Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees • Hacker News Board

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#881

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jun 15, 2022, 5:10 AM UTC

kortilla wrote: post #846

bmitc wrote: post #832

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A wealth tax implies a tax on unrealized appreciated assets, which is beyond bizarre IMHO. No, it doesn't. For example, if I'm super rich and take out a loan using unrealized assets as collateral, then I could be taxed on the loan amount received. There are several such strategies that either force the sale of unrealized assets or tax other portions of the transactions when those unrealized assets are used as colla…

The loans have to be paid. No matter how many times you refi, there is a massive tax bill at the end.

[deleted]

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#882

Post by ceres » Wed, Jun 15, 2022, 5:10 AM UTC

JCharante wrote: post #869

ceres wrote: post #819

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should so few individuals have outsized social, political and economic power over the whole country? Why not tax them more and let elected officials representatives decide how best to spend the money?

The power and budget of the government makes billionaires look poor. Blaming billionaires is failure to see that the money is already available, it's just that the voters refuse to stand up. Why would more money in the government's hands change anything?

Because billionaires are already having undue influence over politics and are funding policies that don’t always have the support of the voters. Why not tax them more and let the representatives of the people make decisions independently for better or for worse.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#883

Post by sam0x17 » Wed, Jun 15, 2022, 5:11 AM UTC

ipaddr wrote: post #297

ryandrake wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are plenty of people in the world who would think that anything over $500/month is way more than enough for one person. Should your compensation be reduced to that amount? This is rhetoric that tries to confuse two totally different scenarios in order to convince the majority to oppose something that only hurts a tiny minority. Saying "one person should not have 5 generations worth of wealth" is not the same…

Those are just round zeros. You could obtain that much money in some African countries over the last 50 years for a few dollars. The latest cryto coin could give you that many coins. But these are numbers trying to represent wealth. Any cap you put on the top could have the effect of reducing the value of a currency meaning the buying power doesn't change. A billion cap would make your million dollar house worth $100…

A much more reasonable proposal would simply be to ensure that billionaires actually pay the ~25%-35% everyone else pays and to put a $ cap on itemized deductions so that billionaires find it vanishingly difficult to write off 100% of their taxes. Same thing should go for corporations. Right now the standard for FANG-like companies is to achieve a $0 tax bill at the end of the year. It's disgusting when those same companies have employees making minimum wage as 1099 workers and paying a double digit percent of those wages in federal income tax.

The problem with billionaires though is they typically make and hold their money through assets, so what we really need is a bunch of reforms on how we tax assets. Namely, it should be such that if you have more than $1B in assets, taxes eat away at it pretty swiftly until it is back down to something reasonable. I think that's something we all can get behind.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#884

Post by pyuser583 » Wed, Jun 15, 2022, 5:11 AM UTC

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.

The problem with a wealth tax is that it’s easy for wealthy people to move.

We tax real estate because it can’t be moved out of the jurisdiction.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#885

Post by pyuser583 » Wed, Jun 15, 2022, 5:12 AM UTC

stevenjgarner wrote: post #692

kelp wrote: post #644

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I thought things are capped in California, that Under Proposition 13, the annual real estate tax on a parcel of property is limited to 1% of its assessed value. This "assessed value" may be increased only by a maximum of 2% per year until, and unless, the property has a change of ownership? No such joy in Texas (yet).

That’s probably one of the reasons real estate prices are so high.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#886

Post by sam0x17 » Wed, Jun 15, 2022, 5:14 AM UTC

chrisseaton wrote: post #150

xtracto wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are plenty of people in the world who would think that anything over $500/month is way more than enough for one person. Should your compensation be reduced to that amount? Disclaimer: I live in a 3rd world country and my salary is 1/3 of what the standard US salary is. YES, I do believe that everybody's compensation (including mine) who are in the top 10% of the population should be decreased/limited. Provide…

> The top 10% of the population hold 70% of the total wealth. That's just crazy and unsustainable. Been sustained so far throughout all of human history.

very untrue. It is well documented that income equality is more extreme now (by an order of magnitude) than it was at any point in recorded human history. The inequality is something like 100x that of french revolution times where terms like bourgeois came from. The fact that we haven't broken out in revolution yet is just a testament to how powerful the media state, corporations, and lobbying have become.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#887

Post by bmitc » Wed, Jun 15, 2022, 5:14 AM UTC

Aeolun wrote: post #649

Johnny555 wrote: post #627

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

I pay taxes for owning my house and owning a car and various other things already.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#888

Post by ceres » Wed, Jun 15, 2022, 5:15 AM UTC

vasco wrote: post #835

ceres wrote: post #819

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should so few individuals have outsized social, political and economic power over the whole country? Why not tax them more and let elected officials representatives decide how best to spend the money?

Because they created an outsized amount of value and jobs for society. You can say those would have happened anyway but that's a pretend world we never saw working yet.

Pray tell what value has Sam Bankman Fried, who intends to spend a billion dollars [1] in 2024 elections, created for society? [1] https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.coindesk.com/policy/2022/05...

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#889

Post by Dx5IQ » Wed, Jun 15, 2022, 5:17 AM UTC

oarabbus_ wrote: post #842

ceres wrote: post #819

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should so few individuals have outsized social, political and economic power over the whole country? Why not tax them more and let elected officials representatives decide how best to spend the money?

Let's rearrange that a bit. >Why n̶o̶t̶ ̶t̶a̶x̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶m̶ ̶m̶o̶r̶e̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ let elected officials representatives decide how best to spend the money? >Why should so few individuals have outsized social, political and economic power over the whole country? Regardless of which political party you root for I'd be shocked if your really thought elected representatives do a good job of spending money, especially to the po…

>Why should so few individuals have outsized social, political and economic power over the whole country?

You just answered the question. Because they are the elected representatives. If you didn't trust them, why did you elect them in the first place?

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#890

Post by bmitc » Wed, Jun 15, 2022, 5:22 AM UTC

kortilla wrote: post #849

sdh wrote: post #683

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you're not aware how these "unrealized" capital gains (at scale) are indirectly realized in the form of loans taken against value of the asset. Massive wealth doesn't operate in income or even in typical capital gains advantages you're referring to. It operates at a scale where the value of the assets are so great, banks compete to give loans to them, which are not taxed like income. It's totally absurd to argu…

Those loans have to be repaid. They aren’t a gift ffs.

They are repaid to the bank, which is obvious. No one said they are gifts. They are loaned at ridiculously low interest rates, and the government never sees an ounce of tax from the individual, which is the entire point. Like the person you replied to said, the mega-rich don't operate on income like the rest of us. Why does that make them completely immune to taxation?