geese_feces [comrade/them, love/loves] @hexbear.net

5mo ago

oh no, not my unrealized capital gains!

The tax applies only to individuals with at least $100 million in wealth and mostly affects hedge fund managers.

here's fox news trying to convince people that the tax will mean that if your home goes up in value, the government will take your house: https://archive.is/Ay89M

"This would be the most crazy tax structure we have ever seen. It makes Venezuela look normal. It makes Russia look normal," Gingrich stressed. "That speech last week in Raleigh, where [Harris] outlined her economic plan, that was crazy. That was so far to the left of Bernie Sanders that Gorbachev in Russia would have thought it was a radical speech."

79 comments

I love how unrealized gains are worth enough to borrow against, but somehow don't count as wealth for the purpose of taxation. Funny how that works.
- I agree with the outlook when it comes to stocks, if this tax is actually true for it. I've had stocks I've heald for nearly a decade and watched them go up and down by large amounts.
  Having to pay a tax on the value they would go up in a year would mean I or anyone else would have to sell off some stock to pay for the tax. I make $50,000 a year. I couldn't afford to keep my stocks if they had a good year. Especially knowing if they went down the following year I wouldn't get the inverse action of a 25% loss credit.
  They need to find other ways that more directly take on the issues of wealth disparity than something that's going to knock out the lower and middle class out of being able to invest in the market. Put limits on what corporations can do and property owners from having more than a certain amount of residential homes/apartments. Put a stop against using stocks and bonds as collateral against loans. Don't put this tax in effect unless the gains increase is in access of $1,000,000 or some amount. Don't screw up everyone else just trying to get by and save a little bit of money .
  
  From the first sentence in The fucking post: The tax applies only to individuals with at least $100 million in wealth and mostly affects hedge fund managers.
  If you read anything more than the headline before you rushed to the comments to provide your ignorant take, you would have saved yourself a lot of embarrassment.

"Okay imagine spending $100,000"
I literally can't imagine doing this at any point in my life, ever.
- Buying a supercar?
  
  why would i do this
- Buying a house?
  
  You can't even buy a tiny house for $100k
  
  For the vast majority of people this isn’t spending money, it’s taking on debt
  
  You're cute.
  
  Average dbzer0 user
  
  yeah sure my credit rating is like 348 last time I checked
  
  Not taxed under the proposed law.
  
  For that price, from Ikea?

"At least 100 million in wealth"
Lol. Lmao, even. Are libs allergic to reading?
- Chuds especially. Dems sometimes read a lot, but only from their little silos of pseudo-intellectual, pseudo-progressive slop.
  
  After years of reading Paul Krugman op-eds I'm basically an economist
- yes
- Well their handlers just omit that part when they tell them about stuff.

Gorbachev in Russia would have thought it was a radical speech.
he spent most of his last decades in Germany iirc
he was a liberal
he's dead
- he's dead
  Not to Newt Gingrich, he’s not. Rent-free afterlife.
  These people are fighting a late-80’s Cold War with a non-existent adversary.
  
  they're doing everything in their power to revive it tho lmao

I saw someone posting something similar about this and a person replied “you don’t make enough money to be concerned about this” and they were like “you don’t know what I’m cooking! I’m certain I’ll be in this tax bracket by the next sitting president!” Lol
- That's been a conservative talking point for years. That if it weren't for [insert generic bad person here] you'd have a million dollars and a boat and 6 houses.
  I'm amazed how many people still fall into it.
  
  I'm amazed how many people still fall into it.
  they have to believe it, or that means capitalism doesn't work, and that is a train of thought they have refused to follow

So not only finally tax for the gambler parasites but a recipe for a stock market crash?

Too bad Kkkopmala isn't even in 1% as based as they are scaremongering themselves

I propose 10000% capital gains tax if someone makes over $100m.
- Once your income hits that point you prestige and have to start over as a McDonald's worker
  
  Call it "Newgame+" but hey, aren't those leeches constantly saying they would retain their experience and be back in rich in no time? Weird how not one ever tried.
- 100% capita tax

This would never happen
Half the top donors to the Dems are hedge funds
https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/top-organizations
https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/biggest-donors

I refuse to believe any proposed policies from a democrat. They can offer anything they want and know they won't pass it because a parliamentarian will find the blue suit rule in effect on the day it's proposed (oops the tax code can't be amended if there is someone wearing a blue suit in Congress on that day, sorry hands are tied everyone, we do want progress though).
All they're going to do is tax cuts and wonder why they can't fund anything. Also bump that military spending up another 500 billion or so gotta make sure we're extra lethal and threatening to everyone.
- But that money is protecting freedom!*
  By giving Israel $ to kill more kids

This worked when they made everyone afraid of the estate tax, even though that only applies to the richest 2,000 or so deaths a year.
- "But what if that's me??"
  -person that buried their credit and nearly bankrupted themselves to buy a lifted F250 Platinum and a Cybertruck

I like how the title to that post is just describing property taxes that every home owner already pays.

How many fucking people with $100m+ would even keep their investments in their personal name?
Anyway, wacky proposal that they know will never get up
- Yeah, it's 100%
  shit because these kinds of people have family offices incorporated to handle their assets.

Anyone with $100 million is going to be able to evade the taxes anyway.

Think it's for people with extremely high net worths ($100 million+).
It's also a recipe for owning nothing. Nothing solid or fungible. You would look at a Thing, and say, this is going to cost me This Much. If its value goes up. And inflation is going to happen, so of course its numerical value is going to go up.
From t_d thread and the tax doesn't apply to "things" it applies to stocks. And the bit about how you would consider how much owning a thing would cost over time including inflation is already how assets are valued.
- But what if you buy a sandwich and then the value of the sandwich goes up after you eat it!??!??! They're going to tax your poop!

Yeah I’m like 175% sure that they’d be able write off drops in the value of the stock.
My concern with this idea is, how exactly are they calculating the value each year? Average value over the calendar year, value at end of CY, value at YTD from the original purchase? If done wrong it could lead to gaming of the market such that when it’s time to calculate the value, the market always happens to be in a dip then, very odd.
- Yeah I’m like 175% sure that they’d be able write off drops in the value of the stock.
  Yeah, the "taxes on gains that no longer exist" argument, betrays their basic lack of understanding about how taxes on assets work. Do they just not understand that capital losses offset the tax burden of the gains?
  I wonder if some of this confusion happens because most people don't have exposure to anything beyond income and property taxes?
  
  That's exactly what it is. Everyone that complains about this has only ever had to deal with a W2 or 1099 form. They don't understand that as you get richer, you have so many different avenues to avoid paying taxes.
- it's all moot, this ain't passing. if it actually made it to her desk she just wouldn't sign it.
- The other question would be which stocks would be included in a scheme, because stocks with low liquidity would be even simpler to game to rack up unrealised tax losses
- If I were president it would be calculated second by second but without correctiing by the fraction that second represents of the year (1/60x60x24x365) in order to tax them an astronomic sum
  
  And def doable with the tech we have.

fucking hilarious that they don't point out it only applies to those with 100 million, like to these people 100,000 is just throw away gambling money. even 50,000 is more money than i'll ever likely have at one time in my entire life, it would be life-changing to have that much money, and i'm a fairly privileged first world failson.
- You underestimate the immense class solidarity the bourgeoisie have with each other. A slight on billionaires is treated as a slight on all privileged classes, particularly in the global north.
  
  The middle class is our enemy

This will 1000% never pass. The logistics are impossible
- It's for publicly traded shares, so it really doesn't seem impossible. Logistics seem about as complicated as paying income tax on income received in a foreign currency.
  
  Which companies notoriously have never find loopholes in.
  I'm sure the self-regulatory agencies will definitely be able to figure this out in a way that benefits the public.

Hurting [...] economic growth
How
- They aren't even shy in openly admitting their economy is just a three financial instruments in pyramidal shape coat
  
  No, really, I want an explanation of the sort of "this would be like dropping/rising the federal reserve interest rate" or some shit like that.
  I would enjoy to read a big "what if" from someone who actually understands how all that shit works cuz I don't.
  As I see it, it would disentivize stock-gambling obviously but idk how much would affect the trade of stocks for other more ¿"respectable"?reasons.
- "Noooo! You don't understand, it's MY capital to sit on and do nothing with!"

Or in other words...it forces capital to do its job?
Want captialism? Sorry, you're going to have to make regulations to encourage, if not outright force porky to do his job. If labor unions come under scrutiny because withholding labor hurts the economy, then the same logic must also apply to capital.
- The only real job of capital is to transfer wealth from workers to capitalists.

Trying to make Harris cooler than she is again, smh.

Tell me you didn't read anything about the thing without telling me you didn't read anything about the thing.
This doesn't kick in until you've got 100,000,000 US buckaroos worth of net assets.

lmao i love when it only effects 100 million in wealth but they try to think about the average poor american family having their house appreciate

Maybe the better solution here is to tax business loans? That would capture the scenario where someone borrows against their unrealized gains, but wouldn’t force sale of assets and potentially cause a feedback loop which tanks the stock market.
Idk just spitballing and also talking out of my ass
- Or just make it that a gain counts as realized the moment it is used to acquire a loan… yeah that’s probably easier

nobody's willing to work anymore, the just want to take handouts

I think the upper class should start proposing solutions then, if they don't like the ones going around.
They'd do well to remember what happened to the knights templar, when governments racked up high levels of debt and all wealth was being privately hoarded.
How hard would it really be for the seals to eliminate ~100 people?
- The democrats are one half of the Great Satan's ruling uniparty. The upper class are already exercising their will through them. This will either be conveniantly dropped if/when the dems get power, or it will be implemented in such a way that the elite aren't negatively affected by it.

79 comments