President Biden says that 3,500,000,000,000 equals 0.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Never been tried? Most countries in Europe have had a wealth tax at one point in time and some still do. Pros and cons, seems like they are very expansive to manage.

Explain to me how youd begin to do it in a country of 330 million, when some people have their wealth in jewelry, baseball cards, rare coins, expensive wine, fine art, gold bars, etc. You'd send different kinds of appraisers to everyone's house, every single year? How would you know who sold what or who bought what?

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Explain to me how youd begin to do it in a country of 330 million, when some people have their wealth in jewelry, baseball cards, rare coins, expensive wine, fine art, gold bars, etc. You'd send different kinds of appraisers to everyone's house, every single year? How would you know who sold what or who bought what?

Most wealth taxes I've read about only target the super rich so most Americans wouldn't need to bother with them. They also seem to apply to only certain types of assets. I'm guessing there would have to be some level of self disclosure with the government always having the option for an audit if appropriate.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Most wealth taxes I've read about only target the super rich so most Americans wouldn't need to bother with them. They also seem to apply to only certain types of assets. I'm guessing there would have to be some level of self disclosure with the government always having the option for an audit if appropriate.

That would be manageable I guess, and the revenue it would generate would be a rounding error in terms of our annual budget and total debt. Wouldn't it?

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

That would be manageable I guess, and the revenue it would generate would be a rounding error in terms of our annual budget and total debt. Wouldn't it?

Warren's plan reportedly would generate 2.75 T over ten years, that's not a rounding error.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Warren's plan reportedly would generate 2.75 T over ten years, that's not a rounding error.

Nope, 275 B a year isn't a rounding error. But Warren was also reportedly the famous Native American professor at Harvard, who is reportedly opposed to everyone profiting from foreclosures except her and her husband, and who also reportedly thinks skyrocketing tuition is wrong unless all that wampum flows into her saddlebag.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Nope, 275 B a year isn't a rounding error. But Warren was also reportedly the famous Native American professor at Harvard, who is reportedly opposed to everyone profiting from foreclosures except her and her husband, and who also reportedly thinks skyrocketing tuition is wrong unless all that wampum flows into her saddlebag.

Makes no difference, and your "wampum" remark is insulting to my Native American heritage.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Makes no difference, and your "wampum" remark is insulting to my Native American heritage.

A history of Lies and hypocrisy make a difference to some people. To some people, it impacts the credibility of the liar & hypocrite.

If you're not insulted (and you aren't) that she deliberately appropriated the unfathomable misery your ancestors endured for her own personal gain, then please spare me your fake outrage at my remark. If you give her a pass for what she did (and we all know you do), my remark is nothing. Either it's wrong to exploit Native Americans, or it's OK. But you believe it's ok when liberals do it, and wrong when conservatives do it, and it doesn't work that way, sorry. You have to choose whether it's OK or not, and apply that standard to everyone, or else you don't actually have a principled position.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

and your "wampum" remark is insulting to my Native American heritage.

idiot