7 ms·

I'd much rather implement a maximum wage, would do a huge amount of good for our society. Let's say a cap on any more than $10M a year for total wealth gain for

I'd much rather implement a maximum wage, would do a huge amount of good for our society. Let's say a cap on any more than $10M a year for total wealth gain for any individual. Everything else is taxed at 100%. Suddenly, we could all have healthcare, kids would get the supplies they need for school, a UBI scheme would be doable. Basically, we could finally stop acting like a poor third world country.

jazzyjackson 3y ago
This is literally how the freemasons started as a secret society btw. After the black plague there were salary caps on skilled labor but the masons decided to hell with that and colluded to demand higher wages under the table if you wanted a cathedral or a city hall built they held all the leverage
j7ake 3y ago
Please explain why taxing people beyond $10M at 100% will result in better social programs? Your theory can also be countered with another theory: people making a certain amount of money will simply leave the country, leaving you with less tax revenue than the current system. Also, how does one tax unrealized stock market gains (which is what most wealthy people's wealth are)? I have not seen that policy anywhere and I imagine it would be very difficult to implement.
tomcam 3y ago
Is it your thought that a 100% tax rate would increase the productivity of those being taxed at that rate? Or even leave it unchanged?
- lacrimacida 3y ago
  Not exactly 100% but high enough to keep greed in check after a certain cap
  - lotsofpulp 3y ago
    Why tax income? Wealth should be taxed. The problem is hoarding, not doing valuable work. For example, owning land that is empty or an empty building for years just so it appreciates deprives the community. Tax the shit out of it so it forces the owner to use it productively or sell it so someone else can figure out how to use it productively.
    - jazzyjackson 3y ago
      This is neo-georgism, no? I knew somebody always advocating for this while simultaneously resigned to the fact it wouldn't ever be pulled off (too much inertia in the status quo i guess) but i like it a lot better than "eat the rich"
    - tomcam 3y ago
      If you use your car only couple of days a week, should you be taxed more on your car than someone who uses theirs every day of the week? What about a piano you haven’t practiced on for a few years? The expensive ski boots you haven’t touched since high school?
      - lotsofpulp 3y ago
        Maybe, but we can at least start with the more fundamental resources that have to be shared amongst people and are in limited quantities, such as land. Driving giant pickup trucks for no productive reason also uses up a societal resource, and increases societal risks, so I would not mind seeing extra taxes on those compared to more reasonable methods of transport, and a case could be easily made that all personal vehicles should be taxed much higher to incentivize public transit construction and use. Society is not losing out much if you don’t use your ski boots since college, but maybe society does benefit if you consume less throwaway things, so a generally increased tax on consumption, perhaps based on mass and distance (since more mass moved further distances takes more energy to move) might work. Easiest way to do this is simply 10x tax on fossil fuels, it will flow down to everything. Tax things you don’t want. Taxing the result of productive work (income) is disincentivizing something we do want. We want people working hard and striving to do the difficult tasks that are in short supply of expertise (and higher income).
jahewson 3y ago
Yeah so that’s not how taxes work.
Gormo 3y ago
> Suddenly, we could all have healthcare, kids would get the supplies they need for school, a UBI scheme would be doable. Could you explain the reasoning by which the policy you propose would be expected to produce these outcomes?

jazzyjackson 3y ago

This is literally how the freemasons started as a secret society btw. After the black plague there were salary caps on skilled labor but the masons decided to hell with that and colluded to demand higher wages under the table if you wanted a cathedral or a city hall built they held all the leverage

j7ake 3y ago

Please explain why taxing people beyond $10M at 100% will result in better social programs? Your theory can also be countered with another theory: people making a certain amount of money will simply leave the country, leaving you with less tax revenue than the current system. Also, how does one tax unrealized stock market gains (which is what most wealthy people's wealth are)? I have not seen that policy anywhere and I imagine it would be very difficult to implement.

tomcam 3y ago

Is it your thought that a 100% tax rate would increase the productivity of those being taxed at that rate? Or even leave it unchanged?

lacrimacida 3y ago
Not exactly 100% but high enough to keep greed in check after a certain cap
- lotsofpulp 3y ago
  Why tax income? Wealth should be taxed. The problem is hoarding, not doing valuable work. For example, owning land that is empty or an empty building for years just so it appreciates deprives the community. Tax the shit out of it so it forces the owner to use it productively or sell it so someone else can figure out how to use it productively.
  - jazzyjackson 3y ago
    This is neo-georgism, no? I knew somebody always advocating for this while simultaneously resigned to the fact it wouldn't ever be pulled off (too much inertia in the status quo i guess) but i like it a lot better than "eat the rich"
  - tomcam 3y ago
    If you use your car only couple of days a week, should you be taxed more on your car than someone who uses theirs every day of the week? What about a piano you haven’t practiced on for a few years? The expensive ski boots you haven’t touched since high school?
    - lotsofpulp 3y ago
      Maybe, but we can at least start with the more fundamental resources that have to be shared amongst people and are in limited quantities, such as land. Driving giant pickup trucks for no productive reason also uses up a societal resource, and increases societal risks, so I would not mind seeing extra taxes on those compared to more reasonable methods of transport, and a case could be easily made that all personal vehicles should be taxed much higher to incentivize public transit construction and use. Society is not losing out much if you don’t use your ski boots since college, but maybe society does benefit if you consume less throwaway things, so a generally increased tax on consumption, perhaps based on mass and distance (since more mass moved further distances takes more energy to move) might work. Easiest way to do this is simply 10x tax on fossil fuels, it will flow down to everything. Tax things you don’t want. Taxing the result of productive work (income) is disincentivizing something we do want. We want people working hard and striving to do the difficult tasks that are in short supply of expertise (and higher income).

jahewson 3y ago

Yeah so that’s not how taxes work.

Gormo 3y ago

> Suddenly, we could all have healthcare, kids would get the supplies they need for school, a UBI scheme would be doable. Could you explain the reasoning by which the policy you propose would be expected to produce these outcomes?