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

Who died and left the US $7B?

sherwood.news

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 589 posts

Re: Who died and left the US $7B?

#261

Post by fallingknife »

jjav wrote: post #258
fallingknife wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Renters do not pay property tax in the US. That liability is entirely on the owner.

> Renters do not pay property tax in the US. There's a simple way to visualize why is not true: You're renting a property for $1000/mo. Whatever the owner is paying for property taxes, you don't know. Then, property taxes go up by $200/mo. Do you think your rent won't go up by at least $200/mo as a direct consequence of the tax increase? Because it will. Because the renter is of course paying for all costs, including…

No it won't. The rent will not go up until the lease is up. And at that point it still won't necessarily go up by 200 bucks because that's just not how markets work.

Re: Who died and left the US $7B?

#262

Post by willcipriano »

VirusNewbie wrote: post #209
willcipriano wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A big part of modern monetary theory is taxing the newly printed money and putting it towards (wasteful) government programs to "burn it" in a sense. Predictably, politicians who support MMT only did the printing part and skipped that bit once inflation started.

How does that burn the money? If the government is spending the money, it's going to federal employees and purchasing good and services from the general economy.

That's where the wasteful bit comes in.

If the taxed dollars ended up with say hurricane victims or other struggling Americans, those dollars would chase goods and services domestically driving up the price of those goods.

Now consider if instead you helped fund Israels socialized medicine program or paid off some of Ukraines debt or paid interest to Chinese creditors. Those dollars wouldn't have much effect when it comes to increasing the price of eggs in the US as they are being spent far away in another economy.

A similar effect could occur if the money ended with the wealthy folks, say wealthy owners of private defence contracting firms, as those dollars might chase building a super yacht (inadvertently employing some people but also consuming foreign made materials and labor) instead of trying to rent an apartment in Iowa. Less dollars chasing Iowa apartments, considering supply and demand, lower prices, lower CPI.

Take dollars from the middle class who will drive up the cost of the American dream and instead give them to people who will drive up the price of luxury goods.

It's never explained this clearly beacuse people would riot, but with this framework the choices of government in the last few decades or so suddenly makes more sense.

(I don't endorse MMT)

Re: Who died and left the US $7B?

#263

Post by ricardobeat »

EricE wrote: post #120
drexlspivey wrote: post #46

This $7B is enough to fund the US Federal government for about 8 hours

Yes, what a colossal waste - would have been much better going to charities.

Choose your charities wisely. The average is something like 66% of funds going to the actual cause, and it varies wildly between 10% and 95%+.

Re: Who died and left the US $7B?

#264

Post by jmpman »

This is the most frustrating news I’ve read about taxes. As an American, I’d like to think that our tax system was designed to be fair. Yes, Warren Buffet’s secretary famously paid a higher tax percentage than he did, because all of his wealth was in unrealized gains. I’d accepted that - with the understanding that upon Warren’s death, estate taxes would be paid, and “fairness” would be restored to the system. But, lobbying for tax loopholes, wealth left to charities where heirs are awarded outrageous management fees, etc are ways for the extremely wealthy to avoid ever paying these estate taxes. When I heard the democrats push for a billionaire tax, I was quite cynical, as I thought the fairness issue would be resolved through estate taxes. This $7B being an anomaly, suggests that the wealthy are engineering their way around paying these estate taxes. I thought those problems were limited to “step-up” in cost basis type of giveaways to the wealthy. Now I’m reading that even the basic estate taxes aren’t being paid. I’m livid. Hate to say this, but I may now support the democrats plan. It’s a horrible plan, but apparently estate taxes aren’t working either.

Re: Who died and left the US $7B?

#265

Post by zajio1am »

rahimnathwani wrote: post #193
fallingknife wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Renters do not pay property tax in the US. That liability is entirely on the owner.

Your statement is technically correct. It's also technically correct to say that diners, not restaurant owners, pay sales taxes. The reality is more nuanced. Introducing a sales tax on restaurant meals affects both diners and restaurant owners: restaurant owners can't pass on the whole increase to diners, and diners cannot afford to go out as much. Similarly, property tax levels influence landlords' decisions to ente…

I appreciate your nuance, as mixing up economic burden and legal responsibility for taxes is a common fallacy in discussions. But specifically for rents in supply-constrained cities, i would guess that supply is highly inelastic, therefore market rate of rents is already as high as acceptable by renters (i.e. determined by demand curve) and therefore property tax would not affect it much.

Re: Who died and left the US $7B?

#266

Post by gperkins978 »

witchammer wrote: post #225
_bin_ wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't just arbitrarily set the status quo that way, can't just sneak a premise that the state has default a right to collect a piece of arbitrary appreciation on an asset (as all assets are used for speculation) when the owner hasn't actually gotten cash from that, and that any government that doesn't tax that is just cutting someone a break on something rightfully owed. The state of nature is no tax, and as it's…

> The state of nature is no tax > You don't get to argue from the point that your preferred taxation regime is simply how things should be Those two statements seem mildly contradictory.

The state of nature has no schools, no water, no sewer and no police. If one is going to live in a civilized nation, he should pay his share of taxes. Capital gains is 15%. That is not an outrageous amount. Everyone should pay because everyone benefits. One is free to leave and live in tax shelter principality or Sultanate.

There is a problem with high taxes on earned income, but anyone complaining about the 15% capital gains tax has problems. The estate tax only applies to this who are very, very fortunate. These are not even earned. Again, if one hates his country, he can move to Dubai, Bermuda or the Glorious Sultanate of Brunei and enjoy their lifestyle.

I do understand that people in California get angry because the state is so poorly run, but most of the US has easily avoided the self-created problems of California and New York city.

Re: Who died and left the US $7B?

#267

Post by gperkins978 »

sologoub wrote: post #205
geysersam wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The counterpoint is that this leaves money invested, which means others invest in other things, This is a bad argument. Taxes are also money invested, in schooling, infrastructure, etc. It's a very common fallacy of people criticizing public spending to point to the stock market and say "Look! Imagine how rich we would be if we had just invested the public spending instead." Completely falling into the trap of disc…

> Taxes are also money invested, in schooling, infrastructure, etc. Not presently. Most tax dollars are spent elsewhere and infrastructure/education get less than 7%: https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/feder... Even that spending is not effective. Drive California roads and you’ll often see fixes that aren’t much better than the damaged roads they replaced. And let’s not talk about our wonderful t…

What are you doing to change this? Are you trying to make the situation better? California has been run into the ground for the last thirty years intentionally. Many residents love having mentally ill people die in the streets. They have created an entire system to support this. Money has been drained away from roads and schools to pay for ever growing "programs" to employ rich white ladies so they can brag to their friends about their incredible virtue.

You are free to leave. There are plenty of low-tax countries. If you want to live in the US, Europe, Japan,..., then you must pay to be part of our reindeer games.

That said, PLEASE get involved and try to direct public funding and attention towards core activities (roads, schools, infrastructure) instead of ever more ridiculous programs to employ Berkeley graduates in virtuous-looking jobs. Utah does a great job at this sort of thing. Instead of learning from them, our political elite degrade them and insult them for their religious beliefs. I once repeated a colleague's obscene jokes, only I stated that he said them about Muslims instead of Mormons. He lost his mind trying to correct me. It was amusing.

Re: Who died and left the US $7B?

#268

Post by TheCoelacanth »

_bin_ wrote: post #213
geysersam wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a funny argument the one about the family farm. In this case it's not even about inheritance tax. It's a sob story about a guy who couldn't inherit the farm because his dad owed the state money because they had let him not pay tax on his capital gains for a long time. Sorry for not tearing up.

You can't just arbitrarily set the status quo that way, can't just sneak a premise that the state has default a right to collect a piece of arbitrary appreciation on an asset (as all assets are used for speculation) when the owner hasn't actually gotten cash from that, and that any government that doesn't tax that is just cutting someone a break on something rightfully owed. The state of nature is no tax, and as it's…

> The state of nature is no tax

The state of nature is no property. Billionaires can't exist without a government enforcing their property rights. Why shouldn't they pay the entity that made it possible for them to accumulate their vast wealth?

Re: Who died and left the US $7B?

#269

Post by t0mas88 »

vanjajaja1 wrote: post #148
schneems wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we should probably celebrate gifts to the US government more than we do. I had the idea that we should put a donation box on tax forms. The 100 top donators get on the “US 100” list (like Forbes) but it’s based ONLY on how much you donate, not how much you claim to be worth. It’s one thing to claim to be rich to a Forbes reporter, it’s another to have the (tax) receipts to back it up.

reminds me of the way dubai auctions off the 3 digit car license plates, then hotels do things like only letting low number license plates park out front

Brilliant move, then use the money to support those that are less well off. You can have the ultra-rich bragging about how much they paid, while those that need it most are benefitting. A real win-win.

Re: Who died and left the US $7B?

#270

Post by xpe »

bawolff wrote: post #67
xpe wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When capitalism is functioning well, ... I recommend this question as an interesting conversation starter at parties: Is it in the self-interest of the most successful capitalists to have a well-functioning capitalism?

Obviously not. Which is why we have antitrust laws. If it was in the self-interest of the most succesful capitalists, we wouldn't have to have laws about it.

Right. Phrasing it as a question and waiting for the gears to turn can be a good strategy.
Post reply on HN