What It Takes to Be in the 1% Around the World

[AKA-None]

Originally Posted by danstanford

Most property tax systems use the relative value of homes within the grouping at a single point in time to then divide the property tax rates appropriately. If real estate values increase and your home goes up in value the assumption made is that they all went up in value so they continue to use the previous values to go against the mill rate. The principle of the system is that your taxes will only change as the municipality needs more (or less) money to conduct business.

When the periodic reassessment dates happen the mill rate is adjusted to suit so that the increase in value does not artificially inflate the tax rates you pay on your home.

There could be a system out there that works as you describe but it is not widespread nor would it work very well. Your taxes adjust based on the needs and decisions of the relevant government.

State of Wisconsin USA

And if memory serves me the same occurred a couple of decades back in HI when Japanese speculated in real estate and drove prices up significantly in a very short time

[AKA-None]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Please share an example of someone starting a large business venture simply by putting in hours and not risking capital.

Apple? Microsoft?
My BIL started a business by leveraging the value of someone else’s work

[Tetepare]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Who's giving it? That doesn't really make any sense to me, but maybe you can expound on the idea.

I meant what I wrote: "Since wages are the major way we distribute wealth in our capitalist societies, a better approach is to use laws, policies and regulations to support better wages for all."

Well nobody would be poor at birth if we all got $1M. Everyone is equal. Nobody has an excuse to be poor. Zero money needed for social services or US social security. Nobody has to work, if they did it’s free extra money. Just invest.

I mistook your statement. I was hoping you had some magic idea that’s foolproof and not a big argument.

[Dave_S]

Maybe abolish all income tax and have a sliding scale of goods and services tax from necessity to luxury. Add to that a tax for money going overseas and a credit for money coming in.

On top of that a tax credit ratio for employee wages.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Tetepare

Well nobody would be poor at birth if we all got $1M. Everyone is equal. Nobody has an excuse to be poor. Zero money needed for social services or US social security. Nobody has to work, if they did it’s free extra money. Just invest.

I still don't understand what you're suggesting. Where would this money come from? Are you proposing some sort of guaranteed income program? If so, I'm all ears. My view is that this is inevitable as we move, more and more, to an economy without human jobs.

Originally Posted by Tetepare

I mistook your statement. I was hoping you had some magic idea that’s foolproof and not a big argument.

There's nothing magical about it. Support workers' wages through a host of labour laws like strong minimum wages, unemployment safety nets, and encouragement of collective action. We did all this before, following the 1920s/30s disasters. This led to the greatest boost in economic productivity in our history, while greatly flattening the distribution of wealth in our societies.

There's no magic. Just a desire to make the economy work for the majority.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by jimbunyard

If "no one paid anything close to those rates", how and why did their "cratering" cause WWII?

It didn't WWII caused the cratering. You have cause and effect reversed.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by danstanford

That all makes good sense and fits the smell test other than 1% owning 94% of the wealth. I cannot conceive of any way this could be accurate so I will do some research on my holidays and let you know what I find.

Thanks for the work J

Mike Oreilles' link suggested top 10% control around 80-85%.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by AKA-None

Apple? Microsoft?
My BIL started a business by leveraging the value of someone else’s work

Try again. In the early days, the capital was small but they still invested capital.

So your BIL took out a loan to get capital to start his business?

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Dave_S

Maybe abolish all income tax and have a sliding scale of goods and services tax from necessity to luxury. Add to that a tax for money going overseas and a credit for money coming in.

This is basically the idea behind a flat VAT tax (all other taxes abolished and prohibited).

There are set asides for food and medicine...they aren't taxed. This is what many state sales tax systems already do. (maybe add a base amount for housing also)

With this scenario, the poor will pay very little taxes as most of their spending is covered under the set asides.

The rich on the other hand would have most of their spending taxed and the uber rich would have a much more difficult time not paying taxes.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Tetepare

Well nobody would be poor at birth if we all got $1M. Everyone is equal. Nobody has an excuse to be poor. Zero money needed for social services or US social security. Nobody has to work, if they did it’s free extra money. Just invest.

I mistook your statement. I was hoping you had some magic idea that’s foolproof and not a big argument.

This has the same problem as raising the minimum wage...all it does is drive inflation. Lots of dollars chasing a limited supply raises prices.

Also what happens when the foolish burn thru their $1mil by the time they are 20? Look at sports, movie and rock stars...when the good times are over a large percentage of them are bankrupt within 5yrs. Same for winning the lottery.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by gonesail

sure. 0.08 percent .. or 42 million people in the world are considered to hold billionaire status. but really that is what we know about .. I suspect that number is a lot larger.

https://www.the-sun.com/news/1879723...ntage-economy/

According to wikipedia (take it for what it's worth), there are 2755 billionaires.

There might be a few hidden ones and you get odd scenarios like political potentates who technically own their countries but I doubt it's off by millions.

[AKA-None]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Try again. In the early days, the capital was small but they still invested capital.



So your BIL took out a loan to get capital to start his business?

He borrowed money he didn’t have against things he didn’t own

Try that if your working minimum wage

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by AKA-None

He borrowed money he didn’t have against things he didn’t own

So he obtained capital and put it at risk.

He would still owe on the loans even if the business went belly up.

Could he wind up bankrupt if the business fails...sure thing.

And as far as apple and MS, once they started to expand, they rolled a lot of capital back into the business to grow it. Also those who invested early put capital into it in terms for a share of ownership.

[danstanford]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

This is basically the idea behind a flat VAT tax (all other taxes abolished and prohibited).

There are set asides for food and medicine...they aren't taxed. This is what many state sales tax systems already do. (maybe add a base amount for housing also)

With this scenario, the poor will pay very little taxes as most of their spending is covered under the set asides.

The rich on the other hand would have most of their spending taxed and the uber rich would have a much more difficult time not paying taxes.

The biggest risk of this system is the way it becomes a disincentive to spending which then limits the revenue side. In addition, our version of equity in the taxation system has morphed from each paying a share to each paying a share in proportion to our ability to pay. This concept requires us to limit the contributions made by the low income sectors.

[Tetepare]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

There's nothing magical about it. Support workers' wages through a host of labour laws like strong minimum wages, unemployment safety nets, and encouragement of collective action. We did all this before, following the 1920s/30s disasters. This led to the greatest boost in economic productivity in our history, while greatly flattening the distribution of wealth in our societies.

I just don't see how that would work.

As an aside, your (multiple) comments about how people support themselves as technology replaces humans is the most astute and frightening question. New York State has moved from an industrial region to what they call "service." And these days in NYS, millions are employed either directly or indirectly in "services" for the plethora of things-that-must-be-licensed, social services, insurance, medical, etc. I think this is more the result of the nature of bureaucracies to grow rather than intelligent design.

Back on the topic, in NYS we already have a "living wage" in the form of minimum wage, substantial subsidies, free schooling, and medical that's pro-rated. In many areas there is subsidized housing and/or rent control.

Proponents of raising minimum wage in NYS say that the $12.50/hr is poverty level. They're basing that on 40 hrs/wk, with one breadwinner. They don't ever include the monetary value of the free subsidies enjoyed by minimum wage earners.

If we use their minimum wage and apply it to my family, my 65 hrs/week equate to $42,250. Add the wife's 45 hours and that's a total of $71,500. Add junior, who's working 60 hrs/wk, and we have a household income of $110,500. At minimum wage.

Where I don't see a higher minimum wage (by collective bargaining, state mandate, whatever) working is what happens to those worth more? Yes, worth more- working harder to get advanced education and providing a higher level of contribution. If minimum wage is increased (however it's done) to $60,000 per worker, why the hell would I go through seven years of university and then night school, and then work 60 hours a week for $80,000? Hint: I wouldn't. So if I can do nothing and get $60,000 per annum, what would the industry have to pay to get me to invest time in education and hard work?