Hard to make $$ in a country that worships established wealth without getting into the old boys club. You can make great money with a good idea but working two jobs for 170K gets
old.
When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer
21–30 of 229 posts
Re: When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer
#22I 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…
You could tax holdings in the US or by US citizens instead of earnings, then.
Make it expensive to hold capital.
Capital in motion and at a high velocity is generally good for everyone. Capital at rest serves very few and is very harmful to everyone else.
Re: When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer
#23I 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…
What would the flat tax actually tax though, income? Wouldn't they just dodge that then by not having income? Sure, for you and me it would make it easier -- my W2 says I made exactly 100k, here's exactly 50k of it, period. For people who have a flexible income, why report any amount that would make you pay in?
Re: When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer
#24I 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…
In what way would a flat tax rate close loopholes? I hear that all the time but it doesn't make sense. In the end the problem with taxes is determining what counts as taxable income. The flat tax doesn't change this. As of now it would just be another huge tax cut for high incomes which in my opinion it's designed for.
Re: When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
Seems like we should make another go at trying to structure this whole "society" thing for the good of everyone from where I am sitting.
Re: When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer
#26I think the thing we keep forgetting is if "everyone" makes more the only thing that is going to change is housing and food prices and you will gain 0.
The issue here is not the exact value of earnings (which changes with inflation), but the income distribution, which has become massive.
To cite the article, in the 50s and 60s, CEOs earned on average 20 times the average workers' salary; this is now 247 times the average workers' salary.
Re: When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer
#27I 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…
How would a flat tax rate avoid the unfortunate reality of burdening the poor with relatively high taxes? Tax brackets, in theory, mitigate this by reducing or eliminating taxes for low income individuals and families. A flat tax rate would surely simplify things, but I'm not convinced it would be the best solution.
Re: When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer
#28I 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…
You could tax holdings in the US or by US citizens instead of earnings, then. Make it expensive to hold capital. Capital in motion and at a high velocity is generally good for everyone. Capital at rest serves very few and is very harmful to everyone else.
Because that causes capital to flow in only one direction: namely, out of the country.
Re: When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer
#29I 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 dising…
"But they achieved success by creating value and making careful and studied decisions about the allocation of capital."
Or through fraud, graft, and knowing who to bribe (see "campaign finance").
Re: When the Rich Said No to Getting Richer
#30I 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 solution is just not that complicated:
1. For individuals, simple tax code which does not distinguish where your income came from, but does keep income brackets (not flat tax).
2. For businesses, distinguish between:
- "US-based" company which would pay 10% corporate tax. A US-based company would need to have at least 66% of employees based in the US and/or at least 50% of the products/services produced in the US.
- "international" company would pay 35% corporate tax, if they want to do business in the US.