←back to thread

191 points impish9208 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.204s | source
Show context
jparishy ◴[] No.45104627[source]
Wealth inequality is high. High enough you can feel it like a vibe in the air. The richest people in the world are telling everyone to get onboard with technology that is determined to make a lot of those same people's jobs redundant. All with an explicit goal of increasing the price of stock most of those people do not own.

IMO there's two economies, maybe divided by those who participate in the stock market and those who don't. We, Americans, have largely given up trying to improve the lives of people not in the first group. Economies are living, breathing entities and we're just grinding poorer people for fuel so richer people can have another house, another boat, another company. A lot of regular joes are really stressed out about paying rent. The loss in faith is warranted.

replies(8): >>45104697 #>>45104768 #>>45104835 #>>45104982 #>>45105432 #>>45105784 #>>45105888 #>>45107040 #
Buttons840 ◴[] No.45104835[source]
Income taxes are higher than capital gains taxes.

This isn't based on economic theory or anything, it's just a political choice we have made as a country. We've chosen to reward those who move money around and trade capital more than we reward those who labor. And this at a time when, supposedly, the country is trying to increase its ability to build things.

I thought this specific fact worth mentioning.

replies(5): >>45104925 #>>45104964 #>>45104996 #>>45105199 #>>45109116 #
jandrewrogers ◴[] No.45105199[source]
This is simply incorrect.

To make the tax incidence on wages and capital gains equivalent, you must first deduct losses due to inflation and risk. For wages, inflation and risk round to zero. For long-term capital gains inflation and risk are large and often the majority of the "gain". Short-term capital gains are already taxed like wages.

In the US, unlike some other developed countries, there is a very limited ability to deduct losses due to inflation and risk from long-term capital gains. Consequently, if they made the tax rate the same as wages then the tax incidence on capital gains would be much higher than wages.

As a policy matter in the US, they fix this large difference in tax incidence by reducing the tax rate instead of adjusting the cost basis for inflation and allowing full deductibility of losses.

If you pencil out the implications of these two policies, I suspect you'd find that you like the way the US does it better. Making risk and inflation deductible to equalize tax incidence enables a lot of financial structuring.

replies(7): >>45105391 #>>45105545 #>>45105762 #>>45106407 #>>45107539 #>>45108371 #>>45130410 #
rurp ◴[] No.45106407[source]
Your point is undercut by the vastly lower effective tax rates rich Americans pay vs middle class workers. It's the norm in this country for someone making millions of dollars/year to pay a significantly lower tax rate on that income than anyone working a decent paying job.

A horseshoe shaped tax graph by income is clearly against the intent and spirit of a progressive tax code so something is very much broken and has been so for decades.

replies(2): >>45107923 #>>45110595 #
thesmtsolver ◴[] No.45110595[source]
But your point is undercut by the fact the vast majority of middle class workers do invest and benefit from long term capital gains taxes.

Around 40% of stocks are in retirement accounts.

replies(1): >>45116144 #
alphawhisky ◴[] No.45116144[source]
Around 50% of the entire market cap of the NASDAQ is owned by the top 1%. Tax it.
replies(1): >>45130858 #
1. hello_moto ◴[] No.45130858[source]
also tax their other assets...