Hi David, On Oct 15, 2010, at 9:22 PM, David R. Block wrote: > I'm not a fan of the wealth tax. Again, for those in the lower middle income > range, one is hitting mostly IRA, 401k or 503b accounts, unless they remain > tax exempt and I don't see that here.
I'm only proposing a tax on FDIC-insured savings accounts over, e.g., $200K. *All* investment would be tax exempt, except at the end when you cash it out, and then only a small percentage. And anyone with over $200K in savings is probably no lower-middle income. :-) > Likewise the financial transfer taxes would only hit me when I change > investments in my IRA or 401k. So I should be taxed for trying to be a smart > investor? Thanks, but no thanks. We have to tax something. And if you're a smart investor, you should only shift your funds when there's a noticeable upside (greater than 0.5%). Yes, this introduces friction into the market, so making small shifts to gain razor-thin margin advantages will become impossible. But it hurts institutional and professional investors (and day traders) far more than your typical individual. More patient capital seems a very good thing overall, and the elimination of capital gains should make this a very small price to pay for most people. > I find $4000 in additional property taxes onerous when I already have a > combined School, County, and City property tax of about $6000. Do I want to > almost double it? Hell no. However, I see with your wealth exemption, my > house wouldn't be hit at all. Retirement accounts? Now that's another story. No, the same story. See above. > And the Fair Tax rate that I have seen most often is 21 % or so, so where did > 10 come from? By assuming we can capture half the revenue from stock transactions and a wealth tax, to make things progressive but still simple. -- Ernie P. -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
