Billionaires, Redistribution & Inheritance

[1000000CHF]

@Bibi4

I don’t have the power or the desire of putting my parents on the street so I could sell all their assets just to “send the money to Africa”. The Bill and Melinda gates fondation sounds like a better investment for the world if you want to know what I would do if I had millions…

That’s why I said “most of the money” - not all. You don’t have to make yourself poor to support others, just give up the non-esentials. I don’t understand why are you not supporting poor now? Why you need to wait to be a millnaire? And later you’ll wait to be billionaire? It’s just an excuse for doing nothing and hoping that governments will solve the world problems with other’s people money.

PS. Inheritance tax in Switzerland is plain dumb, as low taxes attracting capital from the whole world is one of the things that made this country rich in the first place.

[Bibi4]

Telling people that is their personal responsibility to “solve poverty” right now by giving away all their savings in a forum that is about FIRE is a weird opinion I have to admit.

Anyway you need a systemic response to a systemic problem. Poverty is a systemic problem so governments have to step-in, change laws, levy taxes. Counting on individuals to “do the right thing” is doomed to fail. Especially when people might have different views about what the right thing is.

@1000000CHF

PS. Inheritance tax in Switzerland is plain dumb, as low taxes attracting capital from the whole world is one of the things that made this country rich in the first place.

A race to the bottom that attracts the people that your are decrying: greedy people that don’t want to pay ANY taxes… And then hoping those same people will give away their money to “save the poor”… I don’t see that working out.

edit: Also thinking low taxes is just what made Switzerland rich is a very limited view of history. All wars were avoided, trading with both camps, the political system, a rather strong industry for its size are all equally valid reasons for Switzerland prosperity.

- YouTube

[trotro]

@1000000CHF

Besides, it’s true that life is unfair because luck exists, “undeserved” and “deserved” benefits are bundled together and they’re inseparable. It’s a grim fact of life. But this doesn’t give anybody license to rob billionaires, millionaires or thousanders. The rich didn’t do anything wrong by being lucky. It’s not their fault that others are less lucky and they owe nothing to nobody.

Man, you gotta stop thinking in terms of ‘deserving’ and ‘owing’ and just consider utility.

The ultimate aim of the economy is to maximise welfare through market forces, proper regulation and some degree of redistribution. If you want to argue against redistribution you should not be talking about how it’s “robbing billionaires and millionaires” but about how it decreases welfare.

@1000000CHF

Trying to eliminate the luck from life would not only utterly fail (we had examples of this system) but, what’s worse, it would undermine the productive forces of society - work, thrift, entrepreneurship - everything that makes riches “deserved”. The vicious circle of envy leads only to misery and disappointment.

It’s unclear what “eliminating luck” would even look like. And I’ve never seen anyone seriously argue for that.
Even if eliminating luck was bad, redistribution of wealth doesn’t dop that. We’ve always been redistributing wealth (to varying degrees), yet people still work, still have thrift and still start business.

[ma0]

+1 Internet point to @Bibi4 for the video of David Mitchell. (Do not google #wilty on youtube or you’re going to spend a whole day/week laughing)

[1000000CHF]

@trotro

The ultimate aim of the economy is to maximise welfare through market forces, proper regulation and some degree of redistribution. If you want to argue against redistribution you should not be talking about how it’s “robbing billionaires and millionaires” but about how it decreases welfare.

I do think about utility and I seriously doubt that redistribution increases “societal” utility long-term (putting aside the impossibility of inter-personal utility comparison and aggregation). Respecting property rights of everybody decreases the rent-seeking and increases the incentives to accumulate capital, thus increasing the productivity long-term. Additionally, it’s best guarantee of individual liberty, if you value it.

@trotro

We’ve always been redistributing wealth (to varying degrees), yet people still work, still have thrift and still start business.

Well, I think they’re less thrift and less entrepreneurial than they could without redistribution.

[1000000CHF]

@Bibi4

Telling people that is their personal responsibility to “solve poverty” right now by giving away all their savings in a forum that is about FIRE is a weird opinion I have to admit.

Anyway you need a systemic response to a systemic problem. Poverty is a systemic problem so governments have to step-in, change laws, levy taxes. Counting on individuals to “do the right thing” is doomed to fail. Especially when people might have different views about what the right thing is.

It is true that it is systematic problem and the comparison of last 50 years of China and Africa shows that integration with global capitalism is much better poverty elimination tool than government sponsored humanitarian aid. Government solutions to world poverty problems was a disaster in last century. The only sustainable solutions is helping people learn and accumulate capital - and I believe the best way to achieve that is by supporting global trade and effective private charity.

@Bibi4

A race to the bottom that attracts the people that your are decrying: greedy people that don’t want to pay ANY taxes… And then hoping those same people will give away their money to “save the poor”… I don’t see that working out.

Accumulation of capital is the race to the top. I don’t have any problem with tax avoidance as I think taxes should be low enough to make people pay them voluntarily. For example, currently, in my canton, I pay 3% of income tax and frankly speaking even if I could pay 0%, I wouldn’t do it. I don’t mind financing government with my 3% on a voluntary basis - as long as it’s low and rationally spend. For me, it’s a matter of personal responsibility - without responsibility, there’s no liberty. And liberty is my core philosophical value.