Should there be a wealth tax?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

For example, how about a tax of 1% per year on all wealth that a household has over $10 million. I don't care which form the wealth is in, it's assessed, and any amount over that threshold is taxed.

The lazy rich need a massive tax hike.

[Franzl]

No, absolutely not.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Nah, just increase the top income tax bracket to 50%.

[Franzl]

     Nah, just increase the top income tax bracket to 50%.

just out of interest

how does someone who supports not only the income tax, but also the highest bracket to 50%....and someone who supports universal health care.....get such an economic PM score?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

     Nah, just increase the top income tax bracket to 50%.

But those people might actually lift a finger for their money.

[Bono]

If you want to discourage capital accumulation even more than the current situation does.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

No

[A18]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No doubt, someone did. But what does that have to do with anything? Someone worked for this wealth, as well.

Now why should wealth be taxed in proportion to accumulated assets, rather than on a standard basis? (This regime has an odd result: If guy x throws a $2 million party, that amount of money is no longer factored into his tax "bill." But if guy x buys a real estate for $2 million, that money does count toward the amount of property the government will confiscate from him.)

And why in the world does your proposal only affect households with more than $10 million?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No doubt, someone did. But what does that have to do with anything? Someone worked for this wealth, as well.

Now why should wealth be taxed in proportion to accumulated assets, rather than on a standard basis? (This regime has an odd result: If guy x throws a $2 million party, that amount of money is no longer factored into his tax "bill." But if guy x buys a real estate for $2 million, that money does count toward the amount of property the government will confiscate from him.)

And why in the world does your proposal only affect households with more than $10 million?

True, that would be a bit of a weird result, but that spending should help the economy. $10 million seems like a reasonable value, that way no one can claim that they are forced to pay this tax on any reasonable amount of wealth, such as a house in the bay area.

[TeePee4Prez]

No, the estate tax will suffice for me.

I also feel that there should be a $3 million exemption for the estate tax increased on a yearly inflation index plus the rates should be lowered and made more progressive.

[dead0man]

This would be a great idea if your goal was to get everyone worth more than $10 million to move to another country or do lots of less than legal things to hide most of their assets.

[dead0man]

     Nah, just increase the top income tax bracket to 50%.

just out of interest

how does someone who supports not only the income tax, but also the highest bracket to 50%....and someone who supports universal health care.....get such an economic PM score?

I'm starting to wonder the same thing.  Are you turning on us Pit?

[MasterJedi]

No, but I'd support taking everything that jfern owns!

[Franzl]

     Nah, just increase the top income tax bracket to 50%.

just out of interest

how does someone who supports not only the income tax, but also the highest bracket to 50%....and someone who supports universal health care.....get such an economic PM score?

I'm starting to wonder the same thing.  Are you turning on us Pit?

not that I mind...moderate economics are good, but it seems odd.

[Jake]

This would be a great idea if your goal was to get everyone worth more than $10 million to move to another country or do lots of less than legal things to hide most of their assets.

Seriously. Those who were very wealthy (ie, billionaires) would relocate elsewhere. It might be difficult to move the real estate that makes some wealthy, but it's difficult to chase down people who's main wealth comes from their stake in businesses.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Nah, just increase the top income tax bracket to 50%.

just out of interest

how does someone who supports not only the income tax, but also the highest bracket to 50%....and someone who supports universal health care.....get such an economic PM score?

I'm starting to wonder the same thing.  Are you turning on us Pit?

not that I mind...moderate economics are good, but it seems odd.

     Those are literally the only two economic positions I hold that could be considered left-wing in the United States today.

     Bear in mind that I also believe in the inviolable right of companies to outsource jobs, oppose all regulations except for those against abusive business practices, & want completely free trade with all nations.

[dead0man]

Alright.  But I'm keeping my eye on you and will report my findings to the proper authorities.

[Matt Damon™]

Sure but not on all wealthy people. Restrict it for certain groups.

[Torie]

A truly frightening thought.

[Matt Damon™]

Fezzy, I like you but rich people aren't a historically oppressed minority in need of special protections.

[opebo]

...Someone worked for this wealth, as well.

Well, yes, but not the owners of the wealth.  Those who worked for it are his wage-slaves.

And why in the world does your proposal only affect households with more than $10 million?

Obviously the purpose of this is do reduce the power of the owners.  It is a divide and conquer strategy in reverse - dividing the commonplace minor rich from their allegiance to the really big rich.  This is modeled on the owners strategy from back in the union days - divide the 'skilled' worker from the unskilled, the white from the black, etc.   

[opebo]

A truly frightening thought.

It is always frightening to think of losing you privileges and becoming like the ordinary person (miserable and oppressed).

Fezzy, I like you but rich people aren't a historically oppressed minority in need of special protections.

Haha, in fact they are the 'majority' in terms of power - they, though only maybe 1% at most of the population, hold nearly all the power.

[Ban my account ffs!]

I say no to a "wealth tax", instead raising the marginal income tax rate on income over $1,000,000 to 60%.

At the same time, we do need to 'scrub' the budget, cutting waste... especially in the defense department.  I think we can shave a good bit off without hurting our missions abroad or the safety and benefits of our troops.

We need to increase our revenue in order to balance our budget and begin paying our national debt down.

If the rich, as the single biggest holders of wealth and the best group to help achieve this, cannot understand how important that is to our nation and to the present and future growth of the economy, then they really deserve to have their money taken away.

[Matt Damon™]

I don't favor a wealth tax but I don't see how they could ever become an abused minority.

[memphis]

Not just yes. HELL YES. The extreme inequality of wealth in this country is an even bigger problem that inequality of income. I would wholeheartedly endorse lowering income tax rates to get a wealth tax like this.