However, for inheritance tax I don't think it matters, if it is unearned wealth. It is the sole right of the person who makes the gift, not the person who recieves. Der Amerikaner ist die Orchidee unter den MenschenVolker Pispers
It is not the person who leaves the inheritance that is taxed, but the recipient f it. I said the principle of private property doesn't limit the right to give inheritance, but it does limit the right to receive it.
The question is whether you want a system which amplifies wealth differences or not, quite simply. When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
Francois asked me to bring up other examples than gold, for why somebody would not use an asset for producing revenue. He should have asked you, as you brought the idea up, that a wealth tax is better than a pure income tax, because of the incencitive to use the asset. I have invented a rather realistic example. And yes, of course there is the question, what system one wants. And as all the examples others brought up, were about much bigger wealth, the question is, amplifying wealth to which degree, so that e.g. one answer to my example could have been, to speak about a wealth tax only for the people who are much richer than just a selfused property, even if it is a house in Munich. Another answer is to tax appropriately already on that level, as it already means to be much richer than most others. And these answers have different effects and will attract different voters. However, what's your problem? I said, I want something specific. Some comments later you write the question is what I want. That I said in the first place.
From my first diary: "Conservatism means a declining loyalty starting with individuum, family, region, country, (Europe), world." I see property not only as individual property, but as 'clans/family' property. Inheritance is only the formal overscription of the 'clans' property to the next generation, while the real ownership, that one by the clan, does not really change. Der Amerikaner ist die Orchidee unter den MenschenVolker Pispers
Having clarified our positions regarding dynasties, we have to agree to disagree.
Anyway, to answer your question, taxing wealth is independent of taxing unearned windfall income (be it inheritance, gifts or capital gains). When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
The Wikipedia article on Wealth Tax claims the rate in Switzerland is progressive up to 1.5%, in various US states it varies from 1% to 4%, and in France the Solidarity Tax on Wealth taxes up to 1.8% for wealth above €750k (but the lowest nonzero marginal rate is .55% and the highest rate is only reached at €15M).
None of this seems "confiscatory". When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
Why were you arguing in the first place? Der Amerikaner ist die Orchidee unter den MenschenVolker Pispers
I believe redistributive taxation played a huge role in creating the middle class, but I don't know my econometric or economic history to be able to back that assertion. When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
A proper asset tax will hit at, say, 10 millions euros at a few percents then at 100 millions euros with annual rates of 20%, etc.
The goal is to prevent anyone from amassing enough wealth to interfere by sheer economic power with the institutions.
Berlusconi would simply not exist in this system.
