[HockeyIlliterate]

Originally Posted by jammies

So your solution is for people to avoid taxes by not investing in anything.

A net worth tax would be coupled with a consumption tax.

Thus, if an individual earns, say, $100K and invests none of it, surely some of the earnings would be spent and would be subject to the consumption tax.

Originally Posted by jammies

I wonder why no one has thought of it before.

I suspect that the idea of a net worth taxation has been thought of before.

Originally Posted by jammies

Not to mention, say you're Donald Trump. You owe more than you own, but you owe so much the banks can't let you go bankrupt.

Which brings up a decent point regarding taxation:

Many on the "left" tend to view taxation as a means to equalize inequality, and to make sure that the "rich" pay their "fair share."

Given that income does not necessarily equate to being "rich," if the goal is truly to tax the "rich," shouldn't you first figure out who the "rich" really are?

Originally Posted by jammies

Or, say you are elderly and your net worth is tied up in your home. Sure, you "theoretically" have half a million dollars, but your pension, under the HockeyIlliterate fair taxation scheme, is taxed heavily enough that you end up selling your home because you are eating cat food and week-old bread scavenged from behind the local Mac's.

I do not contemplate abolishing the existing property tax scheme. As such, a net worth tax could exempt the value of one's primary residence from net worth calculation (whether due to fairness, a desire to avoid double taxation, or whatever).

Originally Posted by jammies

I think you haven't really thought this through. At all.

I'm not convinced that you have either, but I understand that it is easier to criticize than it is to create.