Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ghufran_syed 2119 days ago
What's the opposing view, other than "they are rich, they can afford it + we really need the money for $good-things"? I'm not sure if you are disagreeing with the math or making a separate point about why we should do it anyway?
2 comments

I truly don't know the answer on whether the wealth tax is a good idea (and there probably isn't a single right answer). But, that sure is a shitty way of saying, "I don't understand, can you explain your viewpoint to me?"
I think it's an accurate summary of the arguments in favor of a wealth tax. But I would really like to hear if there are other arguments that can't be characterized that way. But it's hard to be persuaded when no-one actually presents the argument, and instead just criticizes the tone.
There were multiple prominent politicians with serious wealth tax proposals running in the 2020 Democratic Party primary. If you want implementation details I would suggest that you read their proposals.

As for an "argument" it's really no different than any other political position in that it boils down mainly to what you personally value.

I've observed at least two distinct value systems which can both lead to supporting a wealth tax.

1) Maybe you believe in helping the marginalized and creating a more equitable society. Perhaps you believe it is insane and obscene that multi-millionaires and billionaires walk past tent cities of homeless people every day in the streets of San Francisco. Maybe you care about the well-being of other people and recognize that what is good for them is usually good for yourself.

2) Or maybe you believe that tax policy should optimize efficiency as a facilitator of economic growth. You recognize that the diminishing marginal utility of wealth and the runaway inequality in America presents a problem of inadequate aggregate demand and threatens the entire economy. Maybe you've done the math and realize that the US government must raise revenues to have any hope of staving off an eventual sovereign debt crisis.

From what I've seen, the people opposed to a wealth tax usually believe something else.

I'm firmly in the camp that believes that the situation in SF is obscene.

But if CA wants to work on fixing its social ills, they could start by implementing the basics, like a functioning property tax system, and reducing the tremendous amount of spending on things like pension abuse, before moving on to more exotic and invasive solutions like wealth taxes.

So many of their issues stem from the ridiculous housing and other property development situation. It's not the fault of the ultrawealthy so much as the moderately wealthy NIMBY homeowner. But it's less popular to blame them, because for many of us, they are ourselves.

I'm happy to present one as an example. If be happy to continue discussing it past that as well, as long as you are willing to converse and not argue.

Wealth in the hands of a few becomes static. Jeff Bezos can only buy so many jets. When you leave it there, the entire economy stagnates.

As most of Bezos' fortune is in Amazon stock, this money is not exactly sleeping.
Fair point, and same probably goes for other billionaires, who have their money in a variety of investments. That probably does a lot to juice the stock market, pumping up valuations, but it doesn't do as much to generate actual economic returns. Happy to be educated otherwise.
The point of the wealth tax is not to secure funding for "good things" but to intentionally sabotage the accumulation of wealth.