Why Democrats Are Wrong About Income Inequality In The United States

thefederalist ^ | 11/11/2019 | Helen Raleigh

[ChicagoConservative27]

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a front-runner Democrat in the 2020 presidential race, seems to have a plan for every problem under the sun, from free child care, to free college, to climate change solutions, to “Medicare for all.” However, she has proposed only one plan to pay for all these “free” offerings, which, according to her own estimates, will cost our nation a whopping $52 trillion: raising taxes on the rich.

In January, Warren proposed a “wealth tax” of 2 percent on Americans with $50 million-plus in assets and 3 percent on those with assets over $1 billion. After being criticized by both the left and the right saying this tax won’t raise enough money to pay for all the government programs Warren wants to offer, she decided to double down. Last Friday, Warren announced she would double the wealth tax for those with assets over $1 billion from 3 percent to 6 percent.

[mjp]

Warren claims her “wealth tax” is simply asking the rich to pay a fair share

Why does she get to decide what is the "fair share" and how does she know what it is?

[EEGator]

Agreed. Just adding on to your point.

[TomGuy]

At a tax rate of 6% on accumulated wealth, doesn’t all of the wealth evaporate in about 17 years

Those with $millions and $billions are not as stupid as Warren's supporters are. Those +aires will, if they have not already, move a great portion of their wealth off-shore where the likes of Warren cannot get to it.

These tax-the-rich proposals have been used by political candidates for decades. They are more shuck-and-jive than reality. Once elected, the pol goes for the middle class. Case-in-point: Obamacare. Increased premiums and deductibles that priced actual health care beyond the reach of many -- in the middle class.

No doubt a President Warren will do as much damage as the previous Dem president, however.

[qaz123]

Shouldn’t the title of the article say...

Why Democrats Are Wrong About Everything

[GOPJ]

In the good old USSR they had a saying , “ we pretend to work and the government pretends to pay us “ ...

Yep - that's the world Bernie and Warren want us to live in...incentives from hell.

[oincobx]

We are in a winner take all economy, where small diifferences in performance mean big differences in outcomes. Think of the difference in purses between the winner of a tennis tournament and the runner up.

In the past 20 years, the top 10% have gone from holdiing 55% of all wealth to holding 65%. The top 1% holds amost as much wealth as households in the 50th-90th percentile.

That’s part of the reason you see things like the college cheating scandal. It’s competitive out there and parents are trying to get any advantage they can for their kids.

I don’t think taxing wealth is the answer but ever increasing shares being held by the top 1% and be a great solution for long term stability.

[HamiltonJay]

They are not wrong about wealth inequality... they are wrong about what to do about it....

Capital has not been flowing as it should through society... and long term this will have a huge destabilizing effect on our nation.... Trump has done more to fix this than any president in my lifetime, but it still has a long way to go before we get back to good stable economic flow.

[SanchoP]

“It's not an endlessly expanding list of rights — the 'right' to education, the 'right' to health care, the 'right' to food and housing. That's not freedom, that's dependency. Those aren't rights, those are the rations of slavery — hay and a barn for human cattle.” ----- Alexis de Tocqueville

The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money. -- Alexis de Tocqueville

Vote for free stuff --- Fauxahontas

[MacNaughton]

[DIRTYSECRET]

The money is out there somewhere creating wealth. It’s not in their mattresses.

[oincobx]

>>>The money is out there somewhere creating wealth. It’s not in their mattresses.

But one household can only spend so much. The marginal propensity to spend and the wealth effect are smaller for someone with great wealth. As the top 10% move from 55% of total wealth to 65% of wealth and then towards 75% of all wealth, that could create a governor on the growth of the economy.

[Immolumentor]

Exhibit 1: Chief Justice John Roberts; Obamacare.

[semimojo]

At a tax rate of 6% on accumulated wealth, doesn’t all of the wealth evaporate in about 17 years, as those who possess that wealth need to cash out, sell property, etc. to get the money to pay the taxes on that wealth?

The amount could shrink but not get to zero.

In reality, the billionaires have their wealth invested and on average probably earn more on their money each year than the 6% Warren wants. They can certainly earn more than the 2% for mere multi-millionaires.

[happilymarriedmom]

Seems to me its either double taxation or taxation without representation. Kinda like how you have to continually pay the government to stay in the house you own.

[ridesthemiles]

I assume you’re thinking 6 x 17 = 102%?
It doesn’t work like that, because 6% gets smaller every time your wealth is smaller.

$100 - 6% you are left with $94
$94 - 6% you are left with $88.36
$88.36 - 6% you are left with $83.06
Etc”””

The 17% was a rounded up number, the correct number would be 16.6666667% to infinity. then you get 100%

Whileyou would be paying a 6% tax each year, your ‘wealth’ might NOT reduce.

Inflation with the value of housing, jewelry, art, and other items might put that original $100 up over $100 by year #2.

The ‘value of my wealth is fluctuating-—real estate—stocks—bonds—other assets I own. So the 6% might stay static, but that is all-—and I don’t think the Dems would stick to that amount EVER.

It is BS-—and it defies the Constitution.

Funny how using the Constitution is OK for this ‘wealth tax”, bvut they re trying to Impeach Trump for doing “Unconstitutional things”.

The Democrat rules are like trying to nail Jello to the wall.

[ridesthemiles]

As long as there is inequality in ambition, there will be inequality in income.”””

Deliberate drug use
Entitlement attitude
Deliberate non-attendance at school—from an early age
Gang affiliation
Anti-authority attitude

I could keep going on & on.

You all know what I am saying.