3 ms·

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

by mmooss 2y 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 2y 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 2y 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 2y ago
    The investments remain if they borrow against them. They just become collateral for the loan.
    - riffraff 2y 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.
- mmooss 2y ago
  Your Manichean divide between 'free market' and 'socialist' doesn't reflect reality. You seem obsessed. > nothing is perfect The same could be said about anything, including free market economics. It's meaningless. > nuances do not drive prosperity They certainly do. The differences are often in the details. > Perhaps That's honest, at least ...
  - WalterBright 2y ago
    > You seem obsessed Being rude is not persuasive. > including free market economics. It's meaningless. I've explicitly said many times that free markets work even if they're not ideal or perfect.
- Ey7NFZ3P0nzAe 2y ago
  > Then it's not free market. There is no government system that is immune from buying influence and corruption The point is that if you're forced to put your money into industries / r&d etc then you don't have enough money to bribe people / political parties / news outlets etc.

by mmooss 2y ago

WalterBright 2y 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 2y 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 2y ago
  The investments remain if they borrow against them. They just become collateral for the loan.
  - riffraff 2y 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.
mmooss 2y ago
Your Manichean divide between 'free market' and 'socialist' doesn't reflect reality. You seem obsessed. > nothing is perfect The same could be said about anything, including free market economics. It's meaningless. > nuances do not drive prosperity They certainly do. The differences are often in the details. > Perhaps That's honest, at least ...
- WalterBright 2y ago
  > You seem obsessed Being rude is not persuasive. > including free market economics. It's meaningless. I've explicitly said many times that free markets work even if they're not ideal or perfect.
Ey7NFZ3P0nzAe 2y ago
> Then it's not free market. There is no government system that is immune from buying influence and corruption The point is that if you're forced to put your money into industries / r&d etc then you don't have enough money to bribe people / political parties / news outlets etc.