• @PunnyName
    link
    English
    -17 months ago

    A billionaire would potentially turn into a multi hundred millionaire. Very unlikely they would lose ~99% of their wealth to “only” become a millionaire.

    The difference between a million dollars and a billion dollars is about a billion dollars.

    • @Cryophilia
      link
      English
      37 months ago

      Great but that doesn’t change my point. Securities fluctuate, if you don’t sell then how do you value them?

      • @Wrench
        link
        English
        17 months ago

        And why shouldn’t they be forced to sell?

        If there’s a huge tax penalty to hording company shares, maybe, just maybe, they would be instead incentivised to profit share with their employees. To focus more on retention than to do waves of layoffs to give their massive holdings a bump.

        But we can’t have that. We need to incentivize narcissistic mega billionaires to have all the money in the world, and still clutch to every last penny while they work their peasants to death.

        • @Cryophilia
          link
          English
          1
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Great. But how do you value them. A stock that’s worth $5 one day, $10 the next, and $3 the next. How much do you tax it? How often?

          You’re giving high minded speeches and stuff but I’m asking how it would practically work. Because I think it’s way more complicated than you think it is.

          Edit: See further down, it could be done by averaging amounts over time.

          • @Wrench
            link
            English
            17 months ago

            High minded speeches? Seriously? There are plenty of feasible options.

            If it’s a public company, you can take the median price for the quarter. If they’re holding over $500,000 or whatever amount as calculated by the median share price, they’re taxed. You can make it tiered, and tax the shit out of anyone holding over $500m or whatever. If they want to avoid that tax, they can sell, and pay the capital gain.

            Or they could tie it to % over median employee shares granted per year. So if you have lopsided profit sharing, tax the fuck out of the greedy C level.

            Private is harder since it’s less obvious what the tangible value is. But you could use the % shares granted yearly again. Maybe have it tiered to a companies net worth or whatever other metric that would be most appropriate.

            It’s fucking ridiculous that we have articles like “Bezos lost $1 billion after shares took a dive this week” kind of articles. That’s a single person hording billions and billions in shares while the workers doing the actual work get pennies.

            • @Cryophilia
              link
              English
              17 months ago

              Most stocks are in mutual funds and ETFs. So if I have a million dollars, but I only own like $500 worth of any one company…?

              • @Wrench
                link
                English
                17 months ago

                … is that seriously what you’re talking about? You can’t imagine being able to estimate the worth of traditional investments? That’s already implemented.

                You already pay capital gains on what you earn in a year. It would be very easy to factor those investments into a wealth tax. Like… trivial.

                • @Cryophilia
                  link
                  English
                  17 months ago

                  Explain then. Would you have to calculate your equivalent net worth throughout the year and pay monthly taxes on it?

                  I’m not saying it’s impossible, I’m saying it’s very difficult.

                  • @Wrench
                    link
                    English
                    17 months ago

                    Yearly would be fine, but it could be done quarterly to. The capital gains tax on stock profits is already done quarterly.