Probably the best take on @paulg's strange wealth tax math.https://twitter.com/jwiechers/status/1366503885146378240 …
It's reassuring if this is the best, because (like most people commenting on it) he doesn't even seem to have read the essay.
-
-
So I did read the article last year when you first posted it (or is this a new one?) - and asked about the strange assumption of a zero-yield stock, with a follow-up question about capital allocation efficiency:https://twitter.com/halvarflake/status/1295717041391964162?s=20 …
-
What are your thoughts on that? Do you think a zero-yield stock is realistic? Why would anyone hold that stock? And wouldn't dividend payments from yielding stock deal with any dilution arguments?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Reading your essay made me realize how viable a wealth tax actually is, I assumed the compounding effect would be way higher. 1% might be a better starting point though for an actual policy implementation
-
Switzerland may be a good example; has had a wealth tax (that tops out at 0.3%) forever.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
not reading "the whole" essay is a weak response. how many times do we read about the putative awful consequences of a tax....then the loopholes begin. we cannot even get a $15 minimum wage through because "it will be ruinous for small businesses."
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Should he need to? He's commenting on your tweet.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
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.