6 ms·

> there should be a heavy wealth tax that makes it hard to become a billionaire Why does everyone want to tax the billionaires? What are you going to get out o

> there should be a heavy wealth tax that makes it hard to become a billionaire Why does everyone want to tax the billionaires? What are you going to get out of it? Do you think taxing the billionaires is actually going to help the poor people? If so, riddle me this: Name one efficiently-run government organization.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
jfoutz 4y ago
Medicare?
- FabHK 4y ago
  Funnily enough, virtually all health insurance systems world wide have a higher government component than the US one, and better outcomes at a lower cost. (Spot the outlier on the first graph: https://ourworldindata.org/the-link-between-life-expectancy-and-health-spending-us-focus https://ourworldindata.org/the-link-between-life-expectancy-... )
CardenB 4y ago
Maybe it is less about the tax revenue and more about preventing power imbalance. Why is it good to have so much power concentrated in the hands of one person?
- evandale 4y ago
  I firmly believe Musk, Gates, and Buffet to name a few do more good with their money than if any government got their hands on it. Not all the billionaires are bad.
  - cute_boi 4y ago
    Looks like you need to look Shenanigans done by Musk, Gates etc. I don't know that much about Warren Buffet, but the main point is when you are billionaries you can earn kindness etc.. They hire PR agency so that gullible people like them. They are really not better than government because these people are the one who lobbies government to vest their selfish desires.
    - phaistra 4y ago
      > Looks like you need to look Shenanigans done by Musk, Gates etc You should check out the shenanigans that the US government gets away with. Whatever bad things Musk, Gates and crew is small fry compared to the government.
  - Johnny555 4y ago
    I firmly believe Musk, Gates, and Buffet to name a few do more good with their money than if any government got their hands on it. Not all the billionaires are bad. A side effect of a wealth tax is that instead of wealthy people building wealth that's just going to be taxed away, it would incentivize funding charitable foundations like the Gates Foundation. Bill Gates has done a lot of good with his foundation, but that doesn't meant that one person should control that much money.
  - dlp211 4y ago
    Taxes != spending so this is the wrong frame to view taxes through.
marcosdumay 4y ago
> Why does everyone want to tax the billionaires? Because they take a lot of value out of a shared society and concentrate too much power on their hands. > What are you going to get out of it? Reduce the power discrepancies, mostly, and money too. > Do you think taxing the billionaires is actually going to help the poor people? Yep. You are asking about government efficiency, but one of the reasons for the lack of efficiency is that billionaires do not want it.
- idoh 4y ago
  To what extent do you think that billionaires earn the wealth that they have?
  - marcosdumay 4y ago
    That seems to vary a lot, so it's not viable to make policy based on it.
- toephu2 4y ago
  The government is going to take all that new tax money from the billionaires and do what with it? Do you believe the government can efficiently manage the tax revenue to help the poor?. SF gov spends $60k/year per tent for the homeless [1] ..that's called a mismanagement of tax revenue (and probably massive corruption). [1] https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/S-F-officials-want-15-million-for-tent-sites-16269998.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/S-F-officials-w...
- passivate 4y ago
  That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
Apocryphon 4y ago
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
pineaux 4y ago
Well, its easy then: dont give it to government organisations, just give the money to other people directly in the form of a basic income. Set up a commercial bank owned by all the people of the US of A (you get one share when born and the share is non-fungible/non-tradeable) then let this bank fund small and medium bussinesses only. They are responsible for the majority of the work anyway. Tax land as well. Profits go to the shareholders and a well pages CEO, who also pays a hefty income tax. Rinse repeat. Set the maximum to a set multiple of the minimum. So you could become a billionaire theoretically, you Just have to make all Americans millionairs first.
- Petersipoi 4y ago
  I actually like the idea. Unfortunately it will never happen, because ultimately the government decides what happens, and this plan doesn't help the government. Maybe make the current president the CEO of this bank or something and it could get some momentum. But then we have whatever idiot got elected most recently using the bank as a political weapon.
weakfish 4y ago
The postal service is a marvel of efficiency
- toephu2 4y ago
  Right.. which is why it is running at a net loss? "USPS's operating revenue was $77 billion for the 2021 budget year, an increase of $3.9 billion, or 5.3%. It reported a 2020 net loss of $9.2 billion." https://www.reuters.com/business/us-postal-service-reports-49-billion-2021-net-loss-2021-11-10/#:~:text=USPS's%20operating%20revenue%20was%20%2477,losses%20over%20the%20next%20decade https://www.reuters.com/business/us-postal-service-reports-4....
  - Johnny555 4y ago
    It's a service. The US Highway system runs at a loss too if you treat it as a business. I can send a letter anywhere in t he country for 58 cents, UPS or Fedex would charge $10?
  - valenaut 4y ago
    Of course it runs at a loss. It’s a public service funded by taxes. The military also “runs at a loss”—should we expect it to be profitable?
  - vaidhy 4y ago
    There are 2 different metrics and I think you effectively shift from one to other as it suits you.. Metric 1: They provide an efficient service. Posts reach on time (rain or shine), they have systems and process that make the organization not waste effort. Metric 2: They earn more money that what is spent by them. By metric 1, postal service, railways and public transport in most places, a large part of governmental services (DMV), medicare in US are efficient. Depending on your neighborhood, even police, fire and ambulance are efficient. by metric 2, most government services will not be efficient.. however, the government is not a business and I would argue that because people confuse 2 with 1 is why US does not have a better quality of life. The job of government is service using tax dollars. Take public transport for example. In my mind, it should be mostly subsidized and effectively free. Trying to make it a profit center makes it a "non-public" transport and you end up with limited services which has secondary effect of reducing mobility and restraining the economy.
bojangleslover 4y ago
We will get something out of it, but only for a year or two. It won't go as far as you think. https://taxdude.substack.com/p/should-we-actually-wealthtax-billionaires?s=w https://taxdude.substack.com/p/should-we-actually-wealthtax-... Now if your goal is just to spite them for the illusion of justice, there are other ways of doing that.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

jfoutz 4y ago

Medicare?

FabHK 4y ago
Funnily enough, virtually all health insurance systems world wide have a higher government component than the US one, and better outcomes at a lower cost. (Spot the outlier on the first graph: https://ourworldindata.org/the-link-between-life-expectancy-and-health-spending-us-focus https://ourworldindata.org/the-link-between-life-expectancy-... )

CardenB 4y ago

Maybe it is less about the tax revenue and more about preventing power imbalance. Why is it good to have so much power concentrated in the hands of one person?

evandale 4y ago
I firmly believe Musk, Gates, and Buffet to name a few do more good with their money than if any government got their hands on it. Not all the billionaires are bad.
- cute_boi 4y ago
  Looks like you need to look Shenanigans done by Musk, Gates etc. I don't know that much about Warren Buffet, but the main point is when you are billionaries you can earn kindness etc.. They hire PR agency so that gullible people like them. They are really not better than government because these people are the one who lobbies government to vest their selfish desires.
  - phaistra 4y ago
    > Looks like you need to look Shenanigans done by Musk, Gates etc You should check out the shenanigans that the US government gets away with. Whatever bad things Musk, Gates and crew is small fry compared to the government.
- Johnny555 4y ago
  I firmly believe Musk, Gates, and Buffet to name a few do more good with their money than if any government got their hands on it. Not all the billionaires are bad. A side effect of a wealth tax is that instead of wealthy people building wealth that's just going to be taxed away, it would incentivize funding charitable foundations like the Gates Foundation. Bill Gates has done a lot of good with his foundation, but that doesn't meant that one person should control that much money.
- dlp211 4y ago
  Taxes != spending so this is the wrong frame to view taxes through.

marcosdumay 4y ago

> Why does everyone want to tax the billionaires? Because they take a lot of value out of a shared society and concentrate too much power on their hands. > What are you going to get out of it? Reduce the power discrepancies, mostly, and money too. > Do you think taxing the billionaires is actually going to help the poor people? Yep. You are asking about government efficiency, but one of the reasons for the lack of efficiency is that billionaires do not want it.

idoh 4y ago
To what extent do you think that billionaires earn the wealth that they have?
- marcosdumay 4y ago
  That seems to vary a lot, so it's not viable to make policy based on it.
toephu2 4y ago
The government is going to take all that new tax money from the billionaires and do what with it? Do you believe the government can efficiently manage the tax revenue to help the poor?. SF gov spends $60k/year per tent for the homeless [1] ..that's called a mismanagement of tax revenue (and probably massive corruption). [1] https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/S-F-officials-want-15-million-for-tent-sites-16269998.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/S-F-officials-w...
passivate 4y ago
That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.

Apocryphon 4y ago

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

pineaux 4y ago

Well, its easy then: dont give it to government organisations, just give the money to other people directly in the form of a basic income. Set up a commercial bank owned by all the people of the US of A (you get one share when born and the share is non-fungible/non-tradeable) then let this bank fund small and medium bussinesses only. They are responsible for the majority of the work anyway. Tax land as well. Profits go to the shareholders and a well pages CEO, who also pays a hefty income tax. Rinse repeat. Set the maximum to a set multiple of the minimum. So you could become a billionaire theoretically, you Just have to make all Americans millionairs first.

Petersipoi 4y ago
I actually like the idea. Unfortunately it will never happen, because ultimately the government decides what happens, and this plan doesn't help the government. Maybe make the current president the CEO of this bank or something and it could get some momentum. But then we have whatever idiot got elected most recently using the bank as a political weapon.

weakfish 4y ago

The postal service is a marvel of efficiency

toephu2 4y ago
Right.. which is why it is running at a net loss? "USPS's operating revenue was $77 billion for the 2021 budget year, an increase of $3.9 billion, or 5.3%. It reported a 2020 net loss of $9.2 billion." https://www.reuters.com/business/us-postal-service-reports-49-billion-2021-net-loss-2021-11-10/#:~:text=USPS's%20operating%20revenue%20was%20%2477,losses%20over%20the%20next%20decade https://www.reuters.com/business/us-postal-service-reports-4....
- Johnny555 4y ago
  It's a service. The US Highway system runs at a loss too if you treat it as a business. I can send a letter anywhere in t he country for 58 cents, UPS or Fedex would charge $10?
- valenaut 4y ago
  Of course it runs at a loss. It’s a public service funded by taxes. The military also “runs at a loss”—should we expect it to be profitable?
- vaidhy 4y ago
  There are 2 different metrics and I think you effectively shift from one to other as it suits you.. Metric 1: They provide an efficient service. Posts reach on time (rain or shine), they have systems and process that make the organization not waste effort. Metric 2: They earn more money that what is spent by them. By metric 1, postal service, railways and public transport in most places, a large part of governmental services (DMV), medicare in US are efficient. Depending on your neighborhood, even police, fire and ambulance are efficient. by metric 2, most government services will not be efficient.. however, the government is not a business and I would argue that because people confuse 2 with 1 is why US does not have a better quality of life. The job of government is service using tax dollars. Take public transport for example. In my mind, it should be mostly subsidized and effectively free. Trying to make it a profit center makes it a "non-public" transport and you end up with limited services which has secondary effect of reducing mobility and restraining the economy.

bojangleslover 4y ago

We will get something out of it, but only for a year or two. It won't go as far as you think. https://taxdude.substack.com/p/should-we-actually-wealthtax-billionaires?s=w https://taxdude.substack.com/p/should-we-actually-wealthtax-... Now if your goal is just to spite them for the illusion of justice, there are other ways of doing that.