heh, neither could I. I’ve looked at WA before, and directly in the cities, it’s like 600-800k with a fair amount of taxes.
I feel obliged to point out that the wealth tax in the Netherlands has been under attack for a while now for the following reason:
The yield being fixed at 1.2%, while the actual yield has been lower than that for over a decade now, means the tax pressure exceeds 100%. Yet this only affects those who are wealthy, but not rich (because the latter kind usually have opportunities for better yields).
How much wealth is exempted from the tax?
A little over €30k right now (for one person, double for couples). It was boosted to this amount recently, partly because of the unfairness of the assumed yield. In the years before that it was closer to €20k.
Do note that this only applies to savings and investments. The value of your primary residence doesn’t count (second homes do though).
Yeah, I think that’s too low for an effective wealth tax. Either tax the actual yields as income, or raise the exemption so that you’re actually targeting wealth.
NPR has done an investigation into where federal disaster money goes:
This looks to me like a case where we need to take a hard look at what problems we want these kinds of emergency relief programs to solve. The programs seem to be designed to provide just enough help that someone in a decent financial position before the disaster can recover. But they don’t provide additional help to overcome the bigger challenges faced by those who weren’t in that kind of good position pre-disaster. And that leads to lots of other issues - for instance, racial discrimination since the poor are much more likely to be non-white.
Without the citizens united ruling how easy does passing a wealth tax become?
I mean, a wealth tax is an EASY win, something like 70% of Americans support it, and 29% of Americans are deluded that they may some day be effected by it, so dislike it.
I think that one of these proposals needs to go up for a vote, and we can get Republican house members on the record that they want to protect the pocketbooks of people with more than 50 million dollars in assets. The GOP can spin that all they want as un-american, but based on polling even pulling a chunk of gullible people from that 70%, it is difficult to see that going below an easy majority win.
I mean, the Democrats could plaster the 2020 election with ads showing the senators and representatives protecting a litany of billionaires. They could even show Trump protecting Jeff Bezos’ fortune, a supposed enemy!
Right now the GOP is keeping their economic protection to the wealthy through dog whistling national security concerns. The tax cut HURT. People are realizing now that they basically didn’t get much from the Tax Cuts and Jobs act, the time to push for this is now. Forget running on this as a campaign fixture, the country needs this wealth tax proposed now.
Agreed. As several people have mentioned, setting that threshold too low can cause some significant financial stress for those without much of a cushion.
What’s the exact mechanism to prevent expatriation of capital? I know banana republics must have dealt with this (unsuccesfully). Need some sort of capital export cap the minute any such rule starts going in because they’ll just move the bulk of assets out.
Could the US, if willing, be even able to reverse fund transfers? I have no idea how banks work.
Okay so take the Kochs for example. They could move liquid assets, but the bulk of their wealth is still their industries which can be nationalized. Hmmm maybe this can work!
There are many, combinations of which are used depending on the exact purpose (eg temporary capital controls for financial stability in Greece vs forced domestication in China). Requiring central bank approval to electronically transfer money outside the country. Limits on cash that can be carried across the border. Restrictions on ownership of foreign companies and land. Restrictions on currency exchange.
The US already practices a tax regime that knows no borders. Presumably they would do the same with a wealth tax. It won’t be enough just to move your capital, you’ll have to hide it, too, something which is increasingly hard to do and which has its own costs.
At some point the threat of extracting it from their dead bodies.
Need I do more than point out the various revolutions from 1790 onwards to how this ends for the obscenely wealthy once the proletariat feels sufficiently screwed?
I am of the sincere opinion that we are rapidly approaching the threshold where the super rich are better off giving some now, rather than giving their necks later. Because that is the end stage of the current trend of wealth concentration. They realized this at the end of the gilded age, and I think the only thing that has prevented it thus far is purchasing propaganda, in this case Fox News.
No, I mean, let’s say you start trying to pass a bill. They wire shit over to Moscow, London, whatever.
I guess the Armando regime will be successful in repatriating assets, thank you for the answers all.
US Dollar probably tanks and it’s gg reset of money I guess. Money, after all is merely a type of score keeping and the fundamental economy is people showing up to work day after day. I don’t know. This is too complicated for me.
The rich are already planning for this.
A repost from last year, but relevant agian in the discussion.
Finally, the CEO of a brokerage house explained that he had nearly completed building his own underground bunker system and asked, “How do I maintain authority over my security force after the event?”
I guess the answer is move to New Zealand?
I am pretty sure the Kiwis know how to set up a Guillotine.
I mean let’s be honest, there is not going to be a meaningful change without buy in up top. They’ve spent decades perfecting their games. At some point the only option without voluntary surrender becomes force.
And when the public gets angry enough that force is required, it tends to spiral until people’s heads are forcibly removed.
The end of the gilded age came when people with enough enlightened self interest took a different path, and we saw the progressive movement institute minimum wages, eliminated scrip, work hours, workplace safety. They were wise to the winds of history, and rather than risk a full scale bolshevik style revolt, instituted changes within their current system.
Today’s uber wealthy think they can escape consequences, without giving up anything. Time will tell if they are right, but I sincerely suspect that absent changes, we will find out if their money can protect them from the uprisings.
Well it’s no delusional if it’s say a million dollars and they are being told they are supposed to have a million dollars or even two for retirement. I just want to clarify that not everyone who is concerned about a wealth tax is concerned because they think they will win the lottery someday or has a rich uncle they’ve never heard of. It’s rational.
Since we constantly say things like, well you can’t talk policies or go into too many details in an election, it’s hard to have these discussions because it’s a vote and see demand.
However, Warren’s 50 million is clearly not going for Middle Class America’s retirement, so I am mostly talk about the ones that have been pretty vague about what their bottom numbers is, what they consider is what is essentially excess wealth. It’s also very likely the Fox type group isn’t getting that 50 million number and they’re too lazy to look it up. They just hear the Democrats want to take your savings.
I don’t disagree, but response is on a spectrum - say light taxation changes on one end and 1789 never forget on the other. Was wondering how something halfway down the line would work out - the legal mechanisms for appropriating vast amounts of wealth without chopping heads off.
I wonder if that has ever happened. Maybe again, Caribbean countries but then people smuggle their cash overseas to the USA and stuff. Russians, Chinese also smuggle their cash out.
Intriguing video about a wealth tax.
I posit that the 1890-1910 era represents the best idea of what that looks like for America. Where the wealthy elite worked as partners in change.
Liked the video, the graph is fairly easy to understand. And I am only speaking on Warren’s plan right now, as hers focuses solely on the super rich.
But I don’t like the wording of saying we want a wealth tax to fix income equality. It won’t fix income equality. Income will always be unequal in the U.S. because of how we compensate our richest citizens. It is how capitalism works.
What we can do, quite easily, is impose a very small tax on the super rich to help make the lives of those in the bottom 99.5% so much easier. Cheaper healthcare, better roads, childcare assistance, better schools, healthier social security, college tuition assistance, green technology.
This isn’t a hand-out, it is America using its own superior economic system to help fund the future of the country. Those who gain the most from living in America can pay back a little bit more to ensure the health and stability of the country. All for the price of a few % cut from multibillionaires and multimillionaires annual investment growth.