261–270 of 358 posts
Recall that uber-rich Steve Jobs has an annual salary from Apple of $1, wears black turtlenecks and jeans (ever anything else?), and is building a modest 5000 square foot home on property he owns outright. What to tax?
The totally uneducated and illiterate Chingis Khan took a different tact. He conquered territories and then collected taxes from and "protected" the commercial caravans that traversed his extensive real estate holdings. Chingis had his problems but his dynasty lasted longer than the others for sure.
One thing that at least some rich people will pay for is status symbols (expensive watches, sports cars that will never exceed 100mph, mansions with rooms that are used only a couple of times a year, $500 t-shirts). Status signaling is ultimately a zero-sum positional arms race that can lead to some pretty ridiculous conclusions(1) and doesn't really leave anyone better off (other than, perhaps, luxury goods supplier…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's only because payroll taxes were sold as a retirement plan contribution for yourself. The idea is that you get all of that money back plus interest. Sadly, it's not run that way. People have the let the money be spent on other items for years, and now they are retiring and it's not there.
It isn't? Social security is solvent assuming no funding changes until 2037.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get what you are saying here, but I think the questions generated by this statement are numerous: "When speeding, you're endangering people's lives." Does this mean 56 mph is, and 55 is not dangerous somehow? By what science is this the case? What about weather conditions? The condition of your car? The type of your car? Your skill and ability to drive? Also, the randomness with which this law is enforced is troubl…
You are arguing against tickets in general, not against fines proportional to wealth.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Scott Adams is at the very least making the assumption that the rich need some sort of appeasement. The specific ideas he mentions aren’t really relevant to this central point.
"As readers might recall, Bill Gates’ father was the lead proponent of the measure. He was fighting Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer and other technology chieftains who poured millions of dollars into defeating the measure because they said it would cost the state jobs. “The rich guys don’t want to pay the tax,” Gates père said on 60 Minutes Sunday night. “They’re defensive. I guess you could call it greed, I suppose. Wan…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The government awards tax credits for everyone making less than that [...] > [...] dividing the total US income by the number of workers [...] So, for that $90k figure to be attainable, you need those who aren't "workers" not to get any of this money. Which means that becoming a "worker" will suddenly mean getting an extra $90k/year, whatever the job. Which means that there will almost certainly suddenly be a lot m…
> Which means that there will almost certainly suddenly be a lot more "workers". You mean a low unemployment rate? > Your system relies on taking away a great deal of money from rich people... the more you do it the harder those rich people are going to try to avoid paying Not really, no. Money in excess of $90k isn't confiscated, it's still used to purchase status just as it is today. The only difference is that it'…
Status - is derived from what one can get with money. For instance, being able to fly anywhere in the world and stay at an amazing hotel and eat great food, etc at the drop of a hat.
One thing that at least some rich people will pay for is status symbols (expensive watches, sports cars that will never exceed 100mph, mansions with rooms that are used only a couple of times a year, $500 t-shirts). Status signaling is ultimately a zero-sum positional arms race that can lead to some pretty ridiculous conclusions(1) and doesn't really leave anyone better off (other than, perhaps, luxury goods supplier…
The problem is that it's hard to create a high status item. Say you invent the "US Govt. Certified Top 0.1% Badge" - do you really think Peter Thiel, John Paulson or Alex Rodriguez will really give a crap? Taxing existing luxury status symbols could work, and is very likely a good idea. Creating new status symbols is likely to fail horribly. Also, the tax on certain neighborhoods neglects the very large non-status re…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Which means that there will almost certainly suddenly be a lot more "workers". You mean a low unemployment rate? > Your system relies on taking away a great deal of money from rich people... the more you do it the harder those rich people are going to try to avoid paying Not really, no. Money in excess of $90k isn't confiscated, it's still used to purchase status just as it is today. The only difference is that it'…
Status markers are much more complicated than you imagine, and they tend to be extremely expensive to produce. If you think that the govt. could make a status marker that rich people actually care about, you're dreaming. The finer things in life really are finer, and it becomes nonlinearly more expensive to produce them the finer they are. A $500 meal at Per Se in NYC isn't just for signalling, if it is at all. It's…
If the rich are so desperate for our approval, why not give it to them? They don't need to play stupid and wasteful status games to seduce us into admiring them, they can compete with each other, we'll add up the score, everyone gets ranked and that will be the end of it. OK, maybe there will be an awards ceremony on TV every year.
The main obstacle to this system is that most of the rich wouldn't go for it because they'd never admit that they crave recognition from people they consider inferior.