5 ms·

I doubt this. The super rich have too much money and need this converted to assets. In the UK at least you're not just competing against would be first time buy

I doubt this. The super rich have too much money and need this converted to assets. In the UK at least you're not just competing against would be first time buyers but multi-national companies wanting to expand their portfolio and the super/ultra rich. We need to tax the rich to redistribute the wealth. Own more than 3 homes as a single entity? Mega taxes etc.

spacephysics 4y ago
Tax the rich doesn’t work like the utopic stories tell. Typically what happens is the rich leave to a place with less taxes or where they’re not seen as the mortal enemy of X local government. Then all that tax money they otherwise were paying goes somewhere else, and the state is left with a net-negative tax inflow. The top 1% pays over 25% of all taxes, and the top 50% pay 97% of all taxes: https://taxfoundation.org/publications/latest-federal-income-tax-data/ https://taxfoundation.org/publications/latest-federal-income... I agree we have a problem with wealth inequality, but taxing the rich is a simple, poor solution to a complex problem.
- bagacrap 4y ago
  that's the top 1% of people ordered by how much tax they pay, not the top 1% most wealthy. We tend to tax earnings rather than wealth and thus the super wealthy get by with minimal taxation. This should be fixed imo. Also if you try to dodge US taxes by renouncing your citizenship you owe a large one time payment so it doesn't work so well. So an exodus of super wealthy individuals seems unlikely.
  - tastyfreeze 4y ago
    Taxing wealth is even more blatant robbery than income taxes. "Give me the amount of your money that I want or go to jail."
    - lotsofpulp 4y ago
      So get rid of property taxes? Everyone who inherited land or valuable IP just gets to be lucky and sit on it?
      - tastyfreeze 4y ago
        Most wealth tax proposals are to take a percentage of a person's accumulated wealth annually. A property tax isn't what people are talking about for a wealth tax. I do believe that you should be able to keep accumulated wealth. We are all equals under the law. Once there is a wealth tax the definition of wealthy will be continually decreased so the government can take more. The government has an insatiable appetite for spending other people's money. It will always demand more.
        disgruntledphd2 4y ago
        Property/land taxes are the best form of wealth tax, as its difficult to shift your land to another jurisdiction.
        tastyfreeze 4y ago
        And those already exist. Which is why wealth tax proposals don't include property taxes.
        disgruntledphd2 4y ago
        In some places, yes. In other places they don't (or are incredibly small). More generally, if you're going to tax wealth property is the place to start.
        tastyfreeze 4y ago
        Like I said, that isn't what is bandied about as a wealth tax. Elizabeth Warren proposes a 2% annual tax for net worth over $50 million and 6% for over $1 billion. It is literally taking a percentage of what they own every year. Don't forget, they would still pay taxes when selling assets. https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/ultra-millionaire-tax https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/ultra-millionaire-tax

spacephysics 4y ago

Tax the rich doesn’t work like the utopic stories tell. Typically what happens is the rich leave to a place with less taxes or where they’re not seen as the mortal enemy of X local government. Then all that tax money they otherwise were paying goes somewhere else, and the state is left with a net-negative tax inflow. The top 1% pays over 25% of all taxes, and the top 50% pay 97% of all taxes: https://taxfoundation.org/publications/latest-federal-income-tax-data/ https://taxfoundation.org/publications/latest-federal-income... I agree we have a problem with wealth inequality, but taxing the rich is a simple, poor solution to a complex problem.

bagacrap 4y ago
that's the top 1% of people ordered by how much tax they pay, not the top 1% most wealthy. We tend to tax earnings rather than wealth and thus the super wealthy get by with minimal taxation. This should be fixed imo. Also if you try to dodge US taxes by renouncing your citizenship you owe a large one time payment so it doesn't work so well. So an exodus of super wealthy individuals seems unlikely.
- tastyfreeze 4y ago
  Taxing wealth is even more blatant robbery than income taxes. "Give me the amount of your money that I want or go to jail."
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    So get rid of property taxes? Everyone who inherited land or valuable IP just gets to be lucky and sit on it?
    - tastyfreeze 4y ago
      Most wealth tax proposals are to take a percentage of a person's accumulated wealth annually. A property tax isn't what people are talking about for a wealth tax. I do believe that you should be able to keep accumulated wealth. We are all equals under the law. Once there is a wealth tax the definition of wealthy will be continually decreased so the government can take more. The government has an insatiable appetite for spending other people's money. It will always demand more.
      - disgruntledphd2 4y ago
        Property/land taxes are the best form of wealth tax, as its difficult to shift your land to another jurisdiction.
        tastyfreeze 4y ago
        And those already exist. Which is why wealth tax proposals don't include property taxes.
        disgruntledphd2 4y ago
        In some places, yes. In other places they don't (or are incredibly small). More generally, if you're going to tax wealth property is the place to start.
        tastyfreeze 4y ago
        Like I said, that isn't what is bandied about as a wealth tax. Elizabeth Warren proposes a 2% annual tax for net worth over $50 million and 6% for over $1 billion. It is literally taking a percentage of what they own every year. Don't forget, they would still pay taxes when selling assets. https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/ultra-millionaire-tax https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/ultra-millionaire-tax