[RetroTechie]

As you said a wealth tax would be needed, as opposed to income tax.

Taxes always have some optimum level: a point where benefit to society as a whole is maximized. Too high, and indeed investors / entrepreneurs could move away. Too low, and society leaves money on the table that could be better used elsewhere.

The simple fact that a society allows individuals to amass $100B+ (or even a 'mere' $1B) shows that wealth taxes are below what's optimal. If existing at all. It doesn't matter if wealth is stuck in assets, it's still society-distorting / corrupting power. There's no benefit to society to have individuals sit on say, >100x the wealth of average folks. Let alone 1000x, 100,000x or even higher.

So why is there no such wealth tax? Answer that question (in depth!), and you're getting closer to fixing the problem.

[JKCalhoun]

"Too high, and indeed investors / entrepreneurs could move away."

Has that happened? Has that been a problem?

[slashdev]

We can see a little of that in California and also Norway. So, yes, there is some of that going on.

[JKCalhoun]

But has it been a problem?