Modeling a Wealth Tax: http://paulgraham.com/wtax.html
Show this thread
-
Given that the interest you can earn on accumulated wealth is greater than a 1% wealth tax, it's still most rational to optimize for the place that let's you create great wealth in the first place.
It's possible that moving your company to California would make it 3x as valuable, so that you'd still be net better off after giving half of it to the government, but would you claim that publicly?
-
-
I'm saying that if moving to California makes it even a little more likely that you qualify for a wealth tax of 1%, it's the rational thing to do. Because the interest you'd earn on the extra accumulated wealth would more than make up for a 1% wealth tax. Wealth compounds too
-
Of course, but it compounds at exactly the same rate in every state. So "a little more likely" is not enough. You'd have to be convinced that the ultimate outcome is more than 2x better.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.