[Throwaway23412]

>Some people (like me) think that effective tax rates of roughly 50% (US, California, Marin County) are too high.

Wealthy people aren't getting taxed 50%. You're thinking of income taxes. Wealthy people don't make income. Genuinely wealthy people make their money from land they own and rent out and from stock they invest and hold.

[rsync]

"Wealthy people aren't getting taxed 50%. You're thinking of income taxes. Wealthy people don't make income."

Income tax is indeed what I am talking about and people do indeed get taxed at (roughly) 50%. You can use whatever term you'd like for those people.

The income limits for the top tax brackets are in the low six figures. Presumably you'd see those raised significantly to avoid these punitive rates on the "non wealthy" ?

[coredog64]

If you own an apartment building and rent it out, you have to pay taxes on the income it provides.

The grocery store won't take stock certificates in payment for a gallon of milk. Instead, you have to sell it. As soon as you do, you are recognizing a capital gain and are taxed on it.

[Throwaway23412]

>If you own an apartment building and rent it out, you have to pay taxes on the income it provides.

Which is why the most common advice among long-term real estate owners is "buy more property".

Wealthy people don't have a higher need for milk (or any basic necessities) than the average person. So why would they need to sell any significant portion of their wealth? As someone said elsewhere in this thread, the problem is we don't tax wealth directly, only when it's transferred.