[lazide]

Sure. The issue I’d see is in 20 years inflation might mean that applies to almost everyone, like AMT, but that is a future us issue.

The biggest personal complaint I have is why should the government be getting more tax money when all they seem to use it for is blowing up random countries in the Middle East and spying on law abiding citizens for whatever random reason.

[harimau777]

You could peg the numbers to inflation.

Personally, I see a big benefit of a wealth tax being lowering wealth inequality; even if the money isn't actually used for anything useful. That would at least help prevent the ultra wealthy from being able to unilaterally ruin society.

[pzo]

I compare ultra wealthy to blackholes - overtime they accumulate more and more mass and reduce mass elsewhere. But even in nature we have Hawking radiation (which leads to black hole evaporation). So for me wealth taxation is similar like this slow black hole evaporation which seems fair.

[philipallstar]

They can't ruin society unilaterally, unless you're talking about Vladimir Putin, who can only do it because he's the head of an autocratic socialist state as well as potentially being the richest man in the world. But the rich bit isn't what does it.

[Epa095]

Then let's bake it into a compromise, we add a wealth tax and decrease income tax with the same amount of money.

Labour is what actually creates value in society, let's tax it less and ownership more.

[lazide]

You have my vote!

[analog31]

Yeah, I appreciate the sentiment. Being a liberal, perhaps I was assuming that competent governance was possible. At the same time, the opposite tack, "starve the beast" was a failure.

[lazide]

Nobody starved the actual beast (military industrial complex) that I can tell