Biden to Propose New Minimum Tax on Wealthiest Americans

[JohnnySavage]

I didn't read the thread; has anyone proposed how to determine someones wealth?

 

[Chobham]

If we get to that point, the city folk, in starving desperation
will be out in droves liberating farmers of their "cash" crops.

The first thing that they'll do is plunder each other, only the survivors will make it to the country side. And there won't be too many survivors of those that do. Those rural folks watch out for each other, the James/Dalton gang found that out the hard way. And as you mentioned in another thread, they're all armed to the teeth.

There are all sorts of ways to barter within a community. In the spring all of the local farmers in the town my father settled in would get together and talk about who would plant/raise what. Very little duplication of crops took place. When harvest time came they just called each other up and said, "come on over and get what you need." Some raised chickens, some quail and pheasant. One fellow fenced off 10 acres and raised Fallow Deer. Point being that there was a huge diversity of foods that were essentially shared among the group. Many also raised food for market as well. I don't think my old man ever used more than 3 acres and there was always a surplus.

 

[Chobham]

I didn't read the thread; has anyone proposed how to determine someones wealth?

Good point.

 

[Champakian]

For the majority of people, the wealthy are everyone above their station in life.

 

[Chobham]

"The plan would generate roughly $360 billion in revenue over 10 years, according to a White House fact sheet released in advance of Monday’s full budget proposal."

That isn't shit. $36 billion a year out of a $4.45 trillion budget. The proposal is just the tip of the camel's nose.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Yes, because it is!

If I were to start taxing people, I would be sent to jail. Even if the people I was taxing were children of mine, and I was using the money to buy groceries or to benefit them. Any of us would go to jail for just taking part of someone else's paychecks from them.

The only thing that makes this not the exact legal definition of theft is the fact that the people who get your money have declared that what they are doing is legal.

What makes it legal is that you agreed to it and that you use what the money is spent on.

 

[NorthernVAM]

It's about time!

Hmmm .. so how is this different than the AMT that's been around for ages?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_minimum_tax

So, if you go and do some studying on personal income taxation in America, I think you'll find that there really isn't anything new under the sun, and for every tax "reform" that has come down the pike, there has always been a set of tax shelters that the wealthy have used to shelter their income and preserve their wealth as much as possible. By the way, if you believe you aren't part of the problem, consider how wealthy you are as a US citizen to the rest of the world's population, and you then will realize that you are in the top 1% for global income, and then ask yourself, how much are you willing to give up in the name of "equality"?

The world is an unfair place, and one has to realize that the people who write the tax code are the ones who are most likely to benefit from it, and they are also the ones who are sitting in that lofty 1% of wealth and/or income. All human civilization has had this problem with income distribution, which seems to follow a pareto distribution no matter which political system you try to organize the society under.

Reference: https://www.pragcap.com/the-pareto-principle-and-wealth-inequality/

The real issue I think is how people are motivated, and the notion that some people should be rewarded better than others for their contribution to the society. If you fundamentally believe your system is "as fair as it can be", where everyone is given as much equal opportunity as possible, then some people -- with a little luck, and a lot of hard work (at least according to Thomas Edison), you can achieve success and join the top 1%. Note, in this scenario, I'm not saying the system is perfect, but as "equal" as humans can organize themselves, and keep the chaos (such as wars, riots and general stealing someone else's wealth).

If you fundamentally believe your is "unfair" then you run into the problem of how to redistribute wealth, so that you minimize corruption and general stealing, but somehow provide a better standard of living for your citizens as a whole. While I don't think capitalism is a panacea by any stretch of the imagination, it seems to be the "most successful" system for rewarding individuals to have motivation and ambition, as well as raising the standard of living above other systems, such as the ones that the Russians (Soviets) and Chinese have .. although one could argue that the Chinese have come a long way in reforming Communism to allow enough free enterprise rewards to unleash motivation within their citizenry.

Taxation is a complicated issue .. isn't it?

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Relax. Biden’s proposal is not serious and the midterms are just 32 weeks away.

 

[pecksniff]

So what's being proposed is a 'net worth' tax. Those that are prone to buying into that program should do some research on how the original 'income tax' was sold to the public.

How was it sold?

 

[pecksniff]

Taxes should be voluntary.

Can you point to any government that has ever been adequately funded on that basis?

 

[pecksniff]

I think if we go back to a barter economy, America will look a lot more like a cross between Thunderdome and the Wild West.

You say that like it's a good thing.

 

[pecksniff]

Relax. Biden’s proposal is not serious and the midterms are just 32 weeks away.

What makes you think it's not serious? And a tax-the-rich proposal can only help the Dems in the midterms.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

What makes you think it's not serious? And a tax-the-rich proposal can only help the Dems in the midterms.

A tax on unrealized capital gains is a non-starter. Has no chance of getting through Congress. It will never reach Brandon’s desk. His people know this. The only purpose of the story is an attempt to deflect attention from Brandon’s huge gaffes this week and the continuing terrible economic news.

 

[pecksniff]

A tax on unrealized capital gains is a non-starter. Has no chance of getting through Congress. It will never reach Brandon’s desk.

Why?

N.B.: Only idiots say "Brandon."

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Plenty of Democrats in Congress oppose taxing unrealized capital gains for plenty of reasons, most of which are related to implementation problems and constitutional questions. Valuation of high end unique real estate properties and other tangible assets like art and antiques is one big issue. Don’t take my word for it. Keep your eye on the news and see how much traction this thing gets between now and Election Day 32 weeks from now. Odds of this getting to the floor of either chamber are extremely close to zero.

 

[LittleDixie]

Can you point to any government that has ever been adequately funded on that basis?

The answer to that question should be very illuminating.

The only way that governments can maintain their existence is through their parasitic attachment. We have no choice but to fund them, and they will kill or imprison us if we do not.

You say that like it's a good thing.

No, I just said it. I would not like to live in a barter economy. You know I prefer sound money to filthy fiat IOUs.

 

[pecksniff]

You know I prefer sound money to filthy fiat IOUs.

What difference does it make, if you can spend them?

 

[pecksniff]

Plenty of Democrats in Congress oppose taxing unrealized capital gains for plenty of reasons, most of which are related to implementation problems and constitutional questions.

No, related to the interests of their donors.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

No, related to the interests of their donors.

Obviously donor interests are a factor in all legislative decisions. But the constitutional questions are valid you can read up on that. Same thing with asset valuation. Estimating the value of a tract home in an established neighborhood is one thing. Estimating the value of a 14 room mansion on a 20 acre estate in the country is a whole different issue.

How much is Mar a Lago worth? Trump might paint an optimistic picture on a loan application and a pessimistic picture on a property tax assessment. Truth is no one will know until the property comes up for sale. There is only one Mar a Lago. Same is true with sports franchises, shopping centers, volatile financial instruments, etc.

This proposal is going nowhere. Congressional support is not there.

 

[pecksniff]

I didn't read the thread; has anyone proposed how to determine someones wealth?

Accountants can do that. It's not complicated.

 

[pecksniff]

Obviously donor interests are a factor in all legislative decisions.

That, of course, should not be so. There's another thread running on ways to change that.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Accountants can do that. It's not complicated.

No, they cannot. Property valuation is not a science. Do you ever pay attention to the stock market?

 

[phrodeau]

According to Forbes, Mar-A-Lago is worth $160 million.

According to Zillow, it’s worth $26.6 million.

 

[LittleDixie]

What difference does it make, if you can spend them?

If you can spend them, it makes no practical difference. But the problem I have with fiat isn't that it is spendable right now. The problem I have with fiat is that it will lose value as time goes on, but commodities like gold or silver will be more stable. The benefit of commodity money is that the commodity has a fixed utility value - a steak dinner has value no matter if it costs you a morgan dollar in 1895 or $30 today.

Fun fact, if you go back into the historical record and price commodities in silver, then convert that to the dollar value equivalent for today, they are pretty much the same. With some exceptions, an ounce of silver would have bought you the same basket of goods in 1800, 1850, 1900, 1950, 2000...

And unlike dollars, if you put a bar of gold in a safe, it will hold it's value, unlike if you have a stack of cash.

 

[Champakian]

According to Forbes, Mar-A-Lago is worth $160 million.

According to Zillow, it’s worth $26.6 million.

Oh good.

Now do the Kennedy compound...