Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
i don't want the feds to have money at all ever for any purpose because they use it to build concentration camps
Note that the inflation adjusted average rate of return on the stock market over the long run is ~8% (https://www.officialdata.org/us/stocks/s-p-500/1980)
That means a 2% wealth tax on billionaires would not make them lose a single penny. Instead, it would just slow down the rate at which their wealth grows (while still growing exponentially).
You don't have to tax them directly. You can also tax things they enjoy.
This year, France increased taxes on private jets by 300%
https://www.fliteline.com/blog/understanding-frances-new-private-jet-passenger-tax
Billionaires didn't even notice.
Luxury taxes are bad because supply is less elastic than demand, so the tax incidence falls on suppliers. In other words, the working class people building the airplanes pay the tax because the rich can just not buy them.
K.I.S.S. Tax wealth. Tax the only thing they really care about. Making them notice isn't just more satisfying; it's better economics.
That's not good enough because the vast majority of their wealth will never be spent. It will just be used to accumulate more wealth.
That's why all of these billionaires have real tax rates in the low single digits (or less). Even with opulent spending habits they keep most of their gains unrealized, so they are never taxed.
Do we really have 3000 billionaires in this world? That's disgusting.
Take it all. The GOP has abused their time, funded by the rich. Do the same when it’s ours. Then the rich won’t have the same power to influence elections any more, and those who deserve a chance to thrive can finally have one.
It should be much higher, and not just billionaires. Add in 100 millionaires to the mix, and a lot of 10 millionaires too.
I honestly find it hard to believe that there is a meaningful difference in lifestyle if you make over $10m a year vs over $100m. So you can afford a bigger boat faster? Save and seethe on your new money dingy.
I fully support a unavoidable progressive tax that taxes every dollar above $10m in a year at 100% and nobody that hits that will suffer or be less motivated in the slightest.
Just enough to fund ICE
A 100% wealth tax on every dollar $1 billion and up would solve a lot of problems and doesn't require guillotines.
Realistically, even if enacted, would be tricky to implement, and would definitely have to be done slowly not to shock the economy.
I think this also means creating a system where companies beyond a certain size cannot be privately owned and must be governed by large "committees", since beyond a certain evaluation, concentrated controlling entities would be forced to sell off.
Long shot research and development (e.g. think employing thousands for a decade, like drug development) could probably be harder to get started, but at the same time less corruptible due to spreading out power.
I do think spreading out power can be a good thing, but I have to acknowledge that would probably make the government much more powerful (i.e. corruptible) by comparison.
Also, a lot of wealth is tied up in non-liquid assets, so these billionaires would be forced/incentivized to hold more liquid value -- who'd want to hold something that can be capped one year only to have it fall the next?
So on one hand, a ton of market value disappears from the economy due to increased supply, yet on the other a ton of hoarded value is unlocked to circulate in the economy.
Anyway, don't know where I'm going with this, I'm not an expert by any means.
Who needs a billion though? Cut that down to like 100 mil, or even 50.
Inflation-adjusted or the monkey's paw will curl a finger.
Every year, your total assets are assessed and every red cent required to bring you to below 1 billion dollars is taken.
IF you ended up getting taxed at this rate, a bench gets installed in a public park with a small placard having your name on it. You get to pick the park.
NGL I would still totally want to be on that placard. Central Park, where all the other rich people can see it.
We could call it Guillotine Insurance 👍
If only they could appreciate the absolute and compounding value of that
Cervical vertebrae security
Luigi Deterrent Tax
Let us inquire about great inequities act