher tax rates.
RivieraKid 6y ago
Why? (I mostly agree but it's not a strong opinion)
- muststopmyths 6y ago
  My guess: because they hope to be wealthy some day.
  - throwaways885 6y ago
    Doesn't everyone? Plus, there's other reasons to be skeptical of wealth taxes, capital flight is a real thing.
    - pmiller2 6y ago
      That's why you pair them with capital controls, to keep that from happening. This, unfortunately, requires significant cooperation from the international community, and ought to be done before any wealth tax is imposed. BTW, have you seen how expensive it is for high net worth individuals to renounce US citizenship?
    - marricks 6y ago
      Isn't that just another myth peddled by wealthy groups? This was a pretty good study and didn't find that effect[1]. Just on the face of it, sure if you're wealthier you have greater ability to move but that also means you probably like where you are because you chose to be there. Most of my high school friends dispersed around the country solely for job opportunities, not because they wanted to be somewhere. [1] https://minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2011/02/documents/millionaire-migration.pdf https://minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2011/02/documents... > The New Jersey millionaire tax experiment offers a potent testing ground, given the magnitude of the policy change and the relative ease of relocating to a different state tax regime without leaving the New York or Philadelphia metropolitan areas. Using a difference-in-difference estimator, we find minimal effect of the new tax on the migration of millionaires.
    - beardedetim 6y ago
marricks 6y ago
Any chance your opinion was formed based on news/studies funded by wealthy individuals?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- BitwiseFool 6y ago
  I'm not the person you responded to but this kind of comment really bugs me. Why assume someone didn't form their own opinion?
  - tstrimple 6y ago
    No one "forms their own opinion" in a vacuum. Your beliefs and opinions are influenced in a multitude of ways by your environment including the media you consume. Asking how the biases you have were formed is something everyone should be asking of themselves, and certainly doesn't seem like an inappropriate question.
    - pingpongchef 6y ago
      Problem is that it's a subtle accusation of speaking in bad faith or an accusation of lacking agency. In order to have respect for the other person, you can't start from either of those positions.
      - BitwiseFool 6y ago
        This perfectly describes how I feel and what I was trying to get across. You're much better at English than I.
      - marricks 6y ago
        Original comment was pretty threadbare, just “wealth taxes wouldn’t affect me but I don’t want them”. It’s worth knowing why they think that, especially if it’s getting upvoted so much. We have to be able to ask these questions and assume they’re not attacks to have productive dialogues.
bpsh 6y ago
Well define not wealthy, if you have over $90,000 net worth you would be in the top 10% already.
- tolbish 6y ago
  Wealthy = enough money to lobby
  - maerF0x0 6y ago
    400k per year income could be 0 saved if one has enough expenses.
    - throwaway2048 6y ago
      so could 1 billion per year.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- TheDong 6y ago
  This is not accurate. For the US, [0] shows the 90% percentile to be $1.2 million net worth. This data is sourced from the federal reserve's survey [1]. [0]: https://dqydj.com/average-median-top-net-worth-percentiles/ https://dqydj.com/average-median-top-net-worth-percentiles/ [1]: https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/scfindex.htm https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/scfindex.htm
  - bpsh 6y ago
    Well I never said it was for the US, instead it's globally. If you are in the US you would have even more advantages.
    - TheDong 6y ago
      The article this comment section is on is entirely about the united states and the wealthy in the context of the united states. You would have had to make it explicitly clear that you were talking about something other than the rest of the comments (the whole world) for your comment to be read as such. Anyway, comparing wealth between the developed world and the developing/less-developed nations is tricky, and needs to be done with care. I don't think using that number in this context is useful.
Hitorinaka 6y ago
Wealth taxes that are too high in relation to peers (other countries/states) will often lead to brain drain, capital flight and others. From an individual's perspective, many will see it as a disincentive in starting something new, you may also be incentivized to borrow more money to ensure the leverage is high enough to limit taxation and optimize current quality of life. Your decision to leave assets for your next of kin can also become distorted and you may feel encouraged to spend the money now (on them and otherwise) as opposed to getting tax fleeced. Many other things need to be in place and fully functional for a high wealth tax to work and even then, it is likely to work for a 10 to 30 year period, only to serve as a dragging anchor at a later stage. I would argue that many of the challenges in Europe from a technological innovation standpoint, can be partially derived in high taxation. It is also difficult to determine what is the right amount of taxation while taking into account the importance of incentive mechanisms. Also, at what point do tax hikes stop? Some of the key real solutions to many of societies challenges is to have its populace be more active in all of its inner working, helping them to better understand the constraints and opportunities as opposed to being a bunch of people getting of top of their little soap box. There is also a major need for strong reforms to tackle nepotism, corruption and laziness at all levels of society.

I'm neither wealthy nor the media and I believe that wealth taxes are a bad idea, too.

flashyfaffe2 6y ago

Would you consider volontarily contribution instead?

mhh__ 6y ago
Possibly not what you mean but I very strongly believe tax rates should he a minimum where you can set your own (and displayed publicly) tax rate above a certain level for your income. Both physically and online, as someone who grew up not poor but far far from rich i.e. I've still only been abroad from the UK twice in my (so far short) life, I am absolutely sick of rich people saying "I'd pay more tax if I could" as a throwaway gesture. I increasingly think an underlying motive of why I study fairly intensely is just to end up better than those who were born better than me. If you really believe that, put your money where your mouth is.
- lostcolony 6y ago
  Oh please. Of course they don't meant that. Because you can totally give money to the government. https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.h... What they actually mean is "I wish you made me pay more". Because they can't bring themselves to write a check to -give- it away, but -do- feel they should have to pay more. Part of that is the social aspect; why should I, as a rich person, be paying more than other people of similar wealth? But I support all of us paying more.
  - PeterStuer 6y ago
    Saying "I wish you made me pay more" while then turning around and hire the best tax accountants to avoid paying even one cent, and lobbying, funding and grooming politicians that will block any wealth taxes, is just adding insult to injury and insulting hypocrisy.
    - lostcolony 6y ago
      Well, it's the same motivation, isn't it? "All my peers are doing this - I would be a sucker not to do the same". It's that feeling of being taken advantage of that they want to avoid. Let's be clear, there are three kinds of mindsets here: "I don't want to be taxed at all" - lots of lobbying and such to keep taxes on the rich low, and lots of loopholes. "I think people of my bracket should be taxed higher, but I am going to avail myself of every existing loophole and itemization I can" - doesn't want to feel like a sucker, but agrees people in their bracket, themselves included, should pay more. "I think people of my bracket should be taxed higher, and I'm going to give money away anonymously or similar to put my money where my mouth is, even if others of my bracket are not" - a unicorn.
- lhopki01 6y ago
  This is very similar to saying that charities should deal with these issues (homelessness, drug additction, etc) not the government. Charities rely on donations. I strongly think that the government should be dealing with these things. I think I should be taxed more but I also don't think that me voluntarily paying 1% more tax will change anything. However everyone playing 1% more tax will so fundamentally change everything that it's worth doing. I don't say "I'd pay more tax if I could" I say "I should pay more tax and so should everyone else earning as much as me" >I increasingly think an underlying motive of why I study fairly intensely is just to end up better than those who were born better than me. You might want to consider the fact then that social mobility is generally higher in countries with higher tax rates.

RivieraKid 6y ago

Why? (I mostly agree but it's not a strong opinion)

muststopmyths 6y ago
My guess: because they hope to be wealthy some day.
- throwaways885 6y ago
  Doesn't everyone? Plus, there's other reasons to be skeptical of wealth taxes, capital flight is a real thing.
  - pmiller2 6y ago
    That's why you pair them with capital controls, to keep that from happening. This, unfortunately, requires significant cooperation from the international community, and ought to be done before any wealth tax is imposed. BTW, have you seen how expensive it is for high net worth individuals to renounce US citizenship?
  - marricks 6y ago
    Isn't that just another myth peddled by wealthy groups? This was a pretty good study and didn't find that effect[1]. Just on the face of it, sure if you're wealthier you have greater ability to move but that also means you probably like where you are because you chose to be there. Most of my high school friends dispersed around the country solely for job opportunities, not because they wanted to be somewhere. [1] https://minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2011/02/documents/millionaire-migration.pdf https://minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2011/02/documents... > The New Jersey millionaire tax experiment offers a potent testing ground, given the magnitude of the policy change and the relative ease of relocating to a different state tax regime without leaving the New York or Philadelphia metropolitan areas. Using a difference-in-difference estimator, we find minimal effect of the new tax on the migration of millionaires.
  - beardedetim 6y ago

marricks 6y ago

Any chance your opinion was formed based on news/studies funded by wealthy individuals?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
BitwiseFool 6y ago
I'm not the person you responded to but this kind of comment really bugs me. Why assume someone didn't form their own opinion?
- tstrimple 6y ago
  No one "forms their own opinion" in a vacuum. Your beliefs and opinions are influenced in a multitude of ways by your environment including the media you consume. Asking how the biases you have were formed is something everyone should be asking of themselves, and certainly doesn't seem like an inappropriate question.
  - pingpongchef 6y ago
    Problem is that it's a subtle accusation of speaking in bad faith or an accusation of lacking agency. In order to have respect for the other person, you can't start from either of those positions.
    - BitwiseFool 6y ago
      This perfectly describes how I feel and what I was trying to get across. You're much better at English than I.
    - marricks 6y ago
      Original comment was pretty threadbare, just “wealth taxes wouldn’t affect me but I don’t want them”. It’s worth knowing why they think that, especially if it’s getting upvoted so much. We have to be able to ask these questions and assume they’re not attacks to have productive dialogues.

bpsh 6y ago

Well define not wealthy, if you have over $90,000 net worth you would be in the top 10% already.

tolbish 6y ago
Wealthy = enough money to lobby
- maerF0x0 6y ago
  400k per year income could be 0 saved if one has enough expenses.
  - throwaway2048 6y ago
    so could 1 billion per year.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
TheDong 6y ago
This is not accurate. For the US, [0] shows the 90% percentile to be $1.2 million net worth. This data is sourced from the federal reserve's survey [1]. [0]: https://dqydj.com/average-median-top-net-worth-percentiles/ https://dqydj.com/average-median-top-net-worth-percentiles/ [1]: https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/scfindex.htm https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/scfindex.htm
- bpsh 6y ago
  Well I never said it was for the US, instead it's globally. If you are in the US you would have even more advantages.
  - TheDong 6y ago
    The article this comment section is on is entirely about the united states and the wealthy in the context of the united states. You would have had to make it explicitly clear that you were talking about something other than the rest of the comments (the whole world) for your comment to be read as such. Anyway, comparing wealth between the developed world and the developing/less-developed nations is tricky, and needs to be done with care. I don't think using that number in this context is useful.

Hitorinaka 6y ago

Wealth taxes that are too high in relation to peers (other countries/states) will often lead to brain drain, capital flight and others. From an individual's perspective, many will see it as a disincentive in starting something new, you may also be incentivized to borrow more money to ensure the leverage is high enough to limit taxation and optimize current quality of life. Your decision to leave assets for your next of kin can also become distorted and you may feel encouraged to spend the money now (on them and otherwise) as opposed to getting tax fleeced. Many other things need to be in place and fully functional for a high wealth tax to work and even then, it is likely to work for a 10 to 30 year period, only to serve as a dragging anchor at a later stage. I would argue that many of the challenges in Europe from a technological innovation standpoint, can be partially derived in high taxation. It is also difficult to determine what is the right amount of taxation while taking into account the importance of incentive mechanisms. Also, at what point do tax hikes stop? Some of the key real solutions to many of societies challenges is to have its populace be more active in all of its inner working, helping them to better understand the constraints and opportunities as opposed to being a bunch of people getting of top of their little soap box. There is also a major need for strong reforms to tackle nepotism, corruption and laziness at all levels of society.