3 ms·
The actual proposals at the time I wrote this was a wealth tax applying to wealth greater than $50 million. That’s substantially different from one that starts
by nindalf 2y ago
The actual proposals at the time I wrote this was a wealth tax applying to wealth greater than $50 million.
That’s substantially different from one that starts at $0.
- rhubarbtree 2y agoIsn’t PG using that as an example and actually says it’s simpler to calculate that way? This doesn’t feel like a generous reading. I’m not against a wealth tax and I’m not aligned with PG, but I do think it’s important to be generous in your interpretation. I think PG is just arguing wealth taxes are unfair on founders. $2m starting point is reasonable btw, that’s a good ballpark for a founders share at pre seed.
- nindalf 2y agoI think it's presented in a way that makes him sound very reasonable, and make a wealth tax sound very stupid. - A small time founder losing 2/3rds of their stock - OH NO, wealth tax is terrible! - A businessman worth $162 of stock ends up being worth billions as their stock appreciates, despite having to pay wealth taxes. Huh, maybe wealth tax is alright.