The "your parents" are only harmed if the public benefit from taxes don't offset the benefit that is received directly in the funding of the 401k or other relevant investment accounts.
In America anyway, the wealthiest 1% own 53% of the stock market. I highly doubt that the "your parents" would benefit more from funding of their investment accounts than they would benefit from the tax revenue generated. Of course my assumption is highly dependent on public policy.
With that logic we should never prosecute corporations doing nefarious things, because that might hurt their profits which will hurt those who's retirement funds depend on said $EVIL_CORP.
"Go ahead BP and VW, keep polluting the world, we're not gonna touch you because we don't want your shares to go down and in turn the retirement funds of those tied to you."
Am I the one seeing the slippery slope here, or am I being crazy?
> With that logic we should never prosecute corporations doing nefarious things, because that might hurt their profits which will hurt those who's retirement funds depend on said $EVIL_CORP.
Nobody claims this. My initial comment was only pointing out that the claim that nobody will be harmed by the windfall tax was false.
In America anyway, the wealthiest 1% own 53% of the stock market. I highly doubt that the "your parents" would benefit more from funding of their investment accounts than they would benefit from the tax revenue generated. Of course my assumption is highly dependent on public policy.