News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by sokoloff on Sunday September 03, 2017 @08:25PM (#15164781)
> The real problem though isn't wealth inequality, it's income inequality.

I disagree. Wealth provides financial security to an even greater degree than high current income. Wealth provides the means to move your family to a place where they will be safe and thrive. Wealth provides a means to start the next generation with a leg up, financially, socially, and academically. High current income can go away next year for most people and is often not portable to a new city or country. High current wealth is far more durable.

I don't think it's the billionaires that are the only "problem". Those with 50+ million USD also live a life essentially devoid of the concerns of financial catastrophe.

I see an incredible amount of logistical challenges in implementing an annual wealth tax (though some countries already do so), but far fewer philosophical problems, even though I am overwhelmingly likely to be one of those targeted by a wealth tax (low single digit millionaire household from 25 years of working, saving, and investing).

I think it good social policy to institute an additional amount of drag on wealth accumulation, preferably by directly taxing it (annually or upon transfer), rather than further penalizing productive income-generating activities that are already taxed at nearly 50%.

Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by whack on Sunday September 03, 2017 @09:46PM (#15165084)
> Wealth provides financial security to an even greater degree than high current income.

Yes, but unless you're talking about a wealth tax in excess of 10%, this is not going to change. Someone with multiple millions of dollars in diversified investments will always be financially secure, unless we're considering drastic measures like a communist revolution.

Regarding all the benefits of wealth you mentioned, note how these benefits only arise when the investor liquidates his investment. Hence my point that instead of taxing wealth when it is being productively invested, tax the wealth at the point of liquidation instead.

I'm also in favor of high estate taxes, but that's an entirely different tangent.

Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by sokoloff on Sunday September 03, 2017 @09:57PM (#15165145)
I don't seek to eliminate wealth; that's a terrible policy IMO. Moderating its growth and concentration only slightly is far less disruptive or fraught with unintended/unknowable consequences.

An annual wealth tax of 10% would wipe out most wealth concentrations within 50 years. I think such a level is absurdly too high, though.

Looking at Switzerland as an example, I think 0.25% to maybe as much as 1% range is far more reasonable (roughly in range with their wealth taxation today) with a per-household exemption of $1MM or thereabouts [to prevent nuisance calculations over $10 in taxes].

> note how these benefits only arise when the investor liquidates his investment

"essentially devoid of the concerns of financial catastrophe" is a tremendous benefit that confers to the wealth holder without need of spending the wealth.

Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by jiggunjer on Monday September 04, 2017 @01:08AM (#15165863)
In the Netherlands there is about 30% tax on financial returns and an additional 1.2% tax on assets (wealth) above a certain threshold.
Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by sobani on Monday September 04, 2017 @06:05AM (#15167041)
The 1.2% tax on assets is the 30% tax on financial returns. It's just that at some point the government was like: "math is hard, let's go shopping^w^w assume the average return in 4%".
Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by closeparen on Monday September 04, 2017 @04:13PM (#15170578)
Consider, for example, that we do exactly the opposite by providing tax shelters for retirement savings, and that this is the only way grandparents get to retire.
Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by sokoloff on Monday September 04, 2017 @08:38PM (#15171737)
Yes, but 25-70 basis points of wealth tax is order of magnitude the same as mutual fund expenses. (I don't say this lightly, as I believe seizing of wealth to be a serious matter, worthy of careful contemplation before implementing such a plan.) I believe a modest wealth tax like this would have a subtle drag on wealth accumulation which is beneficial to society.
Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by pdfernhout on Monday September 04, 2017 @02:06PM (#15169832)
You might be interested in an essay I wrote in 2009 which mentions a wealth tax (perhaps with the government insuring and protecting declared wealth): "Basic income from a millionaire's perspective?" http://www.pdfernhout.net/basic-income-from-a-millionaires-p...

We can of course quibble about the details... Mostly just trying to shift the way of thinking and talking about a UBI...

Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by sokoloff on Monday September 04, 2017 @08:35PM (#15171724)
Thanks for the relevant blog post link. My gut feel is that 6% wealth tax destroys retirement savings and that anything over about 2% in fact does so. (I'm planning on a 3.5% withdrawal rate in retirement, so a 2% additional wealth tax increases by >50% the amount of money I need to squirrel away for retirement. $24K in UBI replaces $685K of that savings need, though almost surely brings along inflation with it and I'm projecting to need a substantial multiple of $1MM to retire.)

I also think that UBI in its first version needs to be more like $600/mo/adult. It's going to be austere for sure, but a figure much higher is not supportable (and so DoA when proposed).