Mason  🏃‍♂️ ✂️

There are legitimate disagreements and discussions to be had about what the government should be in the business of doing and how best to spread the tax burden to pay for it But it's a very bad sign when we're considering taxation **with the intent to reduce citizens' wealth**

Taxation reduces everyone's wealth. Only lately the system is rigged against the middle class now.

I'm talking about absolute wealth — a year-over-year reduction in net worth — and I'm talking about treating this as a goal of taxation.

Thank you for the clarification. I'm glad you did. I don't know how I feel about that other than you'd better hope you're pulled out of the right private parts (pick rich parents). The solidification of wealth (creating an untouchable class) at the top is a problem. Thoughts?

Suffice it to say that there is very likely no inheritance of any kind coming my way. I favor a progressive system of taxation **because** I think it's the best way to meet the simultaneous goals of funding government *and* allowing wealth to grow across the board.

I think it's profoundly irresponsible and frighteningly authoritarian to use taxation as a means of setting a soft cap on the total net worth of citizens. It's very hard to argue that taxation isn't about confiscation when you're explicitly attempting to reduce someone's assets.

Never mentioned a soft cap. Don't think the Rockafellers went belly up did they? Doubt Bill Gates will go belly up either. Those that make the most should pay the most. It's that simple. It is profoundly irresponsible to allow a gap to grow like it is growing between people.

I don't think the gap is the problem; it's poverty & stagnating growth at the bottom. I'd be happy to see wealth growing at *all* levels, & IMO we can get there by targeting geographic immobility, runaway costs in healthcare/education & housing shortages in high-growth regions