81–90 of 236 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why make it on inheritance then? Tax wealth 100% above 2M. I do think this would doom progress but would be a fun exercise.
Wouldnt it be easier just to tax all income above say $200,000 (minimum wage in SV) at 100%. If a net worth of $2 mil is considered outrageous then surely that kind of salary would be considered equally so.
This is just wrong. If we skip the ultra rich totally and focus on normal families inheritance is THE way to help you decendants. Right now (where i live) you pay a big tax on inheritance, this is ok if you only inherit cash. In 99% of inheritances this is not the case. You inherit family home, a cottage etc. Then you must sell because you cant afford to pay for it. Now the asset is gone forever and the next generati…
The majority of people don’t inherit anything, so you are still luckier than most!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a reason why countries, like Sweden, have scrapped the inheritance tax - it doesn't work like that anymore. The benefits of wealth are exercised long before the inheritance can be applied. Your first home down payment, your education, your wealth generation while being on support by your parents, etc. - will push you off the ground faster, than any inheritance in a world where people easily live to 80-90. Mos…
I'm pretty sure we scrapped it because the conservatives got into power.
Inheritance tax doesn't work anymore, in any case.
It's not the 19th century and we shouldn't try fixing 21 century issues with 19th century remedies.
Many in the US expecting an inheritance from their baby boomer parents are in for a rude shock. Why? Because their assets are going to get eaten up by retirement living and end-of-life care. If you still own your assets when you go into care, Medicaid is going to use up all those assets before paying for it and this could be tens of thousands a month with long-term medical care. You can avoid this is you plan ahead.…
10x in 35 years is compounded rate of return of under 7%, which is not far off the average mortgage rate over that period of time. Add in some maintenance and that might even represent a loss in real terms over that period of time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the bigger issue is that people are hording wealth instead of spending it in general making money work for them and not for the greater economy which is the only thing giving their money substance long-term. Well, long-term is longer than human lifetime so I guess there's no real reason for them to worry about it either.
I've heard this take a lot and it doesn't make much sense to me. How exactly are ultra rich "hoarding wealth instead of spending it"? Afaik most of the net worth of the ultra rich is in ownership of companies (stocks) or loans (eg bonds). That money is all out there in the world working. Isn't the fact that the ultra rich are using their wealth productively the reason we have growing wealth inequality? Because active…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the bigger issue is that people are hording wealth instead of spending it in general making money work for them and not for the greater economy which is the only thing giving their money substance long-term. Well, long-term is longer than human lifetime so I guess there's no real reason for them to worry about it either.
Not really. After all that is the point of inflation, to tax people who hoard money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are many solutions, many ways to limit the magnitude of differences of wealth. But America is so thoroughly owned by the wealthy that implementing one of these solutions is not desirable. The legislature in America only works on behalf of the ultra wealthy and any legislation that passes will be to increase the magnitude of the wealth gap.
Also there's the aspect of how many Americans view themselves as temporarily inconvenienced millionaires. The average person doesn't want rules like this because they're sure it'll apply to them someday.
A lot genuinely have no idea that there's a very high lower limit on inheritance tax... at the same time they hate the ultra rich.
This is genuinely a very schizophrenic country.
1) set a generous threshold over which your inheritance gets taxed, inflation adjusted (e.g, 2M not including the principal residence) 2) tax 100% above it. (should only concern a fraction of a fraction of cases) 3) put all this tax's proceeds in a sovereign wealth fund 4) at 21, a citizen gets access to her redistributed generational wealth 5) profit
There's a reason why countries, like Sweden, have scrapped the inheritance tax - it doesn't work like that anymore. The benefits of wealth are exercised long before the inheritance can be applied. Your first home down payment, your education, your wealth generation while being on support by your parents, etc. - will push you off the ground faster, than any inheritance in a world where people easily live to 80-90. Mos…
1) set a generous threshold over which your inheritance gets taxed, inflation adjusted (e.g, 2M not including the principal residence) 2) tax 100% above it. (should only concern a fraction of a fraction of cases) 3) put all this tax's proceeds in a sovereign wealth fund 4) at 21, a citizen gets access to her redistributed generational wealth 5) profit
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the bigger issue is that people are hording wealth instead of spending it in general making money work for them and not for the greater economy which is the only thing giving their money substance long-term. Well, long-term is longer than human lifetime so I guess there's no real reason for them to worry about it either.
I heard something on here about an investment bubble? There is some kind of bizarre world that we live in that the article has a quote from Ramaphosa, the totality of his extraordinary wealth was generated by corruption, on the terrors of inequality. Hoarding is, generally, not a real problem because it requires believing that wealthy people are not greedy. The problem is that most societies heavily incentivize irrat…