What do you think of Elizabeth Warren's wealth tax?

Watching the debates. She just said if you tax 2 cents per dollar on wealth over 50 million dollars, you'd have enough money to fund free college, free childcare, and several other services. Sounds great but does it add up? I'd have no problem with that.

I'd need to see the numbers confirmed, but I certainly don't have a problem with raising taxes on the UPPER 1% which this certainly applies to. It's not egregious to me.

It's not raising taxes, it's a 2% wealth tax. Interesting idea. I say why not? Tax rates only affect current income, so different thing.

Semantics I guess, but I would certainly support a wealth tax on extreme paybands as a means to fund education and childcare.

I don't know if it will pay for everything listed above, but both the concept and numbers listed in her proposal have good backing from some respected economists. An interesting point is that Sanders' proposal (which largely took Warren's proposal and increased the numbers) doesn't, but I'm guessing that's OK with him.

One hurdle it could potentially face is a court challenge based on the fact that it's taxing wealth rather than transactions. But we can accomplish the same goals via other means, so that's not a show stopper in and of itself.

I'd be interested in arguments for and against it. Are all taxes done at the transaction level? What about property taxes? We're essentially taxing the 'value' of an asset on an annual basis.

@HoolaHoopMan: it's controversial which means it would come down to the SCOTUS. Soooo.....

The legal argument against comparing it to a property tax is that property taxes are collected by states.

Sounds interesting. We need to do something.

Guess one could counter that income tax is also imposed at the state level too. Some have it, some don't. But then again that's an 'opt in' version of it, not something mandated at the federal level.

I'm very much okay with taxing the wealthy to pay for things that would benefit the country. Funding college educations would definitely fall in line with things that are good for the country so I'm all for it. We can't keep stacking each new generation with debt that will last a lifetime, it's just not sustainable in the long run and it's just the wrong thing to do to kids who believe what the adults tell them is a good decision.

So this is an additional tax?

Not sure how I feel about that.

If I am being completely honest, I definitely feel the top 1% don't pay their fair share, and that an additional tax (on top of the taxes they should pay, but somehow avoid) that can't be avoided is needed. It might not be fair, but it is just.

I'd rather they patch the loopholes and other things, however, that allow the very rich to get out of paying the taxes they should. That way they'd be paying 30 cents (or whatever it would be) out of every dollar like the rest of us.

Still, I don't see that second part happening, so I guess a new tax would be a good idea.

*It will be interesting to see the public response on this because; relatively speaking, this tax literally has zero impact on pretty much everyone. I wonder if all the "I might be rich one day" voters will vote against this, against their own health, against their children's education.

This is sort of how I feel. The wealthy are the ones who have benefited the most from society, they are therefore the most in debt to it as a result, and should pay back more. Pave the way for the next generation by propping it up financially.

I think warren sucks ass

Tulsi/Yang 2020

But thats not going to happen,

so I'll most likely vote Trump,

thats how the cookie crumbles

No one cares. You were voting trump no matter what anyway.

it's not clear to me exactly how this works. i haven't read up enough.

is this a tax on wealth or a tax on income/earnings? if its a tax on already accumulated wealth it seems it would have to be applied every year to be useful and not a 1 time thing.

if it is a tax on earnings, I can't imagine there are THAT many people making $50M+ annually to generate much revenue..

This country has been in debt since it's beginnings. You are clueless.

Warren is delusional and clearly don´t know how "easy" it is for the rich to move their money outside the reach of her socialists' hands.

So what she said was nothing but a free play to her base and the middle-class who we all know she will tax to hell and back.

Tax on wealth so applied every year.

I can definitely see why some would call this tax unfair, but it is one way to actually get the ultra rich to pay taxes.

Edit: Mark Zuckerberg is good for 60 billions or so? 2% tax on 60 billions, 1.2 billions tax bill, or 120 millions. My math is wonky atm.

@horgen: It's 1.2 billion. Which still leaves him with 59.8 billion dollars. Oh woah is him.

58.8 billions. Poor sod.

Just curious if any of the candidates talk about spending cuts in addition to more taxes or is it the usual tax, tax and tax?

For a very long time most scholars and politicians argued that any income taxes were unconstitutional. We only had income taxes for about ten years during the 1860s to early 70s, and then we stopped taxation for a while because the Supreme Court looked ready to strike it down. Specifically, article I says that any tax on property or on every individual levied by the government has to be distributed among the states based on population. Our income taxes get around this because the 16th Amendment specifically creates an exception for them. A wealth tax most definitely would not get around this, and the argument would probably turn on whether it can be divided among the states effectively or not. If you're using it specifically to pay for college it might be easier, but you'd also run into the problem of the most populous states not necessarily having the largest college population. You might have a lot of states needing more money than they get, and a lot getting more money than they need. What to do with the extra money? Can they spend it on other programs? Only programs with specific purposes? Give it back? Motivated parties could create a whole mess of legal problems for it, and as we've seen Republicans are experts at creating problems.

As for whether or not it's a good idea, normally I'd say no, but no one should have a billion dollars, much less hundreds of billions. If we had been taxing and regulating responsibly over the past few decades no one would and we could avoid any talk of wealth taxes altogether, but we haven't so here we are. A billion is a lot. It's one thousand millions. About the only things we measure in the billions are atoms and cosmic distances. I've lived a little over a billion seconds. If you earned $45,000 a year and saved every penny it would take 22 years to earn a million dollars. If you wanted to earn a billion it would take 22,000 years. One thousand is 10^3, one million is 10^6, one billion is 10^9. The average American salary is around $50,000, average savings is $11,000, the average salary of the top 400 earners is $330 million, and the highest wealth individuals have hundreds of billions. This means that the top salaries are larger than the median by a power of three, and the top savings are larger than the median by a power of eight. For a sense of how big that is, compare 10 multiplied by an increasing number to ten raised to an increasing number. By the time you get to three you're already looking at 30 (10^1) compared to one thousand (10^3). There is no good reason for that. I don't care how innovative you think wealthy individuals are, they are not more valuable than the average person by a power of eight.

I have to admit, I have a huge moral hazard. It's a tax on someone that is not me, so obviously I'm for it. But if I did have that much money, I still think I'd be fine paying the wealth tax on it because I do feel a duty to the society that helped raise me and led to my success.

@comp_atkins: it's a tax on accumulated wealth over the stated amount. It is levied annually. It's estimated to be worth 275 billion per year.

Yep, take someone else's money to pay for crap you should pay for yourself. ROFLMAO! Sounds about Liberal. The last person I want controlling money and who gets what is the government. None of their programs are ran correctly. I always laugh listening to people bitch about how the government doesn't ever do anything right, but they just want to give them even more control of our lives.

You are aware the wealthy get wealthy because of the normal people...…..right? They benefit...they should give back.

Sorry, I do not think that way. I came from a super poor alcoholic family. My mom was a single mother with 3 boys and made less then $20K a year cleaning houses. I busted my ass in college and got several degrees and may start on my doctrine in January. I paid for all of it 100% and do not expect any handouts from anyone. I now make a great living, go on nice vacations, and can afford anything that I want. If I can do it anyone can do it, anyone can do it. All it takes is some focus and hard work.

BTW. I can care less how much money anyone else makes. That's why I like flat tax so much and just get rid of the entire tax code system we have today.

Flat tax would kill those in poverty.

Pshhhh details man, who has time to learn what they support would actually mean?

Yeah because our tax system now is so damn great, but just keep talking without solutions. I don't think it would hurt as bad as you think because most flat tax rate don't even kick in until you make a certain amount. I have seen plans that you don't pay taxes until you hit 20K up to 35K and then pay a flat tax after that.

So keep blabbing Serraph, that is all you are ever good at.

We're literally in a thread about a suggested tax solution that I have agreed with, but sure, I offer no solutions and blab.

It is pretty great, and it'd be even greater if we restored some sanity to the top marginal rates and closed loopholes that allow some people to get away with paying a criminally small rate so long as they have good lawyers. You know what I just read today? An article going over the recent ranking of the most reputable countries in the world. You know what number one is? Sweden, with an effective tax rate of around 70%. Switzerland, Norway, Finland, and New Zealand follow. The U.S. is 36th, behind the vigilantes are going around killing people Philippines.

And flat taxes suck. I should know, I live in a flat tax state. I'm already squeezed by high rents, low pay, and student debt, but when you put a mandatory payment on top of that almost all my disposable income goes out the window, and you want to make it so I not only don't get a federal refund but have to pay another tax on top of that? Hell no. You think they're not going to tax the poor? They will. The government budget last year was 4 trillion with about 700 billion going to the military. If you taxed the total income of the U.S. (13 trillion) at a fifteen percent rate you'd more than cut that in half. You'd need to tax the entire population at more than thirty percent to hit four trillion, and that's before accounting for exemptions (which make it not technically a flat tax anyway). I know you want to cut the federal budget, but you're never going to be able to cut trillions in one year, let alone almost any of the 700 billions devoted to the military. And if they can't find the money to fund the government they'll lower the exemption on taxation, plain and simple. If Reagan raised taxes and H.W. raised taxes, what makes you think anyone else will hesitate to raise taxes? It's a terrible idea.

You just showed you know nothing about taxes then. If you get a return you just gave the government an interest free loan for nothing. Instead you could of kept your money in your pocket month to month instead of waiting to the end of the year. My goal is to owe between 0-500 dollars a year. They can suck it keeping my money for nothing. Rather have that money tied in investments making me money through the year.

Sorry all you people wanting to suck on the tit of the rich are just looking for handouts and it is sad. Go earn your own money and learn to invest. It will pay off, trust me I lnow!.

Yeah, it's called a tax credit genius. Maybe you should think before you go throwing accusations around.

The rich suck on my tits like Donald Trump at a strip club. I give them labor at far below what it's worth, I line their pockets paying for my own education just so I can have a chance at getting out of the shit jobs they throw my way, I do all the jobs they look down their noses at but somehow can't live without. They'd be crying in the ****ing corner without people like me.

Oh, and I don't invest because I like to do a job that actually contributes to society rather than corroding it.

People here think rich folks got rich without help/exploiting others?

Tell me how you get rich without having people who buy your products or services, without a working infrastructure to move said service or product around.

You can do legit business in the states and get rich.

Another tax, yeah no thanks. We need to lower taxes and/or get rid of some, not add on. How about we figure out a way to DECREASE spending instead of screwing people over even more. Its the same song and dance, taxes get increased or a new one pops up, the money is spent or lost or thrown at something pointless. Dem, rep, other, I don't care more taxes are not the answer.

I'm not against the wealthy paying their fair share, but this doesnt sound like the way to do it.

Such a point is greek to many. Persuasion aside all of us have seen what the government does with OUR money and we have all seen how amount X is supposed to go for "insert program here" and it ends up elsewhere or the program ends up costing much more than what was originally pushed. Does anyone actually believe the money stolen, I mean collected, would go to the intended program(s)?

Counter that with the military which puts a hole in your entire argument.

Sh*t, just turn it into a block grant then. The GOP loves the idea for Medicaid and other programs.

A tax credit a perfect example of why our tax system sucks. Someone that doesn't pay anything in taxes can get EIC and get money back. Yep, what a great system. Yeah I guess I would be pissed if someone wanted to get rid of my tax welfare also.

There are plenty of jobs that contribute to society and you can make a good living. Sorry if you can't find those jobs.

Must be nice to have a simplistic opinion on life.

@n64dd: Does said business exist in a vacuum and create money in a vacuum?

Life is actually really damn simple and to be honest not that hard. It all comes from making good decisions and being able to learn from the mistakes you make. Sorry it is just not that bad and it is pretty dang easy to get ahead in life if you work hard and put in effort. Just to bad that people just want handouts and to point fingers at others when things go south.

Why is it always the people who are able to conceive of the fewest possible outcomes who are always the most damn sure of themselves?

lol, thanks for the laugh.

How old are you? 15?

No actually the childish people are the ones wanting handouts and not actually wanting to earn it themselves. Sorry I don't want to depend on the government nor do I need rich peoples money. Sorry I can earn my own and it really is not that hard.

I think we know the 15 year old, because you just proved it with your response.

@Xabiss: Haha yeah, you are definitely 15 lol such a simplistic and absurd view on life.

It'll blow your mind when you find out the people who get the most government "handouts" are the rich and corporations.

You mean corporate welfare...…….

@Xabiss: Your anecdotes are not supported by the facts. Mean household income in the US is approx. $63K total for all family members from all sources including wages, gov't support etc. For 40% of households it is less than $49K. For 28% of households it is less than $35K.

The top 20% of households command 52% of all total household income. That has grown from 43% in 1970.

Every other quintile of households has gone down in % of total household income since 1970.

The bottom 20% of households command just 3.1% of total household income.

The next 20% above the bottom command just over 8% of total household income.

The data demonstrates the simple fact that the most well off have gained over the last 50 yrs and everyone else has actually lost. Income inequality last year was the highest ever recorded in the US since it was tracked starting in 1967.

So no, statistically it is not easy to get ahead regardless of your uninformed opinion.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/203247/shares-of-household-income-of-quintiles-in-the-us/