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

Billionaire Tax Officially Heads to Nov. 3 Ballot

sos.ca.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 67 posts

Re: Billionaire Tax Officially Heads to Nov. 3 Ballot

#31

Post by marcinpieczka »

0xy wrote: post #4

Even if it fails, California has taken a multi billion dollar tax hit from all of the wealth flight as a result of this. Not to mention that those people may take jobs with them, straight to Florida or Texas or other friendlier states. These taxes are an abject disaster everywhere they're tried. France tried it and it was extremely bad for them. The cash raised from the tax is dwarfed by the wealth flight, every time…

If you won't do anything about the wealth, the top 1%, or top 0.1% will own more and more, until they own everything. Literally. There is no other outcome possible

Re: Billionaire Tax Officially Heads to Nov. 3 Ballot

#32

Post by AnimalMuppet »

xhkkffbf wrote: post #5

All of the wealth has been taxed before, often multiple times. Adding another layer sure seems like overkill.

Well, no, it hasn't. Much of the wealth is in the form of unrealized capital gains. It won't be taxed until it becomes a realized capital gain, that is, until the underlying asset is sold.

Re: Billionaire Tax Officially Heads to Nov. 3 Ballot

#33

Post by watwut »

whateveracct wrote: post #10
nickdurfe wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

41 of the 56 men who signed the document containing that statement were slave owners.

and yet now the constitution bans slavery i find the "but the founding fathers had slaves" to just be nihilistic nonsense the united states was a manifestation of enlightenment philosophy that persists to this day (despite attacks on it)

It took literal war to get there.

Re: Billionaire Tax Officially Heads to Nov. 3 Ballot

#34

Post by nickdurfe »

pipes wrote: post #17
nickdurfe wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"and yet now the constitution bans slavery" Unless you're a prisoner convicted of a crime. Stating that the founders of the United States owned slaves is not "nihilistic nonsense", it's an important distinction to note that they sought political power for themselves, and no one else. The phrase "all men are created equal" should be interpreted as "all white land-owning men are created equal"

But the constitution doesn't say: "all white land-owning men are created equal" It said "all men are created equal". It took a long time to get to this point in human history and it's worth defending.

Your elementary school social studies teacher failed you; the statement you referenced is written in the Declaration of Independence, not the US Constitution. The parent OP that I first replied to stated that "Owning money should allow you more representation than not owning money". This is a position not at all worth defending, and completely at odds with the concept of "all men are created equal".

Re: Billionaire Tax Officially Heads to Nov. 3 Ballot

#36

Post by pipes »

nickdurfe wrote: post #34
pipes wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the constitution doesn't say: "all white land-owning men are created equal" It said "all men are created equal". It took a long time to get to this point in human history and it's worth defending.

Your elementary school social studies teacher failed you; the statement you referenced is written in the Declaration of Independence, not the US Constitution. The parent OP that I first replied to stated that "Owning money should allow you more representation than not owning money". This is a position not at all worth defending, and completely at odds with the concept of "all men are created equal".

To be fair. I grew up in Ireland and have never lived in the USA. I just admire the protections for the individual that your country aims for. Anyway I appreciate the correction :)

Re: Billionaire Tax Officially Heads to Nov. 3 Ballot

#37

Post by pojnttekkn »

schacon wrote: post #16

Love it. In fact, we should have expanded it to be a "millionaire tax" where everyone who has a home worth more than $1M needs to pay a one time $50k+ tax to the highly efficient state government. I'm sure they can easily figure out how to sell a small fraction of their home to cover it. If there is one thing that history has proven, I think it's how valuable dry taxation is for everyone in the long term.

[flagged]

Re: Billionaire Tax Officially Heads to Nov. 3 Ballot

#38

Post by nobodywillobsrv »

iamkeithmccoy wrote: post #11
telesilla wrote: post #6

Azim Premji donates every dollar he makes over 1 billion for the last 20 years. Mckenzie Scott is working through donating her share. Same for Melinda Gates, Dustin Moskovitz & Cari Tuna. Warren Buffet plans to donate the larger part to charity. Let's keep building the good examples so the alternative (power consolidation across generations) is unthinkable for future generations.

Good examples are great. But it doesn't solve the problem. The only way to fix this busted economy where inequality is increasing and few, wealthy individuals are gaining insane amounts of political power through spending is systemic change in the structure of our tax base.

Why not tax the gov though? "Nobody should have that much control" means you must first have limited government and some mechanism to stop unstable governance dynamics which allow for capture. Currently it seems like billionaires are one way to stop that.

Re: Billionaire Tax Officially Heads to Nov. 3 Ballot

#39

Post by nobodywillobsrv »

gaiagraphia wrote: post #26
hsnewman wrote: post #3

In the USA "all men are created equal". Owning money should allow you more representation than not owning money. Companies/institutions should not be allowed to spend money on politics, and a flat tax would solve this.

I think I heard that the Carthaginians used to auction off political positions, and the proceeds were effectively the taxes which ran society. While on the surface it sounds like a ridiculous concept, maybe it'd be better if we just cut out all the middlemen. At least policy could be directly connected to the paymasters.

Whild I hate the idea of a zillionaire tax, and I largely think good allocators should allocate, I also recognize that simply pricing things and allowing them to be bought is unstable in many cases.

If you can use it to take over a country it must be stopped.

Post reply on HN