Posted on 06/21/2019 11:25:46 AM PDT by reaganaut1
Elizabeth Warren is being lauded as the serious candidate in the race. Her motto, “I have a plan for that,” is accepted as proof that she is thoughtful and conscientious. That’s too generous.
One should expect a grown-up to evaluate costs and benefits, to understand tradeoffs, and to pay for what they propose. By that standard, Senator Warren’s big plans fail spectacularly. What Warren has done is engage in magic-wand politics. Wouldn’t it be great if college were free and everyone got subsidized child care? ) (No.) Wouldn’t life be grand if everyone’s rent were reduced by 10 percent? If wishes were horses . . .
Others have noted that her assumptions about how much revenue can be raised through a wealth tax are wildly over-optimistic. Ten European countries experimented with wealth taxes. Seven abandoned them after discovering that they don’t work. And there are constitutional impediments in the U.S. Further, as my friend Josh Taifer, a California physician and day trader, points out, the level of government intrusion necessary to police a wealth tax would be unlike anything we’ve seen. Our incomes and dividends are reported to the IRS. But a yearly 2 percent wealth tax would be a levy on everything. It would encourage the rich to put their assets into less traceable forms such as gold, jewels, and art. Would IRS agents be rapping at their doors, demanding to see the contents of the home safe or, on a tip from a neighbor, hiring a backhoe to dig up gold bars buried in the backyard? And what about fluctuations in value? How much is that Andy Warhol painting worth? Can we really know until we go to sell it? There’s no Kelly Blue Book for paintings.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
“Can we really know until we go to sell it?”
Three percent annual liens might be levied, collectable at the next subsequent sale as an income tax.
Of course if you would like to pay two percent of our expert’s price now, you can forget about that lien.
Wealth taxation is possible. And probable, under future Democratic federal governments.
Wealthy political donors should consider donations carefully.
“Would IRS agents be rapping at their doors, demanding to see the contents of the home safe or, on a tip from a neighbor, hiring a backhoe to dig up gold bars buried in the backyard?”
Virginia once had such a personal property tax. Agents did peer through windows and pound on doors. It was replaced by a car tax.
Raven statues are much cheaper than those of Maltese falcons.
If the people of this country think any of the Democrats who might win the White House in 2020 will lead this Republic into the land of milk and honey are suffering from severe delusion.
Motherjones.com is littered with ads to win a beer with E. Warren.
I think the UK had a wealth tax in the 1960s. Some people got hit with something around 106% of income.
How could we possibly survive without the 17th Amendment? /sarc
‘Tis but the tax collector-and nothing more...
“there are constitutional impediments in the U.S.”
If California has a 50% greater per capita wealth tax base than Mississippi, then the wealth tax rate could be 50% higher in Mississippi and followed up by rebates of 40% of the tax in that state, giving Mississippi a lower effective wealth tax rate.
Wealth tax rebates are 100% as Constitutional as income tax rebates.
The Democrats can tax away the wealth of the rich.
Don’t feed alligators, bears or Democratic campaigns.
Warren’s way too stupid to do anything other than pander. It’s the only tool the left has in their empty toolkits.
Taxes are often used as punetive inducements to control
behavur, Tabacco, alcohol, gasoline, are just a few.
Warren knows this, democrats know this and it IS why
they want to tax “wealth”. Without wealth, there is
only POWER, and they believe THEY deserve to wield it.
The wealth tax could be levied on corporations that issue common stock, with discounts for shares owner by governments and foreigners with no domestic nexus.
This wealth tax would be in the form of shares - stock dividends issued to Uncle Sam.
*they can afford it*
She is particularly annoying.....I’m really starting to dislike women.
And I am a woman.
Worse of the worst these types I tell you.
My employer is such and the hoi poloy were at the office last week. They really detest us.
Proud to be deplorable
Freegards
From the Articles of Confederation:
“Article VIII. All charges of war, and all other expenses that shall be incurred for the common defense or general welfare, and allowed by the united States in congress assembled, shall be defrayed out of a common treasury, which shall be supplied by the several States in proportion to the value of all land within each State, granted or surveyed for any person, as such land and the buildings and improvements thereon shall be estimated according to such mode as the united States in congress assembled, shall from time to time direct and appoint.
“The taxes for paying that proportion shall be laid and levied by the authority and direction of the legislatures of the several States within the time agreed upon by the united States in congress assembled.
https://usconstitution.net/articles.html
This indirect taxation could be reinstated by Congress.
California, with exceptionally high land values, might wish to reconsider its love for Democrats.
“We have to pass the law to see what’s in it”
Sound familiar?
She makes up for it in volume.
There already is a wealth tax on cash. It’s called inflation and it’s rather cleverly hid from most people that they are paying it.
Scolding, lecturing, harranging, finger-wagging....
Lizzie Warren is Hillary Clinton on steroids in that department.
We’ll get to the `wealthy hypocrite’ part later.
The first CBS poll will show F&M at 113 to -13 among likely voters...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.