Wealth inequality

#251
#251
volinbham said:
Poster was arguing the merits of a wealth tax. I was pointing out the volatility of taxing wealth rather than income or realized gains.

Please try to keep up.
Click to expand...

That's like asking Stephen Hawking to open a jar of pickles.
 
#252
#252
Most new wealth is 1st generation created . Dems love to punish success. They love to deem risk takers who made a pile of money...
 
#253
#253
Dumb people spend money, smart people save it. Why wouldn't the rich get richer? Unless you want to subsidize stupidity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#255
#255
volinbham said:
Concerns:

1. Discourages savings/wealth accumulation - this impacts availability of investment capital.

2. Encourages excessive consumption - see above, the best way to avoid taxes/lower your tax burden is to zero out annually.

3. Discourages ownership of hard assets - basically property taxes are wealth taxes since the are based on the value of owned/held assets rather than the productivity of those assets.

4. Volatile revenue streams - income and property values do not fluctuate significantly in the short term. However, more liquid assets (stocks, etc.) do fluctuate and paper wealth has bigger swings the more it is tied to more liquid assets. Having that volatile tax base means tax revenues will tank in down markets (just when you need revenues for stimulus if you are a Keynesian). The business cycle will greatly impact the revenue side of the budget.

I'd also argue that everyone should have some skin in the game. Applying this only to some people has it's own problems.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your response. I always appreciate your insights.
 
#256
#256
Biopsyman said:
Most new wealth is 1st generation created . Dems love to punish success. They love to deem risk takers who made a pile of money...
Click to expand...


I doubt that most of the people in the top 1/10th of 1 percent are first generation wealthy.

But even if they are, that's beside the point. My point is that I question whether it is sustainable, over the long term. I also question whether there is something immoral about greed at such a high level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#257
#257
lawgator1 said:
I doubt that most of the people in the top 1/10th of 1 percent are first generation wealthy.

But even if they are, that's beside the point. My point is that I question whether it is sustainable, over the long term. I also question whether there is something immoral about greed at such a high level.
Click to expand...

Morality plays no part in the equation since it's impossible to legislate morality. It's of my opinion that's it's immoral to punish someone for being successful of hell even lucky.

As for sustainability, probably not but I would rather see policies put in place that actually help the lower income people create their own wealth than taking it from others.
 
#258
#258
lawgator1 said:
I doubt that most of the people in the top 1/10th of 1 percent are first generation wealthy.

But even if they are, that's beside the point. My point is that I question whether it is sustainable, over the long term. I also question whether there is something immoral about greed at such a high level.
Click to expand...

You find it immoral for people to succeed?

Do you find it moral to steal from others?
 
#259
#259
hog88 said:
Morality plays no part in the equation since it's impossible to legislate morality. It's of my opinion that's it's immoral to punish someone for being successful of hell even lucky.

As for sustainability, probably not but I would rather see policies put in place that actually help the lower income people create their own wealth than taking it from others.
Click to expand...



To bad the conservative wing of the GOP doesn't realize that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#265
#265
Gramps said:
Did you miss the word "wing" in both post?
Click to expand...

Nope, but I tend to agree with FallGuy. If his statement is ridiculous then what type of morality are you suggesting the conservative/religious wing of the GOP is trying to legislate?

jmo... but this "wing" you are referring to died years ago with Pat Buchanan and at this point is perhaps more of a "fringe" at best.
 
#268
#268
IBlvNTmWrk said:
Nope, but I tend to agree with FallGuy. If his statement is ridiculous then what type of morality are you suggesting the conservative/religious wing of the GOP is trying to legislate?

jmo... but this "wing" you are referring to died years ago with Pat Buchanan and at this point is perhaps more of a "fringe" at best.
Click to expand...

Good, that wing needed to be gone.

The religious right pushing morality issues such as the old blue laws, gambling, drugs, gay marriage, abortion and the such have hurt fiscal conservatives.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#269
#269
tennvols77 said:
Goes for everyone across the board. Don't want to pay property taxes go rent. Those with more expensive homes have the much higher burden for wanting to live in a nicer, safer area. Money which benefits those in the same counties who pay less.
Click to expand...

Their rent covers the property tax and then some. That's how the landlord makes money.

Good plan, tho.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#270
#270
lawgator1 said:
I doubt that most of the people in the top 1/10th of 1 percent are first generation wealthy.

But even if they are, that's beside the point. My point is that I question whether it is sustainable, over the long term. I also question whether there is something immoral about greed at such a high level.
Click to expand...

Moral concerns are fun to talk about, but if you try to regulate and tax the economy into morality, you're not going to accomplish your goal and you will be no better than busybody moral authoritarians on the right.
 
#272
#272
hog88 said:
Good, that wing needed to be gone.

The religious right pushing morality issues such as the old blue laws, gambling, drugs, gay marriage, abortion and the such have hurt fiscal conservatives.
Click to expand...

I agree... don't think it was productive or necessary. Blue Laws would be a good example. However, just based on what I've read in these forums there are many people against gambling, gay marriage, and abortion that are not part of the "religious wing".
 
#273
#273
IBlvNTmWrk said:
I agree... don't think it was productive or necessary. Blue Laws would be a good example. However, just based on what I've read in these forums there are many people against gambling, gay marriage, and abortion that are not part of the "religious wing".
Click to expand...

I'm far from a member of the religious anything much to my wife's chagrin. And I'm pretty much against all of the above (not so much gambling) but I'm also against outlawing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#274
#274
hog88 said:
I'm far from a member of the religious anything much to my wife's chagrin. And I'm pretty much against all of the above (not so much gambling) but I'm also against outlawing.
Click to expand...

You should listen to your wife more often. :)

I'm generally against outlawing as well in cases where others are not impacted (e.g. choosing not to where a seat belt or a motorcycle helmet will only impact me and no one else... so that should be my choice). However, gambling (as an example) is different. Would it seem fair if someone were allowed to open up a casino just down the street from where I purchased my house years ago? It's not that I have any problem with gambling, but I would have an issue with the potential crime and lower home values that would impact me personally.
 
#275
#275
IBlvNTmWrk said:
You should listen to your wife more often. :)

I'm generally against outlawing as well in cases where others are not impacted (e.g. choosing not to where a seat belt or a motorcycle helmet will only impact me and no one else... so that should be my choice). However, gambling (as an example) is different. Would it seem fair if someone were allowed to open up a casino just down the street from where I purchased my house years ago? It's not that I have any problem with gambling, but I would have an issue with the potential crime and lower home values that would impact me personally.
Click to expand...

That would fall under zoning laws (don't move to Houston) the same as a factory or other business.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top