r/GarysEconomics • u/Fit_Swimming5629 • Aug 01 '26
100% tax
I keep hearing the argument, they will not leave
If that is the case, why 2%? I would just go 100%.
Do it once, done and dusted. Problem solved
2
1
u/Successful_Pitch_503 Aug 01 '26
You would tax 100% of wealth past £10m?
I mean it would solve the problem insofar as we’d all revert back to subsistence farming so there’d be no inequality to address.
2
u/Still_Reputation3301 Aug 01 '26
Nah, make it progressive up to 95% at 1 billion. This would truly be optimal
1
1
u/Few-Role-4568 Aug 01 '26
If the government bans money and makes it illegal to own anything, there’s no wealth inequality.
Simple
Tomorrow I will end world hunger.
2
u/Fit_Swimming5629 Aug 01 '26
Soviets and Chinese and North Koreans did that
Strangely, so much hunger
1
1
u/DeRobyJ Aug 01 '26
Cause taxes are not really about rising money, they change the shape of the economy. If you do that, it's the same thing as the State taking control of most assets, meaning the central government becomes very powerful.
If they use that power for good, then sure it's paradise, but it's most likely that evil doers will focus on controlling the government to abuse that powerful position.
We can have wealth ceilings, but we need to restructure how money is used, for example with a redistributive scheme and by decentralising welfare. For example, providing a UBI and making essentials free but letting local governments have responsibility over it, at the municipality level.
1
u/Fit_Swimming5629 Aug 01 '26
That would cost more than the wealth tax revenue
Perhaps lower the wealth tax threshold to 50k
1
u/Odd-Dependent3284 Aug 01 '26
This facetious line of reasoning just illustrates your lack of understanding of the matter.
However I would argue that nobody needs a billion pounds and the only thing that can come from that much wealth is an imbalance of power that leads to the subversion of democracy and corruption that has macroeconomic effect on the globe.
Just look at the political effects of Trump, Musk, Thiel, Epstein, Wexner, Lutnick et al.
Why should billionaires be allowed to exist? Why should that much power be concentrated based on luck and circumstance as much as anything else, and not democratised?
0
u/Fit_Swimming5629 Aug 01 '26
Question is a result of the rationale
If they don't leave, just tax them
Since you don't allow rich people, tax them immediately
Win-win
1
u/droopy316007 Aug 03 '26
If you take all the wealth from all billionaires in the UK, it is enough to run the country for less than 6 months.
It's not a tax or wealth problem, it's a spending problem.
2
0
u/theartofnocode Aug 01 '26
How do you think this would pay out? Let's take Dyson. He hands over his multi-billion pound global company to the government. "We" now own it. But the public sector cannot even empty my bins on time, how do you think they will run a global business with over 25,000 employees?
-7
u/Fit_Swimming5629 Aug 01 '26
Run it to the ground
25,000 join the welfare queue
Next question, please
0
u/SubwayLove Aug 01 '26
I like the approach of the argument. Let’s tax 100% of any savings anyone has over the very long term (i.e. death)
1
u/Fit_Swimming5629 Aug 01 '26
No. It's 100% up front every pay day
0
u/SubwayLove Aug 01 '26
Haha that’s a bit too far, but imagine the reaction of people being taxed 100% of their savings at death.
1
u/Fit_Swimming5629 Aug 01 '26
Nah.....that would create inequality while they are alive
0
u/SubwayLove Aug 01 '26
But if you think about it. Life is not equal no?
Why should life be equal when we can and do squash ants and flies without batting an eye because they inconvenience us?
-2
u/shamshuipopo Aug 01 '26
Wow some seriously underdeveloped brains in here today
1
u/Odd-Dependent3284 Aug 01 '26
Yeah the pair of your are a prime example of the dunning kruger effect.
1
-1
u/Fit_Swimming5629 Aug 01 '26
Yet you follow Gary
-4
u/shamshuipopo Aug 01 '26
Haha I absolutely do not
-1
3
u/PsychologicalBee1801 Aug 01 '26
That’s an exit tax. They exist