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

431–440 of 589 posts

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

#431

Post by hnaccount_rng »

doe_eyes wrote: post #303
Salgat wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get why people say a tax on unrealized gains is not feasible. All it means is that a percent of your investment becomes "realized" every year and you sell a portion of your investment to cover it. So if you have a billion dollars in stocks and you have to realize 10% of it in a year, you sell enough stock to cover the $20 million and the other $80 million becomes realized and never taxed again (only future ga…

> All it means is that a percent of your investment becomes "realized" every year and you sell a portion of your investment to cover it. Because there is a ton of investments that aren't liquid, aren't trivial to value on an ongoing basis, and aren't infinitely divisible. Again, a farm is a perfect example. Land prices are going up. Your family farm was worth n million, and is now theoretically worth twice that. Do y…

But that's largely solved right? The banks that issue loans _against_ those assets do put a number on them! Just tax it based on this value. And since they are willing to lend money anyhow, the user can just take out a slightly bigger loan to cover the tax too.

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

#432

Post by Wytwwww »

logifail wrote: post #417
Wytwwww wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The state of nature is no tax, and as it's unpleasant Being able to accumulate capital, at least without having to resort to extreme violence is also about as "unnatural" as it gets.. No taxes = No government = No excess (above subsistence level) accumulation of assets

> Being able to accumulate capital, at least without having to resort to extreme violence is also about as "unnatural" as it gets.. (This is a genuine clarifying question, because I'm struggling here) are you suggesting that saving is somehow unnatural?

> that saving is somehow unnatural

Depends on how you define saving. Hoarding perishable goods is of course a pretty natural behaviour but that only scales so much. Investment (i.e. owning more land or other productive assets than you can utilize directly yourself) seems pretty as opposed to communal ownership seems pretty "unnatural".

Not that I'm somehow implying that "natural" (whatever that really means, since using violence and coercion certainly seems like natural human behaviour) is somehow always superior to the opposite.

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

#433

Post by arrosenberg »

mmcdermott wrote: post #390
jncfhnb wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you principally protect your property by… wait for it… paying taxes to the state to uphold law and order

While I'm sure that someone somewhere objects to paying for law and order, I think most tax grumbling comes from taxes rising (and, arguably, still not rising enough) to pay for bigger and bigger programs with an increasingly tenuous relationship to law or order. Not everyone objects to every line item, of course, but the bigger the budget gets the more certain it becomes that those rising taxes are not just to keep…

> I think most tax grumbling comes from taxes rising (and, arguably, still not rising enough) to pay for bigger and bigger programs with an increasingly tenuous relationship to law or order.

The Constitution addresses this confusion in its' preamble. The role of the government includes law and maintaining order, but it extends further -

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

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

#434

Post by bialpio »

bluGill wrote: post #361
triceratops wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But they don't have to work.

Most middle class don't have to work either - they are just not willing to accept the lifestyle that forces. Even poor people could find enough savings by 30 to not work if they really want to live that lifestyle. (I don't blame anyone for not wanting to live like that)

Out of curiosity, how much money do you think is needed to survive ~55 years ("savings by 30" + life expectancy around 85ish = 55yrs) without working? Also, please spell out biggest assumptions you're making.

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

#435

Post by hnaccount_rng »

hluska wrote: post #340
efsavage wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is definitely an obvious fix, just have collateralization be considered realization. You're welcome to have as much money on paper as you want, but if you want to post $Xm in stock against a loan, you need to pay taxes on it first.

What happens if the value of the underlying asset depreciates? Here’s a hypothetical: - I own $100 of stock in Company A. - The First International Bank of efsavage decides to accept that $100 in stock as collateral on a loan. So I pay taxes assuming a value of $100. - When I dispose of the stock, it is only worth $80. Will that be a retroactive credit, meaning that I will have to amend my tax return in the year that…

Why not just treat it as any other loss for tax reasons? If I understand this correctly, then the current state is basically: If you take losses you can use those to nullify a future gain. Just do that.

And.. the bookkeeping thing is really solvable. That's kind of what banks are for

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

#436

Post by hgomersall »

willcipriano wrote: post #262
VirusNewbie wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I'm yet to meet anyone that actually understands MMT and doesn't endorse it. You might be the first, but I doubt it. Which bit of MMT do you have trouble with?

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

#437

Post by Wytwwww »

entropicdrifter wrote: post #394
Wytwwww wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The state of nature is no tax, and as it's unpleasant Being able to accumulate capital, at least without having to resort to extreme violence is also about as "unnatural" as it gets.. No taxes = No government = No excess (above subsistence level) accumulation of assets

And the people who have a strong drive for the accumulation of capital/assets build armies and those armies shake down subsistence-living people for food and supplies in order to sustain themselves and suddenly you've got taxes again

Yes, thankfully modern liberal(ish) democracy(sort of) and the rule of law allowed us to exit this circle (well.. at least brought us much closer to that point than we ever were).

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

#438

Post by [deleted] »

Jedd wrote: post #94

A fascinating reddit post was mentioned here about a month ago - about the mildly famous (if a little macabre) 'Buy, Borrow, Die' cycle used by the obscenely-wealthy to - multi-generationally - avoid tax obligations. https://old.reddit.com/r/BuyBorrowDieExplained/comments/1f26... HN comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41408772

[deleted]

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

#439

Post by ChadNauseam »

mynameishere wrote: post #58
jrockway wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone can make a voluntary contribution to the United States Treasury: https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html

I always wondered if there was a way to effectively "burn" one's entire wealth, creating a small deflationary event that would increase the value of existing dollars. How could one do this? Donate to the Federal Reserve? Or would you literally have to cash everything out and burn it?

Couldn't you just not spend or invest the money? I think putting it in a chest and burying it in an unmarked location would be equivalent to burning it.

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

#440

Post by ChadNauseam »

kombookcha wrote: post #260
pembrook wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Damn, that guy is citing sources, must mean he's wrong and there is no need for you to examine any of the vibes-based assumptions you are making about the real world then.

The GP never said they were wrong because they gave sources, they said they didn't give any rebuttal at all and instead only cited sources that presumably contained a rebuttal. If they said "such and such author did a survey that found that only 5% of money held by rich people got to them via productive pursuits", that would be one thing, but they just said "such and such author says you're wrong"
Post reply on HN