It should be progressively more expensive to remain rich.
Figure out a baseline of what’s required to provide comfortable subsistence.
Set a tax rate of 0.01% for income above 10x the baseline.
Set the tax brackets to:
0.1% for >100x
1% for >1,000x
10% for >10,000x
100% for >100,000x
If you want to earn more and pay less tax, you work toward raising the baseline.
An economy is a construct provided by the society to help facilitate its function. Hoarding wealth denominated in its currency is intrinsically sociopathic, and societies which tolerate it are suicidal.
This is a part of a broader thesis, which also argues the ‘comfortable subsistence’ should be treated as a right.
The taxation wouldn’t be required to pay for anything, its primary purpose is to constrain inequality, and incentivise continual elevation of the social floor.
I’d like to see ‘wealth’ accumulation and persistence as a legitimate proxy of how much someone has contributed to and supported the society they participate within, as opposed to its current form of how much they’ve extracted from and damaged it.
They can build their reputation, and be happy with it. Individualism is a lie to justify unequal distribution of resources.
Show me someone born on a deserted island, who built their entire world and infrastructure from the ground up as an individual, and you’ll have a case for someone who deserves all that they’ve built. For the rest of us, we are a species that builds on the works of all others who came before, and we succeed together.
The singular genius myth is a lie built to justify a race to the patent office, and dismiss multiple discovery.
It should be progressively more expensive to remain rich.
Figure out a baseline of what’s required to provide comfortable subsistence.
Set a tax rate of 0.01% for income above 10x the baseline.
Set the tax brackets to:
If you want to earn more and pay less tax, you work toward raising the baseline.
An economy is a construct provided by the society to help facilitate its function. Hoarding wealth denominated in its currency is intrinsically sociopathic, and societies which tolerate it are suicidal.
I would argue a comfortable subsistence should be a right, and not require any work at all. And this taxation could provide the basics for everyone.
This is a part of a broader thesis, which also argues the ‘comfortable subsistence’ should be treated as a right.
The taxation wouldn’t be required to pay for anything, its primary purpose is to constrain inequality, and incentivise continual elevation of the social floor.
I’d like to see ‘wealth’ accumulation and persistence as a legitimate proxy of how much someone has contributed to and supported the society they participate within, as opposed to its current form of how much they’ve extracted from and damaged it.
They can build their reputation, and be happy with it. Individualism is a lie to justify unequal distribution of resources.
Show me someone born on a deserted island, who built their entire world and infrastructure from the ground up as an individual, and you’ll have a case for someone who deserves all that they’ve built. For the rest of us, we are a species that builds on the works of all others who came before, and we succeed together.
The singular genius myth is a lie built to justify a race to the patent office, and dismiss multiple discovery.