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

Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

coindesk.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

641–650 of 1001 posts

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#641

Post by pkulak »

rglullis wrote: post #368
pkulak wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because you can't immediately pinpoint where a line should be, doesn't mean that it shouldn't exist at all.

True, but my argument is that this is the wrong metric to be regulated. I don't care that there are people richer than me, I care that there are people with too much power on their hands.

I'm okay with a poor, powerful person. That means they have their power through some means other than wealth accumulation; popular election or something. People who are powerful because of money usually didn't even get the money themselves. It's the new hereditary monarchy. Get rid of all the money, and you get rid of the undue power as well.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#642

Post by Aeolun »

alx__ wrote: post #584
Johnny555 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People keep pointing to Armstrong's $110M house like it's some sort of injustice. If you think billionaires should exist at all, then that's one of the least-bad injustices imaginable Ok, I'll admit it, billionaires should not exist at all, there should be a heavy wealth tax that makes it hard to become a billionaire. Will a CEO work less hard if he (and his peers) can only ever gain $100M in net worth before a wealt…

Christ on a skateboard!? All the temporarily displaced billionaires in this thread are something else. If you require more than 100M in net worth to be "motivated" to work. There's a larger problem with you. Being a CEO/leader doesn't require some skill set that's given to you from some mythical watery being just because you're special.

> If you require more than 100M in net worth to be "motivated" to work. There's a larger problem with you.

How else are you going to buy a decent airplane? The nice ones start at a few tens of millions.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#643

Post by Aeolun »

sharkweek wrote: post #618
alx__ wrote: post #584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Christ on a skateboard!? All the temporarily displaced billionaires in this thread are something else. If you require more than 100M in net worth to be "motivated" to work. There's a larger problem with you. Being a CEO/leader doesn't require some skill set that's given to you from some mythical watery being just because you're special.

I'm a big fan of 100% taxation on anything above 999M, but my continuation here is that anyone that earns more than that gets a trophy for every additional 1B they earn put on display in a big museum in a city of their choice (Museums selectively scattered around the US).

I’m a firm believer in a maximum of like 50% tax on income. Anything more just feels like a punishment for working.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#644

Post by kelp »

stevenjgarner wrote: post #613
Johnny555 wrote: post #606

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, you mean like the property tax I pay on my unrealized house value? I don't get that tax back if I end up selling my house for half what it was taxed for last year. But I can appeal the evaluation for this year.

Depending on the jurisdiction, property taxes are usually a function of the property valuation. So at least if the property value goes down, theoretically so do your annual property taxes. The problem with a theoretical wealth tax, is that when the asset value goes down, too late you've already paid your wealth tax.

I'm actually in this situation on my property taxes.

In San Francisco there is a 2.5 month window to appeal your property tax assessment. I did that for 2020, and was successful (the hearing was like a year+ later) and they gave me a refund.

I failed to do it for 2021, because I was under the mistaken assumption that they'd they'd also adjust my 2021 assessment after my appeal. They didn't. I guess that's on me?

I just sold that property for a loss and 15% less than my tax assessment, and I'm well past the appeal period for 2021/2022 sales tax year. So I think I'm out of luck. I just over-paid by 15%.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#645

Post by tastyfreeze »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #390
dgudkov wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

History teaches us that people who don't want billionaires to exist eventually start not wanting millionaires to exist.

Does it? Is there an example of said gradual progression?

Just look at how the 17th Amendment was sold...

https://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-11-3-b...

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#646

Post by rurp »

stevenjgarner wrote: post #604
Johnny555 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People keep pointing to Armstrong's $110M house like it's some sort of injustice. If you think billionaires should exist at all, then that's one of the least-bad injustices imaginable Ok, I'll admit it, billionaires should not exist at all, there should be a heavy wealth tax that makes it hard to become a billionaire. Will a CEO work less hard if he (and his peers) can only ever gain $100M in net worth before a wealt…

A wealth tax implies a tax on unrealized appreciated assets, which is beyond bizarre IMHO. So you buy a house for $500k somewhere. It surges in value to $1.2 million. You therefore have an unrealized capital gain of $700k. You are NEVER going to get that money until you sell it, and when you do you are going to pay a whopping amount of capital gain tax. But a wealth tax implies you pay that capital gain tax now. Okay…

All of the serious wealth tax proposals I've seen have a rather high floor. A more practical hypothetical would be a person with 10m other assets worrying being taxed on the gains from their 5th vacation home.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#647

Post by imdsm »

yellowbanana wrote: post #608
alx__ wrote: post #584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Christ on a skateboard!? All the temporarily displaced billionaires in this thread are something else. If you require more than 100M in net worth to be "motivated" to work. There's a larger problem with you. Being a CEO/leader doesn't require some skill set that's given to you from some mythical watery being just because you're special.

This has nothing to do with motivation, If you start a company and that company becomes succesfull you will end up rich. > Being a CEO/leader doesn't require some skill set that's given to you from some mythical watery being just because you're special. Controlling a company requires shares, and shares are networth, it is good that companies are controlled by people who most understand them, and those are the people…

A lot of people seem to be in the mindset that it'll never be them so it should never be anyone else. It's not just in the US, here in the Uk we have the same mindset too.

A lot of people dislike/hate Elon Musk for example, and usually they focus on two things: his tweets, and his wealth. Conveniently forgetting that prior to his work at SpaceX and Tesla (which he's driven) reusable rockets weren't a thing and EVs were restricted to oddities laughed at on Top Gear.

It seems to be the way, people look at the wealth and think "well that shouldn't happen". But it doesn't come from no where, it doesn't just appear.

For anyone who thinks this wealth shouldn't appear, let me ask this: if someone could discover a cure for all cancers — how much should they be allowed to earn for it? I.E. What price would you put on the cure for all cancers?

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#648

Post by shrimpx »

tomcam wrote: post #356
shrimpx wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. I guess that model implies that the govt will take a percent ownership of whatever you own. I think it would destroy the prospect of high risk high reward ventures like Tesla. Maybe the tax rate can be divided by a volatility metric so investors in high risk ventures aren’t severely punished randomly.

Do you feel random government employees would be more productive and knowledgeable than the owners of the business whose shares were taken away by this scheme? Do you feel good businesses would continue to be good when handled by bureaucrats? Bonus points for the name of a bureaucracy that has done this kind of thing well.

No I don’t support this. I keep trying to figure out how it could work, so I can understand the point of view of the people who propose it. I haven’t seen any salient proposal.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#649

Post by Aeolun »

Johnny555 wrote: post #627
stevenjgarner wrote: post #613

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depending on the jurisdiction, property taxes are usually a function of the property valuation. So at least if the property value goes down, theoretically so do your annual property taxes. The problem with a theoretical wealth tax, is that when the asset value goes down, too late you've already paid your wealth tax.

Isn't that the same? If my house is worth $1M in 2022, I pay tax on that $1M of value. If it goes down in value to $500K in 2023 (and is reassessed), I'd pay tax on $500K value in 2023. If I own $1B of AMZN in 2022, I'd pay wealth tax on my $1B holdings in 2022, if the market tanks and AMZN is worth $50M in 2023, then I'd pay the wealth tax on $50M in 2023. Just as with property taxes, a wealth tax is generally annua…

It feels weird I’d have to pay anyone just for owning something. Besides, how would you price private companies? Are those just going to be free?

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#650

Post by stevenjgarner »

kelp wrote: post #644
stevenjgarner wrote: post #613

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depending on the jurisdiction, property taxes are usually a function of the property valuation. So at least if the property value goes down, theoretically so do your annual property taxes. The problem with a theoretical wealth tax, is that when the asset value goes down, too late you've already paid your wealth tax.

I'm actually in this situation on my property taxes. In San Francisco there is a 2.5 month window to appeal your property tax assessment. I did that for 2020, and was successful (the hearing was like a year+ later) and they gave me a refund. I failed to do it for 2021, because I was under the mistaken assumption that they'd they'd also adjust my 2021 assessment after my appeal. They didn't. I guess that's on me? I ju…

Thank goodness you did not buy that property for cents on the dollar 30 years ago and now have to also pay a fictitious wealth tax on the property when it was at the peak of its "value". Count your blessings.
Post reply on HN