Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
More wealth to the rich means more taxes to the government, more jobs to the non-rich, more opportunities for other people to become rich, and more services and products to everybody.
What have you provided to this country?
Well, 13 months in combat in 'Nam and a life-long disability to show for it for starters You? But yeah. Musk has done more. Let's give him more ways to not pay taxes.
In Europe, they don't call it communism. Social democracy is quite different. Yes, there are billionaires in those Europeans countries that support the Social Democrats. I've done any number of walking tours of Europeans cities on Youtube and haven't seen a homeless person yet.
And what has Bernie done for this country other than suck taxpayers dry for 50 years and demand to suck more?
Europe can call it whatever it wants. High taxation creates an economy where people at the bottom can't get ahead.
The federal government doesn't tax wealth. Never will either. Stick to real life and the facts.
Measuring overall taxes paid (not just income taxes) as a percentage of wealth owned is the only way to fairly measure taxes paid. That's why the subject of this thread is wealth tax.
And what has Bernie done for this country other than suck taxpayers dry for 50 years and demand to suck more?
Nothing at all. We have 50% of tax filer paying no federal income tax at all. And he's wants more from those that pay the most. He should look at how is beloved social democracies of Europe tax. A large VAT paid by everyone and much flatter income taxes
Measuring overall taxes paid (not just income taxes) as a percentage of wealth owned is the only way to fairly measure taxes paid. That's why the subject of this thread is wealth tax.
Wealth tax....you mean the policy that failed everywhere it was implemented?
You first, Bernie. Donate everything you own to the IRS first. Politicians always want other people to pay for their garbage ideas.
Measuring overall taxes paid (not just income taxes) as a percentage of wealth owned is the only way to fairly measure taxes paid. That's why the subject of this thread is wealth tax.
Wealth fluctuates and there are no "profits" or "losses" until you liquidate it.
How would you like to be taxed on the accumulated wealth of your home even though it's not liquid and could deflate the day after you pay those taxes ?
Wealth fluctuates and there are no "profits" or "losses" until you liquidate it.
How would you like to be taxed on the accumulated wealth of your home even though it's not liquid and could deflate the day after you pay those taxes ?
Personally, I would say we adjust net tax policies (cap gains corporate rates, inheritance taxes, etc.) so that net taxes paid as a % of wealth is close to equal across income groups. I wouldn't tax wealth itself. Taxes paid as a % of wealth owned is a metric, not a policy. I've worked in wealth/investment management for a long time, that's just my opinion from working with the wealthy/ultra wealthy in the investment world for decades.
The problem to be solved is ultra wealthy not paying their fair share of taxes. How we measure results is net tax burden as a % of wealth owned. How to solve the problem is complex, and needs to be discussed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.