Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 229 posts

Re: When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer

#11

Post by thriftwy »

chollida1 wrote: post #2

I wrote this a few years ago in response to a similar piece: The problem is that the rich have the ability to take their income in alot of different ways. Tax income more, they'll take it as dividends. Tax dividends more, they'll take it as capital gains. Tax capital gains, they won't realize their capital gains until they can offset them with realized losses or they'll just get bank loans again't their stock holding…

> The problem is that no tax code can close all loop holes

I don't see why it won't be catching up if it is updated to match what people are trying to do.

Re: When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer

#12

Post by jrimbault »

tici_88 wrote: post #10
chollida1 wrote: post #2

I wrote this a few years ago in response to a similar piece: The problem is that the rich have the ability to take their income in alot of different ways. Tax income more, they'll take it as dividends. Tax dividends more, they'll take it as capital gains. Tax capital gains, they won't realize their capital gains until they can offset them with realized losses or they'll just get bank loans again't their stock holding…

"The problem is that no tax code can close all loop holes because you just can't foresee the creative ways people will out maneuver the tax code." I disagree. I simple flat tax rate where everything is taxed at a single rate would close every single one of the loopholes above, if only by making it moot. The fact that the rich can maneuver themselves into a much lower tax rate than the average person presents a signif…

And then we'd have to redo/relearn the last millenium of why we do the things the way we do them.

Re: When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer

#13

Post by mrob »

chollida1 wrote: post #2

I wrote this a few years ago in response to a similar piece: The problem is that the rich have the ability to take their income in alot of different ways. Tax income more, they'll take it as dividends. Tax dividends more, they'll take it as capital gains. Tax capital gains, they won't realize their capital gains until they can offset them with realized losses or they'll just get bank loans again't their stock holding…

The can't easily dodge sales tax, because the responsibility is on the sellers to collect it. Most of them won't have the resources to cheat and get away with it. They can't easily dodge land taxes either, because land can't be moved.

Re: When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer

#14

Post by crdoconnor »

chollida1 wrote: post #2

I wrote this a few years ago in response to a similar piece: The problem is that the rich have the ability to take their income in alot of different ways. Tax income more, they'll take it as dividends. Tax dividends more, they'll take it as capital gains. Tax capital gains, they won't realize their capital gains until they can offset them with realized losses or they'll just get bank loans again't their stock holding…

>The problem is that no tax code can close all loop holes because you just can't foresee the creative ways people will out maneuver the tax code.

You can, legislators just have a number of strong incentives to do the exact opposite.

You can tell how delicate this state of affairs is for the wealthy by the fits that they pitch via the media whenever a legislator proposes closing one or more of these loopholes (e.g. carried interest).

Moreover, many loopholes are often opinion based and require the tacit acceptance of the IRS to continue. Change the IRS leadership and boost its funding and the house of cards would start to collapse.

The problems are that they tell us to be fatalistic about this and we believe them and corporate-friendly lobbyists have more cash than union friendly lobbyists.

Re: When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer

#16

Post by sordidasset »

neonhomer wrote: post #6
sharemywin wrote: post #3

I'm not sure why so many people look up to the rich. They fail at kinder-garden. I have to work very hard to help my 4 year old to understand how to share. If your using money to keep score your probably using the wrong system to keep score. I've been using weight watchers lately and keep score with the right system helps a lot.

> If your using money to keep score your probably using the wrong system to keep score. I think another side of the problem is 99% of people who are not rich are using the same score and since they are "losing" they hate the rich. If we all stop using money as the score we'd all be better off.

What quantifiable system of keeping score is as universally applicaple as money? Money is an awful way to keep score on a global scale, but it seems to be the best we have.

Re: When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer

#17

Post by aaronchall »

I don't understand the obsession with financially successful people.

If you have ambitions for financial success, learn a skill that is in high demand or find another way to create value for society.

If you have no ambitions for financial success, you have no right to go around complaining about the success of others.

Stop fetishizing successful people who deprecate their success. Some, like Warren Buffet, are disingenuous and fairly transparent panderers. Others, like George Romney here, may well be sincere. But they achieved success by creating value and making careful and studied decisions about the allocation of capital.

> Quite often in the pursuit of more wealth, they trample on the little guys, leaving them to struggle more.

Show evidence.

> Or through fraud, graft, and knowing who to bribe (see "campaign finance").

Show evidence. Not baseless allegations.

Re: When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer

#18

Post by chimeracoder »

Like most treatments of this topic, when comparing tax rates from the 1950s and 1960s to today, it fails to note that very few people actually paid this much higher marginal rates. Instead, the high taxation on the upper income brackets encouraged companies to offer perks and benefits that would not be classified as income, and the wealthy would take advantage of these instead.

Furthermore, yes, tax rates are lower today if you exclude Social Security and OASDI[0], but tax revenue as a percentage of national income is higher. That's a sign that the higher tax rates did actually suppress economic activity, and that both the government and its citizens are actually better off with tax rates closer to what they are today than what they were 50-70 years ago.

[0] SS/OASDI tax rates have increased sevenfold since they were introduced in the late 1930s

Re: When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer

#19

Post by inetknght »

jrimbault wrote: post #12
tici_88 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The problem is that no tax code can close all loop holes because you just can't foresee the creative ways people will out maneuver the tax code." I disagree. I simple flat tax rate where everything is taxed at a single rate would close every single one of the loopholes above, if only by making it moot. The fact that the rich can maneuver themselves into a much lower tax rate than the average person presents a signif…

And then we'd have to redo/relearn the last millenium of why we do the things the way we do them.

Is that such a bad idea?

Re: When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer

#20

Post by moretai »

sharemywin wrote: post #3

I'm not sure why so many people look up to the rich. They fail at kinder-garden. I have to work very hard to help my 4 year old to understand how to share. If your using money to keep score your probably using the wrong system to keep score. I've been using weight watchers lately and keep score with the right system helps a lot.

It represents freedom, that's why people look up to it.
Post reply on HN