News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by barrkel on Sunday September 03, 2017 @05:57PM (#15164167)
Are returns to capital earned?

Certainly it's not easy getting outsize returns reliably, but the idea that the return is earned in a way that scales with the amount invested sounds very dubious to me.

Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by banned1 on Sunday September 03, 2017 @06:07PM (#15164215)
The original capital was. The returns are already taxed. Are you proposing that returns are taxed at some other different rate? At some point the market won't be attractive enough.
Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by barrkel on Monday September 04, 2017 @05:17AM (#15166840)
The returns to capital (capital gains specifically) are taxed at a much lower rate than income, and they're not taxed at all until they're realized, which means they can be timed to offset losses. Then the government is effectively handing out a subsidy to people with lots of capital, even more so than the lower tax rate.

"The market" not attractive enough - there's nowhere to put your money other than "the market" (including bonds, commodities, real estate etc.) unless you keep it in currency, and that's even more susceptible to government takings.

Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by banned1 on Monday September 04, 2017 @02:55PM (#15170172)
https://taxfoundation.org/why-capital-gains-are-taxed-lower-...

Is there a limit you see in taxes?

Do you have investments yourself? Maybe you donated all of your investments to the government after realizing how little you were being taxed?

Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by barrkel on Tuesday September 05, 2017 @12:00PM (#15176456)
I most recently converted my investments into a house deposit. In effect, I propped up inflated house prices. It'll take a while before I have a significant investment position again.

Your last question is silly. The reason why I can simultaneously support higher taxes, yet not voluntarily donate money to the government, is because advocacy of higher taxes can raise far more money for government than my personal donations. Raising money to fund government is a collective action problem; if government relied on donations to run, it would fail because of freeloaders - in essence, a tragedy of the commons. But by collectively enforcing mandatory taxes we can make government work.

Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by TheSpiceIsLife on Tuesday September 05, 2017 @12:15PM (#15176598)
> But by collectively enforcing mandatory taxes we can make government work.

It's arguable whether giving government more money results in government working better.

By some accounts government is a demonstration of waist and an exercise in excess.

Government departments are always chronically underfunded, primarily because no government department PR employee ever got promoted by saying "we have enough money".

Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by albinofrenchy on Monday September 04, 2017 @02:55PM (#15170174)
> At some point the market won't be attractive enough.

We are _nowhere_ near that point. And no one is saying tax capital gains at 100%; but I've never seen a convincing argument that it shouldn't be at _least_ the same as income tax.

Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by banned1 on Monday September 04, 2017 @03:06PM (#15170227)
I think the main argument is previous taxation.

https://taxfoundation.org/why-capital-gains-are-taxed-lower-...

Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by albinofrenchy on Monday September 04, 2017 @06:46PM (#15171300)
That is an argument; I just don't think it is a particularly good one. In particular, I think it muddies the water a bit between various forms of things that are taxed as capital gains.

That article goes out of its way to paint a picture of someone purchasing stock in a C corp with money earned from earned income and then eventually sold.

And yes, the corporation would pay a corporate tax rate (although almost certainly south of 30%), and then when that stock is sold, there is likely a 15% hit on the gains.

It is an unconvincing argument though; since salaries from a c corp are taxed too; if previous taxation was a deal breaker c corps wouldn't exist at all.

It is also unconvincing since capital gains are only taxed at the time of realization, it is an entirely different mechanism. As taxes goes, I can't choose to hold off paying taxes on income for a decade and invest that money; essentially compounding that money. But that is exactly how long-held unrealized capital gains work.

And insult to injury -- the entire idea of 'carried interest' is a give away to hedge funders. Even if you kept a low capital gains rate, carried interest as a concept should just be removed from the tax code.