Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The 99.5% act (proposed legislation)

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How would wealth be calculated?

    Seems like there could be a lot of wiggle room for shenanigans there.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Zaphod View Post
      Unlikely it passes. Way too many senators and people making the decisions fall into these buckets or at least will feel like they do, so beyond even normal reservations, it doesnt make personal sense for them so...
      I was actually just looking into articles on the internet about net worth of senators of representatives. Quite a very would be hit hard by this. They surely want to protect what they’ve earned.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by endo4jc View Post

        I was actually just looking into articles on the internet about net worth of senators of representatives. Quite a very would be hit hard by this. They surely want to protect what they’ve earned.
        They'll just exempt themselves as they do on any law they pass.

        Comment


        • I am 100% against a wealth tax. Its just beyond stupid. Its exceedingly complex, probably impossible to implement well and its flat out unnecessary. We already have vehicles in place (income, corporate, property (a wealth tax), and capital gains taxes). Tweaking any of the existing laws eliminates the need for a cumbersome and stupid 'wealth tax'.

          You just cannot tax someone on their unrealized wealth without some compensatory mechanism for the next day when it is much less. Very dumb. If you wanted to mess with that you'd have to address loans taken collateralized by said wealth and tax it as income in some way. Which, contrary to personal finance sites is how a great deal of the very rich operate, no income, lots of loans as its very tax efficient.

          I think the issue here is again pragmatic in nature. We have the idea of a wealth tax because passing any other taxes is not going to be seen as palatable to any of the population, which they cant be blamed about really since we get very little for our taxes in america.

          And it doesnt matter how little money or wealth you have, 65% tax feels viscerally wrong making it DOA really. This has always been sanders biggest issues, he is out of touch with humanity and thresholds of what even approaches popular policy, turning him into a performative politician by and large.

          Balancing the budget is an illusion, always has been and taxes have little to do with that. The aggregate debt will never be paid, it isnt meant to. You can view it as a transfer from the government to the people, so we the folks get richer which aint that bad.

          The tax code should be much easier on individuals and income earners imo, on everyone really, but then who will pay turbotax? No joke, one of the largest lobbiers against simplifying the tax code.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by ACN View Post

            They'll just exempt themselves as they do on any law they pass.
            Term limits for senators and representatives.

            Illogical why this is not in place.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by ENT Doc View Post

              I don’t think you understand your argument. You say that we can address this through eliminating deductions but don’t specify what those are. You then recognize that the wealth of the Uber wealthy is based on value appreciation of their underlying business, lament the fact that this isn’t being taxed more along the way, but then say we don’t need a wealth tax. Also, the marginal incentive argument makes no sense for shares and business appreciation not determined by the person you’re supposedly targeting.
              ya it must be magic they pay so far below the brackets they are in for effective rates. No shenanigans, no deductions.

              I am not a fancy accountant so I don’t know all the tricks Buffett uses. That doesn’t mean I can’t identify there clearly are tricks when he is paying less effective tax than his secretary. It’s basic math. I don’t understand what you’re saying, before you said you agreed with eliminating deductions. Do you not agree that eliminating deductions would relatively tax the wealthy more? Who itemizes their returns, poor people or rich people?

              Increase long term cap gains then. If you want to penalize day trading and etc then make short term cap gains higher. I don’t know why capital investment is somehow considered better for system than human investment (ie working ).

              it’s not purely from share appreciation. CEO compensation in modern times is primary derived from shares granted which can be taxed in multiple ways. You make it sound like they get so many shares day 1 and then do a good job and it appreciates and they become mega rich . No the process keeps happening and they get more shares granted.

              Comment


              • Take someone like Buffet. No one said he was forced to take tax breaks. Heck, if he thinks he should pay more or “help out” more then he should just pay it.

                Buffet, do it!

                Give uncle Sam what you think you should.

                BUT then shut the bleep up about what you think others should pay.

                It is NOT your $. I earned it. It was taxed heavily.


                Do what you want with yours. Leave mine alone.
                Last edited by Tangler; 03-28-2021, 07:12 AM.

                Comment


                • funny everyone talks about Buffett but he’s really a poor example. His tax rate is low because he takes little salary, he doesn’t live extravagantly, and his massive wealth is almost entirely wrapped up in a Corp that never pays dividends. So it’s all massive unrealized gains. He doesn’t sit on a bunch of other boards getting hefty paychecks. He doesn’t have a ton of leveraged real estate holdings. He donates massive amounts to charities. Far far more than his children will inherit. He hasn’t moved his company to Ireland or whatever to take advantage of tax loopholes (Apple). He is a huge cheerleader for America and we should want more people to do exactly what he has done.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by jacoavlu View Post
                    funny everyone talks about Buffett but he’s really a poor example. His tax rate is low because he takes little salary, he doesn’t live extravagantly, and his massive wealth is almost entirely wrapped up in a Corp that never pays dividends. So it’s all massive unrealized gains. He doesn’t sit on a bunch of other boards getting hefty paychecks. He doesn’t have a ton of leveraged real estate holdings. He donates massive amounts to charities. Far far more than his children will inherit. He hasn’t moved his company to Ireland or whatever to take advantage of tax loopholes (Apple). He is a huge cheerleader for America and we should want more people to do exactly what he has done.
                    It’s representative of the overall problem though. I’m sure Bezos or Musk effective rates are lower than a lot of their staff too, they just don’t talk about it. If not I am happy to be proven wrong

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Panscan View Post

                      It’s representative of the overall problem though. I’m sure Bezos or Musk effective rates are lower than a lot of their staff too, they just don’t talk about it. If not I am happy to be proven wrong
                      it’s also funny that every doc that comes around here that has a bunch of debt, fancy cars, big house, meager savings, so so job. What do we tell them: you have a spending problem

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by jacoavlu View Post

                        it’s also funny that every doc that comes around here that has a bunch of debt, fancy cars, big house, meager savings, so so job. What do we tell them: you have a spending problem
                        But aside from the tax revenue outlook just looking at the distribution of wealth and how it has concentrated since the 80s , do you think that’s beneficial ?

                        is it good that these people are amassing all this
                        money relative to average joe ? I would say no. There’s little reason to explain the disparity IMO other than our tax code enables it. Is a CEO now better than one 50 years ago ? Are they doing more or a better job ?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Panscan View Post

                          is it good that these people are amassing all this
                          money relative to average joe ? I would say no. There’s little reason to explain the disparity IMO other than our tax code enables it. Is a CEO now better than one 50 years ago ? Are they doing more or a better job ?
                          This is where I jump off the wagon. These people are getting what they deserve because they have changed our lives and created value. In no way am I ever in support of punishing success.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Panscan View Post
                            But aside from the tax revenue outlook just looking at the distribution of wealth and how it has concentrated since the 80s , do you think that’s beneficial ?

                            is it good that these people are amassing all this
                            money relative to average joe ? I would say no. There’s little reason to explain the disparity IMO other than our tax code enables it. Is a CEO now better than one 50 years ago ? Are they doing more or a better job ?
                            there are people and data that would argue wealth disparity hasn’t changed. I won’t claim to know. After all there are lies, ************************ lies, and statistics

                            https://johnhcochrane.blogspot.com/2...fixed.html?m=1

                            but I don’t think you can lay it all on the tax code. You think they make tax laws to influence behavior. I don’t think it’s that simple. I think a lot of what politicians do is about getting re-elected

                            consider reading The Price of Tomorrow by Jeff Booth

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by CordMcNally View Post

                              This is where I jump off the wagon. These people are getting what they deserve because they have changed our lives and created value. In no way am I ever in support of punishing success.
                              I'm wary of jumping into the political debate, but I will say seeing how the CEO of our hospital system has changed things for the worse over the last 5 years to make the financials look better in the short term has definitely changed my perspective on the "value" added by the C-suite.

                              Comment


                              • Is it the government's job to cap success? Seems like a pretty dumb idea.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X