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.
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.