Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Money and Finances
Reply to ""Tax the Rich""
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]We will make $1M this year (own a business that will likely fold in two years thanks to Trump policies) so income is variable and we pay 45% combined fed, state and local. I don’t have any qualms paying this in but I at least wish we got SOMETHING for it like universal health care or a decent plan where if our business tanks we know there would be a backup without having to co e up with an extra $2k per month for health insurance premiums. [/quote] You won't get those kinds of perks in the current system because there are simply not enough people like you to generate the tax base necessary to pay for them. Only way everyone gets a lot of "free stuff" like you mention is if they hit the middle class with big tax hikes. The middle class is where the real money is. You could take every penny the billionaires have and it wouldn't be sufficient to pay for the Democrats wildest dreams, or make any dent in our national debt for that matter.[/quote] This isn’t true. The wealthy oftentimes diminish income by living on borrowed money collateralized by their assets. [b]The only way the government can effectively tax them is to tax their wealth. [/b] A 1% tax on wealth over $50 million could raise around $1.9 trillion over a decade (2025-2034), according to the Tax Policy Center. Senator Warren's proposed tax (2% on wealth over $1 billion and 1% over $50 million) was estimated to raise around $2.75 trillion over ten years by economists.[/quote] This is not accurate--a wealth tax is a very blunt instrument and is not the only way to reduce the tax benefits of borrowing against assets. At least three other ways have been proposed that specifically target the borrowing tax arbitrage as outlined in this article: https://budgetlab.yale.edu/research/buy-borrow-die-options-reforming-tax-treatment-borrowing-against-appreciated-assets This is a loophole that should end, even though as the article states "borrowing (of any kind) represents only 1% of the income of the top 0.1% by net worth." [/quote] Look, [b]you [/b]said that the only way to raise meaningful tax money is to tax the middle class. A wealth tax is clearly a way to raise an enormous sum of money from the wealthy while still leaving them with plenty (I’m pretty sure they can earn 1-2% per annum on their wealth). Whether or not a wealth tax is optimal is secondary to the point that the wealthy can contribute much more than they presently do. [/quote] PP who posted the Yale article. I am not the poster who said the only way to raise meaningful tax money is to tax the middle class. I will say I am a dubious about a wealth tax as 1) determining net worth is very tricky, 2) the rich will find ways around it, and 3) it will creep down to the non-ultra high worth, who are far less likely to have the wherewithal to avoid it as the rich will have. [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics