Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

PETRUS

(3,678 posts)

13. Huge fortunes

Reply to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Tue Jul 10, 2012, 05:10 PM

Jul 2012

Last edited Wed Jul 11, 2012, 01:06 PM - Edit history (1)

Well, I don't think "free market" outcomes are moral or even logical. Nor am I comfortable with slavery, military conquest, divine right or any of the causes or justifications for massive inequality that preceded (and accompany) the current system. In other words, these huge fortunes are not legitimate.

People are answering this question in different ways. I think we need to reorganize ourselves significantly along political/economic lines, eventually. In the short run, I support treating all income the same with and setting a very high top marginal rate (maybe 80%). That wouldn't put any upper limit on accumulation within any one lifetime but it would slow it down. And I also support very steep inheritance taxes (maybe 70%-90%) on estate values over a certain amount - probably in the $10 - $50 million range.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

24 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

How much Wealth (and hence Power) should one person/family be ALLOWED to accumulate? [View all] Junkdrawer Jul 2012 OP

No preordained limits on what someone can amass IF hifiguy Jul 2012 #1

There's Really Several Pertinent Iggy Jul 2012 #2

We all want to say "No Limits".... Junkdrawer Jul 2012 #5

Oh I agree it's a Problem Iggy Jul 2012 #7

Agree so much. The greatest fallacy of capitalism, or most 'isms' is not RKP5637 Jul 2012 #3

I really want to keep the baby and toss the bath water.... Junkdrawer Jul 2012 #6

Yep, people are often power and wealth hungry. There are many in the RKP5637 Jul 2012 #11

10% wealth tax every year on all net worth... meaculpa2011 Jul 2012 #4

Where is the federal government given the power to do this? badtoworse Jul 2012 #8

Also an ex post facto law, unconstitutional as well. nt kelly1mm Jul 2012 #9

The last part was a joke. meaculpa2011 Jul 2012 #12

So why was the 16th Amendment needed? badtoworse Jul 2012 #14

Does this mean my real estate taxes are unconstitutional? Junkdrawer Jul 2012 #16

I believe the power to tax real estate is reserved for the states... badtoworse Jul 2012 #20

Nah, 2% wealth tax on net worth above $13 million (the 1%) until the wealth curve is flatter, then stevenleser Jul 2012 #21

Unlimited as long as they pay taxes at the same rate as the rest of us - including SS. HopeHoops Jul 2012 #10

Huge fortunes PETRUS Jul 2012 #13

I don't think such a restriction is required IF TheKentuckian Jul 2012 #15

Asking the wrong question, imo Cal Carpenter Jul 2012 #17

No limit. Just add some more brackets in the tax code. MrSlayer Jul 2012 #18

Inherited wealth will be the downfall of Democracy if left unchecked. Ikonoklast Jul 2012 #19

Everybody sing: "We Did It Before and We Can Do It Again".... Junkdrawer Jul 2012 #22

"Taxing WEALTH ... is the most radical idea I can think of short of armed revolution".... Junkdrawer Jul 2012 #23

It's not so radical...we already tax property, which is half of all wealth. reformist2 Jul 2012 #24