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

101–110 of 587 posts

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

#101

Post by WalterBright »

SilverBirch wrote: post #94
bawolff wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a practical matter, it is very difficult to tax wealth (and even harder to do it fairly.) I don't think the issue is lack of will but lack of plan that actually works in the face of assets with unclear value and/or difficult to liquidate. And this doesn't just affect the ultra rich but people like SWE too. How much is the stock you have in the non-public company you work at really worth? SWE are probably one of th…

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.

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

#103

Post by tzmudzin »

dismantlethesun wrote: post #73
smilekzs wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

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.

> If you are wealthy and refuse to earn an income, then your savings will eventually deplete and you’ll become bankrupt.

Please look up "rent", "dividend" and "capital gains".

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

#104

Post by WalterBright »

underdeserver wrote: post #89
WalterBright wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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%.

Top 1% of salary earners. The CEOs, highly paid doctors, engineers. The real capitalists - those who hold the assets and pay for their yachts with stock-backed loans - they don't pay 40% of the federal tax revenue. Their salary is $1/year.

Loans are not income.

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

#105

Post by EricDeb »

bawolff wrote: post #47
smilekzs wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

As a practical matter, it is very difficult to tax wealth (and even harder to do it fairly.) I don't think the issue is lack of will but lack of plan that actually works in the face of assets with unclear value and/or difficult to liquidate. And this doesn't just affect the ultra rich but people like SWE too. How much is the stock you have in the non-public company you work at really worth? SWE are probably one of th…

What about a tax such that you can only use assets as collateral for a loan if you've paid any outstanding capital gains on them? Would affect normal people through HELOCs but otherwise would mostly affect the very wealthy.

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

#106

Post by an-allen »

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 where most of the money goes - hint military - so more rich folks money into the governments coffers - what industry do you think benefits the most from a policy like this?

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

#107

Post by shafyy »

WalterBright wrote: post #77
shafyy wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's incredibly difficult to tax someone who's actually poor on paper You think this because the super rich want you to think this. Actually, it's not hard and there are some good ideas floating around (e.g. more inheritance tax, don't let them get loans without taxes againt their illiquid wealth). Does it require a change of laws? Yes, but that's the whole point of democracy.

The top federal inheritance tax rate is 40%. The top Washington state inheritance tax rate is 20%. I.e. the government takes half.

Sure, but we all know about the loop holes that need to be fixed.

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

#108

Post by Gareth321 »

I am a devout capitalist with an accounting degree and an MBA. I believe the theory and data indicates that wealth is a mix of (in order): luck, family wealth, social ability, attractiveness, height, intelligence, natural abilities which align well with making money (conscientiousness, ability to delay gratification, affinity for work in scalable professions like IT, etc), culture, place of residence, likelihood of sociopathy, and many more.

Luck is part of it, but there are so many other factors here. When they converge, we often end up with people extremely good at making money. Under capitalism and in principle, this isn't a bad thing. It means they're generating outsized benefit for society. However problems quickly emerge: with economic power comes market inefficiencies. The wealthy can use their power to buy out competition, under-price them (below profit), out-market them, and leverage their efficiencies of scale and bargaining power to maintain a permanent moat. We are seeing all of this occur to an extreme degree in the modern software space. Frustratingly, anti-competitive laws have been on the books for a century, and are sufficiently broad to use. It's just that U.S. politicians lack the will.

Existentially, I believe that power corrupts. Billionaires are billionaires because they created a lot of value for society. Great. But once they're billionaires, they can control the destiny of countries, and this undermines democracy and greater social outcomes. I believe therefore that a balance must exist between deterrent effect which occurs with aggressive redistribution (and the effect is undeniable), and preventing the emergence of ultra powerful individuals.

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

#109

Post by Yizahi »

bawolff wrote: post #47
smilekzs wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

As a practical matter, it is very difficult to tax wealth (and even harder to do it fairly.) I don't think the issue is lack of will but lack of plan that actually works in the face of assets with unclear value and/or difficult to liquidate. And this doesn't just affect the ultra rich but people like SWE too. How much is the stock you have in the non-public company you work at really worth? SWE are probably one of th…

It is reasonably easy.

Step 1. The country creates a law forbidding any financial interactions with "offshore" countries (list is populated manually by lawmakers) and also with companies working with such offshore companies (shell intermediaries) in "good" countries.

Step 2. Country forbids its citizens from owning any assets or be incorporated in the same "offshore" countries.

Step 3. Blanket ban of cryptotokens.

Step 4. Huge inheritance taxes.

Step 5. Incremental tax hikes for second and more houses/apartments owned. Restrictions for corporations owning a lot of residential properties and huge taxation.

Step 6. Ban or restrictions of airbnb-like activities to discourage parking money in the housing market.

Basically look where rich hide money go for that. When they switch tactics you follow.

Step 0. Big independent financial auditor structure, independent from law and judicial branched both (or almost independent). From experience - you can dismantle a lot billionaires even with existing laws, if only someone looked close enough and punished them. This is a huge problem in eastern europe for example.

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

#110

Post by netsharc »

sgjohnson wrote: post #8
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…

> To solve all this, it's pretty simple, and the U.S. actually used to do it: heavily tax the super rich. That never happened. https://mises.org/library/good-ol-days-when-tax-rates-were-9...

Ha, Austrian school of economics... I'm sure they have a neutral point of view.. /s

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School#Criticism

Post reply on HN