6 ms·

If the US government really wanted to bring back industrial manufacturing, tax policy is one obvious route - eg a 2/3 tax on billionaire and corporate wealth, s

If the US government really wanted to bring back industrial manufacturing, tax policy is one obvious route - eg a 2/3 tax on billionaire and corporate wealth, such as on the huge pile of cash Buffet-Berkshire is sitting on, but then offer a way out - invest that cash in domestic manufacturing and R & D and it won't be taxed. This could motivate the private sector to go back to the Bell Labs model, too.

maxilevi 1y ago
As if the government could do better capital allocation in the economy than buffett
- Someone 1y ago
  Why couldn’t they, for the citizens of the USA? Buffett likely would not allocate it to optimize the outcome for US citizens.
- andrewl 1y ago
  As if the government could do better capital allocation in the economy than buffett That seems to be what Buffett is suggesting.
33MHz-i486 1y ago
that doesnt really work if they have to compete on price with foreign producers that have lower labor costs, looser environmental regulations, deeper supply chains and better process knowledge. might as well eat the tax (waiting for monopolistic opportunities) or light the money on fire
WalterBright 1y ago
Billionaires get that way by investing in companies. You don't have to force them into it.
- mmooss 1y ago
  They also get that way by inheriting wealth, by buying favorable laws and regulations, by anticompetitive practices (we've seen a few in the IT sector), and by other problematic behavior. I agree that free markets are great in principle but your comments seem dogmatic - all free markets and only free markets. The conversation would be much more interesting if it was about the nuances.
  - WalterBright 1y ago
    > They also get that way by inheriting wealth, Then their parents must have been billionaires, generating it with investments. If the inheritors divest from those investments, then they incur enormous income taxes. So it's likely to stay. > by buying favorable laws and regulations, Then it's not free market. There is no government system that is immune from buying influence and corruption. > by anticompetitive practices (we've seen a few in the IT sector), and by other problematic behavior. Nothing is perfect. > The conversation would be much more interesting if it was about the nuances. Perhaps, but nuances do not drive prosperity. It would also be more interesting if you showed me a prosperous socialist economy.
    - riffraff 1y ago
      > the inheritors divest from those investments, then they incur enormous income taxes. But isn't this sidestepped buy the "buy, borrow, die" approach, often criticized? https://www.theatlantic.com/economy/archive/2025/03/tax-loophole-buy-borrow-die/682031/ https://www.theatlantic.com/economy/archive/2025/03/tax-loop...
      - WalterBright 1y ago
        The investments remain if they borrow against them. They just become collateral for the loan.
        riffraff 1y ago
        But when they die the basis for the capital gain is the value at the time of death, not the original value, so you basically sidestep capital gains taxation, your children or spouse pay back the loan and get a ton more money than they would otherwise. I'm not an expert on taxation, but this is something people have been complaining about for a long time.

maxilevi 1y ago

As if the government could do better capital allocation in the economy than buffett

Someone 1y ago
Why couldn’t they, for the citizens of the USA? Buffett likely would not allocate it to optimize the outcome for US citizens.
andrewl 1y ago
As if the government could do better capital allocation in the economy than buffett That seems to be what Buffett is suggesting.

33MHz-i486 1y ago

that doesnt really work if they have to compete on price with foreign producers that have lower labor costs, looser environmental regulations, deeper supply chains and better process knowledge. might as well eat the tax (waiting for monopolistic opportunities) or light the money on fire

WalterBright 1y ago

Billionaires get that way by investing in companies. You don't have to force them into it.

mmooss 1y ago
They also get that way by inheriting wealth, by buying favorable laws and regulations, by anticompetitive practices (we've seen a few in the IT sector), and by other problematic behavior. I agree that free markets are great in principle but your comments seem dogmatic - all free markets and only free markets. The conversation would be much more interesting if it was about the nuances.
- WalterBright 1y ago
  > They also get that way by inheriting wealth, Then their parents must have been billionaires, generating it with investments. If the inheritors divest from those investments, then they incur enormous income taxes. So it's likely to stay. > by buying favorable laws and regulations, Then it's not free market. There is no government system that is immune from buying influence and corruption. > by anticompetitive practices (we've seen a few in the IT sector), and by other problematic behavior. Nothing is perfect. > The conversation would be much more interesting if it was about the nuances. Perhaps, but nuances do not drive prosperity. It would also be more interesting if you showed me a prosperous socialist economy.
  - riffraff 1y ago
    > the inheritors divest from those investments, then they incur enormous income taxes. But isn't this sidestepped buy the "buy, borrow, die" approach, often criticized? https://www.theatlantic.com/economy/archive/2025/03/tax-loophole-buy-borrow-die/682031/ https://www.theatlantic.com/economy/archive/2025/03/tax-loop...
    - WalterBright 1y ago
      The investments remain if they borrow against them. They just become collateral for the loan.
      - riffraff 1y ago
        But when they die the basis for the capital gain is the value at the time of death, not the original value, so you basically sidestep capital gains taxation, your children or spouse pay back the loan and get a ton more money than they would otherwise. I'm not an expert on taxation, but this is something people have been complaining about for a long time.