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

Are super-rich people just better at making money?

pudding.cool

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 587 posts

Re: Are super-rich people just better at making money?

#111

Post by danny_codes »

an-allen wrote: post #106
bmitc wrote: post #3

To solve all this, it's pretty simple, and the U.S. actually used to do it: heavily tax the super rich. Heavy taxation and then appropriate use of those funds for education, R&D funding, infrastructure, etc. is actual trickle-down economics. And mega corporations should be heavily taxed instead of holding the country economically hostage. They jumpstart their companies off of government funding and R&D and then act a…

This all presupposes that the government is an efficient user of capital, when its pretty clear its not. Heavy taxes on the rich, means that capital investments that a rich person might finance, become government programmes and bureaucracies. Theres obviously a sweet spot here - but rich folks are good at creating capital and governments are notorious for wasting it. Now in the US I probably don’t have to tell you wh…

Most of our money does not go to the military. Defense spending is about 700b per year, while the budget is over 4t.

The government doesn't need to handle capitol allocation. We can simply shift the tax burden upwards. Poorer people get reduced tax, rich people get more.

Re: Are super-rich people just better at making money?

#112

Post by bmitc »

WalterBright wrote: post #62
bmitc wrote: post #3

To solve all this, it's pretty simple, and the U.S. actually used to do it: heavily tax the super rich. Heavy taxation and then appropriate use of those funds for education, R&D funding, infrastructure, etc. is actual trickle-down economics. And mega corporations should be heavily taxed instead of holding the country economically hostage. They jumpstart their companies off of government funding and R&D and then act a…

The top 1% pay 40% of the federal tax revenue. The top 5% pay 60%. California has the highest income tax at 13.3%, the highest federal tax rate is 37%. That makes the top income tax rate 50%.

I have already covered this elsewhere, but that's an excuse and actually only points to how concentrated the wealth is. Too bad they pay more money than others. Tax them more.

Re: Are super-rich people just better at making money?

#113

Post by wizofaus »

anovikov wrote: post #84

What's wrong about it? Unless you also "defund the police", that is. If law enforcement is well-funded and works well - which isn't all that expensive or hard on a national scale - than what's the problem about extreme inequality?

If we were a species that evolved where extreme inequality made sense, we'd probably be fine with it. But we aren't - not even close. We have strong notions of fairness and acting in the best interests of society as a whole, that enable us to cooperate effectively etc. Extreme inequality eats away at what has made us successful as a species.

Re: Are super-rich people just better at making money?

#114

Post by Yizahi »

lelag wrote: post #99
bmitc wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rich buy stuff, do they not? Tax those things to force realization and thus tax of unrealized wealth. Buying a second, third, fourth home? Here's your increasingly high tax and interest rate penalty. Instead of throwing up our hands with "they don't have cash", force them to realize investments into cash and deincentivize being able to keep everything hidden being investments and purchasing things with unrealized…

> Buying a second, third, fourth home? It's too easy for the ultra-rich to find loopholes in any rules. If there is a tax on homeownership, they will simply not own any home but will own some corporate entity that own the asset. See ? No secondary residence. Just an investment in a corporation that happens to home a bunch of houses.

Make prohibitively expensive for corporations to own residential properties (cut off by square meters or land use type).

Re: Are super-rich people just better at making money?

#115

Post by nmfisher »

lelag wrote: post #99
bmitc wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rich buy stuff, do they not? Tax those things to force realization and thus tax of unrealized wealth. Buying a second, third, fourth home? Here's your increasingly high tax and interest rate penalty. Instead of throwing up our hands with "they don't have cash", force them to realize investments into cash and deincentivize being able to keep everything hidden being investments and purchasing things with unrealized…

> Buying a second, third, fourth home? It's too easy for the ultra-rich to find loopholes in any rules. If there is a tax on homeownership, they will simply not own any home but will own some corporate entity that own the asset. See ? No secondary residence. Just an investment in a corporation that happens to home a bunch of houses.

Those loopholes are trivial to eliminate, because those laws are already in place* for restrictions on foreign ownership.

* in many countries, I don't know about the USA.

Re: Are super-rich people just better at making money?

#116

Post by dr_dshiv »

smilekzs wrote: post #21
bmitc wrote: post #3

To solve all this, it's pretty simple, and the U.S. actually used to do it: heavily tax the super rich. Heavy taxation and then appropriate use of those funds for education, R&D funding, infrastructure, etc. is actual trickle-down economics. And mega corporations should be heavily taxed instead of holding the country economically hostage. They jumpstart their companies off of government funding and R&D and then act a…

One thing I've noticed consistently, is when politicians talk about "taxing the wealthy", they almost always follow that with "earning more than $xxxk a year". This is conflating wealth with income. Being within this tax bracket myself, I do not deny that I am biased, but I do hope this bullshit gets called out hard whenever someone brings up yet another underhanded measure to milk us (typical SFBay SWE) above and be…

Come to the Netherlands! 52% kicks in early and plus there is the 2% worldwide wealth tax on all non-real estate investments.

Is it worth it, just to live in a shockingly civilized society under a highly functional government?

Re: Are super-rich people just better at making money?

#117

Post by nmfisher »

WalterBright wrote: post #101
SilverBirch wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this really... true? I get that there's this idea in people's heads that you couldn't tax for example some incredible rare art collection, because who is to say it's true value and you damage the owner by applying such a tax burden they actually have to sell the art. But let's take a step back. Where is the real money? Bezos, Gates, Buffett, Page, Brin, Ellison, Ballmer, Bloomberg, Zuckerberg. Further down the lis…

Borrowed money is not income.

No, but it is an avoidance mechanism specifically designed to avoid tax on income.

If an independent third party has deemed your stock sufficiently valuable (and stable) to lend money against, then you should be taxed on that loan. You can get a credit when you repay the loan (to offset tax on the income you used to repay).

Re: Are super-rich people just better at making money?

#118

Post by mciancia »

bmitc wrote: post #79
dismantlethesun wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are wealthy and refuse to earn an income, then your savings will eventually deplete and you’ll become bankrupt. Additionally they wealth already taxed in a previous era, and is currently taxed in this era any time they spend it via sales tax. If of course you are spending all your money on personal groceries as a billionaire, then I’m 100% fine with not taxing you.

I don't think any individual should be a billionaire. There's no conceivable reason for a single person to need or have the right to be a billionaire.

How would you want to achieve that?

Re: Are super-rich people just better at making money?

#119

Post by janalsncm »

bmitc wrote: post #3

To solve all this, it's pretty simple, and the U.S. actually used to do it: heavily tax the super rich. Heavy taxation and then appropriate use of those funds for education, R&D funding, infrastructure, etc. is actual trickle-down economics. And mega corporations should be heavily taxed instead of holding the country economically hostage. They jumpstart their companies off of government funding and R&D and then act a…

Adding on to this, we absolutely know how to tax assets. We do it all the time: property (i.e. house) taxes. The unfortunate thing for middle class home owners is that houses are a type of wealth that is taxed just for having it whereas art, corporate shares, bonds, and trust funds are not.
Post reply on HN