So incentivize not saving and unwise money management?
Obvious_Chapter2082 on
Unconstitutional
Standard-Square-7699 on
Tax land.
MrSingularitarian on
This is far too oversimplified. Many peoples wealth is entirely in their home and retirement assets, would you tax someone more if their house increased in value, forcing them to sell their house? Or tax them more if they were doing well saving for retirement?
What you really mean is tax excessive wealth well beyond the needs and wants if a typical human, and this needs a definition. Are you only taxing company stock in a non retirement vehicle? What if they put their own company stock in an IRA like Ellison did? There needs to be a limitation so you don’t destroy people who simply did what they were supposed to and saved and invested wisely.
Also add to this, what if a founder does very well and their company explodes in value, do you take away control of their own company from them by making them sell their stock to pay your wealth tax? Or is this only limited to founders who do REALLY well to the tune of a 1 billion+
pbj_sammichez on
The world just needs tax brackets that make sense. The marginal rates need to go up more rapidly for higher earners rather than leveling off at high income. We need to bring back tax brackets like the US had in the early 1900s. 90% tax on all income over a certain threshold. It basically makes grotesque wealth accumulation impossible through legal means. Then we can cut the lower tax rates and give a break to people who work for a living. Shit- we could make the lowest tax bracket negative, acting as a form of welfare. The extra money you make would still be tied to the hours you worked, so it doesn’t serve as some incentive to do nothing. But it does mean that people with parasitic employers aren’t punished for the greed of management. Obviously this represents an enormous tax reform and it would have to be part of a full tax policy package, but the high marginal rates were what made America the powerhouse it was in WW2.
baby_budda on
Employers would just pay you less. You can’t win.
urbanek2525 on
I prefer to tax consumption above a certain level. It works like a sales tax.
1: National sales tax set to a percentage needed to cover the budget.
2: Compute the amount of spending required to maintain a lower middle class life style, apply the percentage. Send everyone in America a check for that ammount. In other words, pre-refund the sales tax.
Done. Now wealthy people who buy more stuff pay more taxes simply because they spend more money.
ApprehensiveGur6842 on
While I agree with the premise here, I’m with a little of both. Everyone pays their fair share.
bpaps on
Billionaires SHOULD NOT EXIST! Tax them out of existence. No more private schools. Universal health care! Get your shit together, America. You’re embarrassing right now.
9 Comments
So incentivize not saving and unwise money management?
Unconstitutional
Tax land.
This is far too oversimplified. Many peoples wealth is entirely in their home and retirement assets, would you tax someone more if their house increased in value, forcing them to sell their house? Or tax them more if they were doing well saving for retirement?
What you really mean is tax excessive wealth well beyond the needs and wants if a typical human, and this needs a definition. Are you only taxing company stock in a non retirement vehicle? What if they put their own company stock in an IRA like Ellison did? There needs to be a limitation so you don’t destroy people who simply did what they were supposed to and saved and invested wisely.
Also add to this, what if a founder does very well and their company explodes in value, do you take away control of their own company from them by making them sell their stock to pay your wealth tax? Or is this only limited to founders who do REALLY well to the tune of a 1 billion+
The world just needs tax brackets that make sense. The marginal rates need to go up more rapidly for higher earners rather than leveling off at high income. We need to bring back tax brackets like the US had in the early 1900s. 90% tax on all income over a certain threshold. It basically makes grotesque wealth accumulation impossible through legal means. Then we can cut the lower tax rates and give a break to people who work for a living. Shit- we could make the lowest tax bracket negative, acting as a form of welfare. The extra money you make would still be tied to the hours you worked, so it doesn’t serve as some incentive to do nothing. But it does mean that people with parasitic employers aren’t punished for the greed of management. Obviously this represents an enormous tax reform and it would have to be part of a full tax policy package, but the high marginal rates were what made America the powerhouse it was in WW2.
Employers would just pay you less. You can’t win.
I prefer to tax consumption above a certain level. It works like a sales tax.
1: National sales tax set to a percentage needed to cover the budget.
2: Compute the amount of spending required to maintain a lower middle class life style, apply the percentage. Send everyone in America a check for that ammount. In other words, pre-refund the sales tax.
Done. Now wealthy people who buy more stuff pay more taxes simply because they spend more money.
While I agree with the premise here, I’m with a little of both. Everyone pays their fair share.
Billionaires SHOULD NOT EXIST! Tax them out of existence. No more private schools. Universal health care! Get your shit together, America. You’re embarrassing right now.