A Proposed Constitutional Amendment because Income is Not the Same as Wealth (Vanity)

vanity ^ | Jan. 29, 2012 | piytar

[piytar]

Obama and other Democrats are constantly harping on taxing the "rich" or the "wealthy," but their proposals are all about taxing income. Well, income is not wealth, and the wealthy often have little income. The reality is that all income taxes do is punish the productive and job creators. Income taxes also are very useful for the wealthy and powerful to keep their club exclusive by making it nearly impossible for most people to become wealthy.

In other words, income taxes are class warfare by the mega-wealthy against the middle and upper middle class. They want to keep their club exclusive.

As a personal example, I just got a new job. Very good income. However, as a result of trying to create a small business and failing, I also have a lot of debt including tax debt. I will likely see about 15% of my income. The rest will be taxed away. But according to Obama and the Democrats, I'll be approachig "wealthy."

What's the solution? See below. This is a rough draft for discussion purposes, but I think it's a good idea.

OK, will don my flame retardant suit now...

[piytar]

OK, strike the idea. No, not because of those of you who spouted off about "socialist" or "marxist" -- but because the idea isn't workable and would be corrupted as surely as the current system is.

We DO need to get rid of the "progressive" -- actually punitive to the productive -- income tax, though...

[mountn man]

I really don’t see how that is marxist, esp compared to the current system of income taxes.

I'll give you a hint

It’s also structured to build the general wealth of the nation as measured by the median wealth.

[from occupied ga]

but what's "moronic" about the overall concept?

Taxing wealth is the moronic idea. What a wonderful way to absolutely destroy any incentive to save. Give everyone's life savings to the governmentto redistribute to their friends. I only used the word "moronic" because the english language doesn't have a word adequate to express just how idiotic this idea is

[ravenwolf]

I’m good with that, too. But the “mega-wealthy” keep tell us how they think more taxes are good, so let’s give them what they want, too!

---

The only problem is that it is only a very few wealthy that you here all of that b.s from, they are the rats who will support people like Obama just so they can also use the dumb socialist blankety, blank, blank.

[central_va]

The government should be funded by tariffs and an NSRT. If you want to add a SSN payroll tax so be it just let it be voluntary.

If I were made to choose between a wealth/property tax and an income tax I would choose the former, as the later is ultra regressive.

[kevao]

People with that kind of wealth can easily move to another country, which they’ll do, laughing all the way.

The State of Maryland had the brilliant idea to punish the rich also and imposed a millionaires’ tax. I suggest you research how that little experiment has been working out.

[ravenwolf]

Guess I’m just angry about the obscene income taxes, and I decided that if the mega-rich want to preach to us how our INCOME should be taxed because they feel guilty about being so WEALTHY, well, then let’s take them at they’re word and tax their mega-wealth. (They are lying, of course — they want income taxed to keep their club exclusive.)

---

I understand, as i had the same feeling when i heard that rich turd make that statement,too bad we can,t profile people like him and tax the hell out of them only.

[Yardstick]

The left would love to tax wealth directly. Michael Moore has made the argument on more than one occasion that America isn't broke, just the government is broke, since the wealth owned by individuals dwarfs the government's debt. You can see where his argument is leading: let's get our hands on the rich people's wealth. It's a natural argument for someone like Moore to make since 1) it threatens basic constitutional ideas like the right to property, and 2) if implemented it would give the government a huge new confiscatory power. Leftists love giving government those kinds of powers. I think to a conservative it should be a bad idea almost on its face.

[Cyber Liberty]

Except for Section 2, item (b), which is redundant with item (c), you were doing fine until Section 3, whereupon you flew off the rails.

[kingu]

The day after this amendment is passed, every piece of property in the United States will get reevaluated to be worth $51,000,000.

If you took every penny of wealth from the richest 1% of the United States, you’d barely cover this year’s deficit. And that wealth won’t be there next year to tax away. The problem isn’t taxes, it’s the spending by the government. We’re presently spending 12% of the GDP on the national credit card - that’s unsustainable no matter what planet you’re on. You can’t tax your way out of it, you can only cut spending.

Liberals in both parties don’t want to cut the gravy train.

[piytar]

That’s what the (huge) exemption is for and why that would be part of a hard to change Amendment.

But the overall point is decent.

[HangnJudge]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_tax

In 1999, Donald Trump proposed a once off 14.25% wealth tax on the net worth of individuals and trusts worth $10 million or more. Trump claimed that this would generate $5.7 trillion in new taxes, which could be used to eliminate the national debt.

Currently in place:
France, Switzerland, Netherlands, Norway, India, Liechtenstein

Abandoned by:
Austria, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Spain

Arguments against:
Brain Drain and Capital Flight
Arbitrary Valuation of Assets
High Management Costs

[piytar]

Um, common good in tersm of lots if individuals having a lot of wealth is the opposite of marixt “common good” in terms of gevernment redistributing (aka controlling for its own benefit) all the wealth.

[piytar]

Thanks. OK, it’s a bad idea.

[from occupied ga]

The exemption would shrink like the income tax grew. If you need more evidnece of what an egregiously bad idea this is, Jessie Jackasson and Al Sharpton have been advocating a wealth tax for years.

[piytar]

To be clear despite my last response, I’ve admitted it is a bad idea.

[piytar]

Admitted - but I want to keep Sections 1 and 2!

[Yardstick]

If you need more evidnece of what an egregiously bad idea this is, Jessie Jackasson and Al Sharpton have been advocating a wealth tax for years.

No suprise here. It's a leftwinger's wet dream.

[plain talk]

You want government to confiscate private property simply because they are wealthy. That is marxist. You would have to confiscate a lot of property (that has already been taxed) for such a scheme. The fact that you even think of such a thing means you are not a conservative. If you really believe such crap then pitch it to Pelosi I am sure she would be interested.

No we should implement a flat tax where every person gets equal treatment under the law.

[Da Bilge Troll]

Karl Marx would be proud!