5 ms·

yes, net worth estimates are all wrong and is more so a form of lust or wealth pornography for the underclass. the estimates have several assumptions that are

yes, net worth estimates are all wrong and is more so a form of lust or wealth pornography for the underclass. the estimates have several assumptions that are all off. for example, aside from publicly disclosed equity holdings, nothing else is listed unless someone was sloppy about their real estate holdings. but for one-off payments, like an actor in a big movie, they assume it is never spent. they have no way of knowing anything, which is actually pretty nice. but I would say the whole list is completely wrong, even at the top, about who is at the top, even when limiting the list to non-state actor wealth. edit due to rate limit: this comment is purely about a data collection realities and limitations, and is devoid of any comment on tax realities

JKCalhoun 5y ago
> a form of lust or wealth pornography for the underclass I can't quite square your characterization with, for example, the reality that Warren Buffett's secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does. Some of us don't lust for wealth as much as we simply dislike that loopholes exist exclusively for the ultra-wealthy.
- syshum 5y ago
  Because Capital gains is not income, and should not be treated as income... There are alot of problems with Capital Gains taxation in the first place (like for example the fact it does not factor in inflation at all which is a problem for assets held for a long time) Treating it pure income is not the solution
  - larkost 5y ago
    I get capital gains from dividends and stock sales. How do you figure that that is not income? I literally do no work for that money, but am charged less in taxes for it than that on my salary. But it is new money adding to my wealth. How is taxing that at a lower rate anything but privileging those who are better off (I don't think of myself as rich, but others may dispute that). I understand your point about inflation, but then you would have to count that in in interest earnings, and a lot of other places. The Federal Reserve essentially uses inflation as a club to force people to keep their money moving, thus simulating the economy. Why would we kill that club for capital gains? Treating capital gains as regular income absolutely is a solution to even out the playing field. I would even take taxing them at more (even though it hits my pocket book). But an even playing field where business owners don't get to play around with their income to have it rated better than their employees sounds like a good start.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - syshum 5y ago
      >>The Federal Reserve essentially uses inflation as a club to force people to keep their money moving, thus simulating the economy Sounds like you think this is acceptable, to manipulate the currency to force people do things they would not normally do.. We have fought wars over other nations doing things like that... I do not find that practice to be acceptable. So we are starting very different economic worldviews chances are we will not agree on much when it comes to taxation
    - dasil003 5y ago
      One of the arguments against raising the capital gains rate is that the people enjoying that rate don't need to realize gains, they can simply borrow cash against their assets, so raising the capital gains rate could theoretically reduce tax revenue. Not sure how true that is in practice, but I thought it was at least worth considering.
  - drewg123 5y ago
    Seems like the only fair way to handle Capitol Gains would be to tax the after-inflation gains as ordinary income.
- vmception 5y ago
  I was commenting on how net worth estimates are done and who they are for. You are talking about a totally different subject. Ironically, if these net worth lists just serve the purpose of making your blood boil about inequality, even when the lists are wrong and way off, then you are actually part of the entertainment rationale of who these lists are for. The fact is that "Warren Buffett paying more in taxes than his secretary" is the first thing you think of, instead of say... Bob Smith, a random generic unassuming American heir of a random slave trader who invested the proceeds in trusts and private equity funds. If they don't have publicly traded wealth, then the lists will be filled with the wrong people and the wrong amounts.
  - JKCalhoun 5y ago
    Warren Buffett and his secretary is in fact the first thing I thought to give an example of since I assume most people know the story. Though the wealthy have been increasing and amassing their fortunes more and more over the past decades while the rest of the world has been getting squeezed out my blood isn't boiling at all. Personally, I have been able to thread the needle and live more comfortably than my parents. I worry more about those whose blood is however boiling and likely to do something violent if the status quo continues. I wish that we could get some laws without loopholes, with teeth, to reign in the growing wealth disparity before we cross the Rubicon and it becomes too late.
    - vmception 5y ago
      My current thoughts on the matter are that if nobody talks to them, then they won't know what laws to change. Really, the best I've seen lately is ProPublica talking about Roth IRAs, 20 years after one person used them a certain way successfully. It seems clear to me that I'll be able to make what I want dollar wise, and not be in the country when they do something violent or even move to seize assets. I'll probably play both sides, like how Thomas Jefferson allowed his mansion to be used by French Revolution rebels, and dipped back out to the US to bang his slaves. Squad goals, I mean not the slavery part, just recognizing who exactly our founding fathers and examples and role models are.

JKCalhoun 5y ago

> a form of lust or wealth pornography for the underclass I can't quite square your characterization with, for example, the reality that Warren Buffett's secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does. Some of us don't lust for wealth as much as we simply dislike that loopholes exist exclusively for the ultra-wealthy.

syshum 5y ago
Because Capital gains is not income, and should not be treated as income... There are alot of problems with Capital Gains taxation in the first place (like for example the fact it does not factor in inflation at all which is a problem for assets held for a long time) Treating it pure income is not the solution
- larkost 5y ago
  I get capital gains from dividends and stock sales. How do you figure that that is not income? I literally do no work for that money, but am charged less in taxes for it than that on my salary. But it is new money adding to my wealth. How is taxing that at a lower rate anything but privileging those who are better off (I don't think of myself as rich, but others may dispute that). I understand your point about inflation, but then you would have to count that in in interest earnings, and a lot of other places. The Federal Reserve essentially uses inflation as a club to force people to keep their money moving, thus simulating the economy. Why would we kill that club for capital gains? Treating capital gains as regular income absolutely is a solution to even out the playing field. I would even take taxing them at more (even though it hits my pocket book). But an even playing field where business owners don't get to play around with their income to have it rated better than their employees sounds like a good start.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - syshum 5y ago
    >>The Federal Reserve essentially uses inflation as a club to force people to keep their money moving, thus simulating the economy Sounds like you think this is acceptable, to manipulate the currency to force people do things they would not normally do.. We have fought wars over other nations doing things like that... I do not find that practice to be acceptable. So we are starting very different economic worldviews chances are we will not agree on much when it comes to taxation
  - dasil003 5y ago
    One of the arguments against raising the capital gains rate is that the people enjoying that rate don't need to realize gains, they can simply borrow cash against their assets, so raising the capital gains rate could theoretically reduce tax revenue. Not sure how true that is in practice, but I thought it was at least worth considering.
- drewg123 5y ago
  Seems like the only fair way to handle Capitol Gains would be to tax the after-inflation gains as ordinary income.
vmception 5y ago
I was commenting on how net worth estimates are done and who they are for. You are talking about a totally different subject. Ironically, if these net worth lists just serve the purpose of making your blood boil about inequality, even when the lists are wrong and way off, then you are actually part of the entertainment rationale of who these lists are for. The fact is that "Warren Buffett paying more in taxes than his secretary" is the first thing you think of, instead of say... Bob Smith, a random generic unassuming American heir of a random slave trader who invested the proceeds in trusts and private equity funds. If they don't have publicly traded wealth, then the lists will be filled with the wrong people and the wrong amounts.
- JKCalhoun 5y ago
  Warren Buffett and his secretary is in fact the first thing I thought to give an example of since I assume most people know the story. Though the wealthy have been increasing and amassing their fortunes more and more over the past decades while the rest of the world has been getting squeezed out my blood isn't boiling at all. Personally, I have been able to thread the needle and live more comfortably than my parents. I worry more about those whose blood is however boiling and likely to do something violent if the status quo continues. I wish that we could get some laws without loopholes, with teeth, to reign in the growing wealth disparity before we cross the Rubicon and it becomes too late.
  - vmception 5y ago
    My current thoughts on the matter are that if nobody talks to them, then they won't know what laws to change. Really, the best I've seen lately is ProPublica talking about Roth IRAs, 20 years after one person used them a certain way successfully. It seems clear to me that I'll be able to make what I want dollar wise, and not be in the country when they do something violent or even move to seize assets. I'll probably play both sides, like how Thomas Jefferson allowed his mansion to be used by French Revolution rebels, and dipped back out to the US to bang his slaves. Squad goals, I mean not the slavery part, just recognizing who exactly our founding fathers and examples and role models are.