Live data from Hacker News

California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state

wsj.com

621–630 of 734 posts

Re: California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state

#621
post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I make roughly half a million a year. I'm very aware that my tax rate would increase if we started taxing the wealthy more. Please tax the wealthy more. Send the tax man to my house and all my peers. We can afford it just fine.

You do know you can voluntarily pay more in taxes today, right now... Giving money to government is not compasssion, Helping people get food, shelter, healthcare,etc yourself is compassion. Voting for government to use guns to force people to pay what you have perceived as "their fair share" in order to provide those things to people is not compassion, it is self-righteous bullying.

Bullying? You couldn’t find a more powerful word to describe the state taking away your goodies?

Making public goods into voluntarist things like charities isn’t benevolence. Robber barons have no problem giving a pittance to the poor, I’m sure, as long as that keeps them from being “bullied”.

Re: California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state

#622
post #272
post #68

Well I guess I'll take the apparently bold stance here that this isn't the end of Silicon Valley or California and yes this is fair and further, good. When people are getting 5-6% returns on investments (minimum), 0.4% is still not even stopping the rich get richer effect. Not to mention that it's almost certain no one here will ever be touched by this tax. If you're going to move where you live or significantly alte…

Thing is we’ve done the experiment and it doesn’t work. France had a wealth tax (called the ISF, impôt sur la fortune) and it never actually garnered the expected revenues. This is because wealthy French people moved to Brussels, where you still have a pretty nice city and you can still speak French. Macron got rid of it and there was a mini-crash in Brussels real estate as people move back. There’s nothing stopping…

[deleted]

Re: California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state

#623
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your premise that they will experience French Revolution like consequences is overlooking the fact that unlike the 1700s. Up and taking your money to another country that still likes you is the click of a mouse and a private jet flight out. So no they won’t capitulate to higher taxes of earlier times. They will just leave. Like they already are at the threat of it.

Maybe a percentage will, but I think when people are trying to guess and assume what these people will do as "rational economic agents", they miss the human factors. No one is going to pick where they go to college based on the taxes on the ultra-rich unless they are obsessed with money. Once rich, are you going to uproot yourself entirely from any family, friends, and connections in the US? You have to consider that…

[deleted]

Re: California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state

#624

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once the infrastructure is in place to assess this kind of tax, it'll be a matter of time before it starts applying to those with >10M wealth, then >1M, etc

Yup. It's called boiling the frog. I am not totally against wealth taxes, however I disagree with the approach. What I do not understand is why not just implement a more aggressive estate tax on people and close the "trust" and "foundation" loopholes for avoiding the estate tax. Let's take Jeff Bezos as an extreme example (who isn't even a California Resident). At least until we figure out immortality, Jeff Bezos wil…

[deleted]

Re: California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state

#625
post #68

Well I guess I'll take the apparently bold stance here that this isn't the end of Silicon Valley or California and yes this is fair and further, good. When people are getting 5-6% returns on investments (minimum), 0.4% is still not even stopping the rich get richer effect. Not to mention that it's almost certain no one here will ever be touched by this tax. If you're going to move where you live or significantly alte…

Ah, yes, threatening to murder people you're jealous of. This is the content I come to Hacker News for!

[deleted]

Re: California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state

#626
post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't say I have much time to engage today, but since this seems to have some support and a fundamental misunderstanding, I want to address this one. Hatred towards the ultra-rich is not based in jealousy but in a moral stance. The argument is not "I want your 30M" it is that "people having this much wealth is bad for all of society". See: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/06/opinion/abolish-billionai... There's much…

Your explanation sounds something like when a racist says that he doesn't hate people because of the color of their skin but because they bring diseases, take away jobs and are not cultured.

That’s quite an unhinged simile.

Re: California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state

#627

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you are the problem. please set up a charity. feel free to part from your money. there are many of us who cant...unlike some americans, some of us have responsibilities..aged parents living overseas, children, relatives..i would rather use my wealth to make sure that my parents and in laws and aunts and uncles live well before they die. what i am is because of the people who raised me and i owe them a debt before i o…

Someone who earns 500K a year and who wants to be taxed more isn’t the problem. They are a principled social democrat. A thing that a country like the US could use more of. People who look out for themselves and their family only and who wants to make public goods into a voluntarist thing through charities are the problem. They are of no use to anyone except their immediates and are only holding progress back.

I am not a flaggelist. You must have confused me with someone who would be affected by what you wrote. I don’t expect to carry everyone’s burden because I don’t suffer from a Saviour Complex. I believe in human beings ability to be resilient and survive against odds. By themselves. YMMV.

Re: California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state

#628
post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not just move to a place like Idaho or Wyoming instead? You can have it right now instead of dreaming about it.

_You_ go to Idaho and Wyoming. California is our state.

I’m sorry, but you have me confused with someone else who is fantasizing about “a California with population levels pre-Gold-Rush, pre-Dust-Bowl and pre-Silicon-Valley”.

I wasn’t being sarcastic with my previous comment

Re: California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state

#629

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't say I have much time to engage today, but since this seems to have some support and a fundamental misunderstanding, I want to address this one. Hatred towards the ultra-rich is not based in jealousy but in a moral stance. The argument is not "I want your 30M" it is that "people having this much wealth is bad for all of society". See: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/06/opinion/abolish-billionai... There's much…

Hatred towards the rich when our quality of life has never been higher IS jealousy and petty envy. The fact that slogans like “eat the rich” have been normalized by Millennials and Gen-Z on Tik Tok is clear evidence of it. Imagine the irony of an entire society having leisure time to burn on Tik Tok (or other social media) via a handheld space age device that we couldn’t even imagine 15 years ago, and yet whining abo…

[deleted]

Re: California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state

#630
post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thing is we’ve done the experiment and it doesn’t work. France had a wealth tax (called the ISF, impôt sur la fortune) and it never actually garnered the expected revenues. This is because wealthy French people moved to Brussels, where you still have a pretty nice city and you can still speak French. Macron got rid of it and there was a mini-crash in Brussels real estate as people move back. There’s nothing stopping…

> This is because wealthy French people moved to Brussels, where you still have a pretty nice city and you can still speak French Meh, as a French person, the number of people who did this is pretty low. People hid their assets sure, but the FTB is a bit better at this than the fisc is ;-)

I can’t say what percentage of wealthy people did this versus just regular asset hiding, but it happened enough to be visible among Belgians (my family lives in Brussels). Either way, hiding assets is relatively easy if there are millions of dollars on the line. Also, moving to CO or UT is even easier than moving to Belgium from France.

Put another way, the more complicated the tax, the easier it is to find loopholes. It’s basically impossible to write a simple wealth tax. If you do, you end up capturing people who shouldn’t be captured (for example a founder with illiquid stock and purely paper wealth). I’m actually all for taxing income pretty heavily especially in a progressive manner. Better yet, tax consumption. I think a luxury consumption tax, especially one that penalizes things like expensive cars, jets, boats, and similar would be a more effective way to tax the rich.

Post reply on HN