Why This Millionaire Supports a Wealth Tax

[@Hambo04]

So wish Gary got a position on Question Time where he could challenge our politicians who could do with an economics lesson.

[@garyseconomics]

Thanks Hambo, maybe one day - you never know!

[@Hans624]

the idea of lowering income taxes in parallel to adding wealth taxes is really powerful. The message would spread a lot better if 99.9% of people directly benefit financially.

[@peterscott6818]

I have known what you are saying intuitively for a long time now but haven’t been able to articulate it. Thanks for the gift of your streetwise practical intelligence that looks at what is and has understood and developed the language. I am learning from you though I am way more than twice your age. What you are sharing is priceless. Thanks for caring. You made your pile and didn’t have to care about anyone else. But you do. That’s the mark of a good man.

[@leezowers3964]

Top stuff as usual. I interviewed prominent Labour MP and asked about a wealth tax and he started freaking out how would it work/who would be taxed - I said in principle and he jabbered about being practical. Until we get rid of the current crop leading the Labour Party nish is gona change

[@garyseconomics]

Yeah it is frustrating that the Labour party have not gotten behind the calls for a wealth tax powerfully. I guess they think that it's not a "vote winner" at this stage, or maybe they are worried about some wealthy backers? My/our job here is to get the people to want it. If the people want it then it will become a vote winner and (hopefully) at least the labour party will back it, as well as similar parties in other countries!

[@tranceman22]

The problem is the voting system. It favours the right wing party, their media barons donors do their best to destroy what threatens then. That's why Corbyn failed. British elections are not won on majorities but on appealing to the floating voters in the marginal seats who are moderates. It's why Blair won. We need Proportional representation so that the system represents the people.

[@donbennett5353]

I can't believe Gary hasn't got more subscribers. I believe a good place to start reducing inequality is to stop millionaires and billionaires from being MPs. They create legislation that suit big business and their inner circle. Keep up the great work, Gary

[@asmith2450]

This is an excellent video, you pack lots in and it feels dynamic as you’re walking along and the flats and Canary Wharf in the distance illustrate the story. There’s a couple of minutes in your interview on Motley Fool channel earlier this year (from about 29:30) which encapsulates the dilemma of many people, which would make a great short clip. Keep up the good work Gary, and look after yourself. I’m over 60 and very concerned for my kids’ generation and many others in UK.

[@zulkiflijamil4033]

Hello Gary. I am following your channel. Even though I only learnt Economics only at A Levels but alas for first year then switched to Physics but didn't pass. But after listening to your explanation of the real life issues suddenly promted me to relearn Economics. Yes, the issues you raised are serious real matters upon which society must act to solve. Thanks a lot for sharing this video. Keep going , Gary. Respect from Malaysia. 🇲🇾 🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆

[@FairlyEducational]

Nice one, shared it with some mates. Could you do some videos about massive tax evasion (Pandora Papers and after...) and how this effects the economy for regular working-poor?

[@garyseconomics]

That's a good idea boss. I am actualyl on holiday now but I will add this to the list of potential videos to make.

[@JM-yf3ol]

Gary. You briefly discussed how the poor have been squeezed to death (literally), so the rich were coming after the assets (houses) of the middle class. Please could you discuss this further??

[@iancooketapia]

Hear, hear. Let's get Gary in front of more people, not just us who think about this, but to our friends and family who are equally affected but do not often engage with economics and political economy questions.

[@garyseconomics]

Thanks Ian, that is exactly our hope, that the channel will grow by people sharing the vids with their friends and families and communities!

[@paulc7535]

I think you outline the problem very well, and it makes 100% sense what you say. The problem i see is that a lot of the people in power have too much skin in the game so it'll be hard to change things. Let's hope they do change. Covid may have been real but was also a transfer of wealth.

[@willdyer7956]

Thank you Gary, that's the best explanation of the global economic crisis of the last decade+ and resulting income inequality

[@fburton8]

Has anyone asked politicians where the money that was printed has ended up? Answering that simple question would lead to the obvious answer of what to do. I think we need to have this question asked publicly again and again until something gives.

[@nls8508]

Thanks for the video! Nice info once again. Thanks again.

[@garyseconomics]

No worries Naihum, glad you liked it!

[@lkyuvsad]

Focusing on a wealth tax seems like a nice, simple first ask to get people to rally behind. But if this isn't done carefully, there's an easy swerve- say yes to the tax and then just route the money straight back to the rich. Politically, it might be good to combine the demand for a wealth tax with (very broad) demands about how the cash raised should be allocated? I guess that's a much more nuanced thing to communicate and a weaker rallying cry because we inevitably start arguing about the details. I don't know, I worry about the working class winning a battle but continuing to lose the war. I saw someone on the beeb asking Gove about help for renters and obviously something like that is a simple way for a wealth tax to be sent right back to landlords if the help isn't some sort of rent cap. A wealth tax would be grand, and a one-off government redistribution is essential given where we are. Obviously if other things don't change then we will be back in the same spot eventually. It'd be even better if redistribution wasn't needed because we all got enough to live with dignity in the first place- the minimum wage needs to drastically increase. Is there a way to permanently lock minimum wage to a reasonable measure of working class inflation without creating unintended side-effects? Because if we could do that it would require political action to increase inequality, rather than it being the default as long as inflation exists. I think a lot about the Alaskan Permanent Dividend Fund, which has widespread support in a way that making similar transfers with taxes might not, because the idea of commonwealth is explicit in that system. Are there more imaginative methods than just tax to ring-fence some of these wealth-creating resources for the general good, such that taking them away again creates a public outcry that tax reductions and avoidance does not?

[@farahrizvi6634]

May God bless you always for thinking and caring about others. You are a legend. 🤲🏻🙏

[@declanmcardle]

This is one of your best explainers...re-release it or have it bumped in the algorithm...

[@peterscott6818]

As always I very much appreciate the clarity of your diagnosis Gary. It’s brilliantly articulated. However I’m not so sure about the wealth tax as solution. Richard Murphy makes points which seem valid to me in his Taxing Wealth Report that such a tax is extremely difficult to administer (hard to value wealth; hard and expensive to fight challenges from wealthy people; huge armies of tax inspectors required). He says it’s a great idea on paper but all a bit impractical in practice. He recommends changes to the tax system which he says will be much easier to accomplish, which will generate much more revenue and which will not need so many tax inspectors. He says therefore that solution would be much more effective in dealing with the situation you are campaigning on. He was very complementary about your book in a recent video incidentally. Could you do a video on Murphy’s Taxing Wealth Report and whether in your view he is correct in what he is proposing or whether there are things that make his proposals suspect or unworkable? I would be very grateful to hear your perspective on what he is saying.

[@JohnDoe-kn5jo]

Big up. Informative. See you in the north 😉 some time

[@garyseconomics]

Thanks boss!

[@georgec2894]

Such a wealth tax should differeniate between how the wealth was accquired. If the wealth was from diligent saving and investing of income then the tax can be a detterent for those hard workers to continue doing so. This is happening in Norway, where it makes sense to not work too hard and get taxed more - thereby reducing productivity and economic output.

[@grumpy-dad3701]

I've said it for years there's enough money on this planet for everyone to be financially secure and financially happy. It's now a race to be the first trillionaire.

[@sdo2406]

Do you have any info on exactly what & who would be caught by a wealth tax and how it would be implemented (i.e. not avoided)?

[@grahamtunnadine4427]

HI Gary, Good to hear you Radio 4 today. As you said: "a turkey doesn't vote for Christmas". So the real problems is how to bring this about. Structurally. I've got a couple of ideas about how to change the structures that I'd like to run by you. I am not in the same position as you to influence. And you might be able to point out whether they would or wouldn't work. 1: To get taxes from all the internet giants (Amazon, Facebook, Google, eBay, Starbucks etc) who pay minimal or no UK taxes by paying offshore . Shift VAT to a Point of Delivery tax, so that the tax is applied on receipt. On the basis of physical delivery address. This could also level the playing field between High Street and internet. 2: (Somehow) Clean up anonymity of offshore taxation and Shell companies so that tax cannot be hidden or laundered. I am interested to know your thoughts on how we can bring about these changes.

[@Theboxhouse]

Love this!!

[@garyseconomics]

Thanks boss

[@MartinGarthwaite]

I have often wondered why Scandinavian countries have a better standard of living and more equal society than the UK; I am not an Economic Historian. Still, it seems that high taxation that is progressive seems to work. Why does the UK Government have a perverse family tax credit where the state subsidises employers who do not want to pay a living wage, and I think a living wage is not enough? Living is not enough. There needs to be excess income to live well. Pet hobby horse, I went to a state school, free school meals, and did not go to university when I left school as I am dyslexic and trained as a chef. When I eventually got to LSE, I noticed a lot of wealthy kids who had costly education. I have no problem with private education, but if you are one of the 7% of children in the UK to have had one, your parents can afford to pay in university fees what your last year of private education costs per year at University. Why do all governments subsidise elite University education to allow rich kids more privilege? The biggest break I got was being accepted on a fully-funded course to do an HNC in Business and IT, in one year instead of two, this was Margaret Thatcher initiative and it changed my life, what this government has done to Technical Education in this country is a scandal. free or affordable skills training is a must.

[@Makurendende]

Gary you need to be our chancellor!! Please get in to no. 10 I will vote for you!!

[@MerrickKing]

You get taxed > you lose money > government spends your tax on infrastructure > economy grows > you get richer than before

[@thatundeadlegacy2985]

they buy immigrants houses with your money, house prices go up,

[@bearsbreeches]

I support a wealth tax always have but we keep getting neoliberal freemarket governments. A failed policy if there ever was one.

[@adamfarkas7069]

I was half-expecting Gary to start free-flow rapping about this at some point, especially with the music below. I am a bit disappointed it did not happen. It would suit him!

[@rpstrambi]

😂😂😂

[@lewismclay8858]

GARY! You should host spark a debate with other experts where you discuss potential remedies for inequality. The problem is clear. What we need is a robust solution and a solution could take on many forms, each with their own potential pitfalls

[@WillisNP]

This is exactly why trickle down economics doesn’t work. It should be flow up economics. Give to the poor, the money will be spent and flow up to business owners anyway. Then the tax recycles some of that back to the bottom to keep the money moving.

[@philliploco5037]

Gary for PM

[@carolynsmith6738]

How do you get the politicians to take this on board when they are all a part of this 'wealth' system? I'm in Australia and I'm lucky enough to own my home and my young adult kids will likely just manage to get a mortgage but I don't think my future grand kids will unless it's inherited wealth and by the time the parents die its just too late as you've already done the struggle street of raising kids etc. Prices for housing has sky-rocketed here (increases of $300k in 1 year) and there's a huge investment property market making the rich richer and new home buyers are outbid by wealth.

[@garyseconomics]

This is a big question and one that I've thought about quite a lot. Currently, in the UK we have a chancellor worth hundreds of millions, with a father in law who is literally a billionaire. Our last prime minister made £10million immediately after office and no doubt this one will too. So there is a problem really of politics being bought by the rich. For that reason I think it's important that we reach out to ordinary people and get them to believe firmly in reducing wealth inequality. If they continually demand that and vote for it politicians will be forced to concede. It won't be easy, of course, but I think it's the only way. We have to get this for ourselves, it won't be given to us. That said, not ALL politicians are entirely corrupt and self interested. We should support ones who genuinely care about society when they exist. Hope that helps.

[@ricclark8162]

we had a conservative minister who is still a conservative lord but generally seems to get it he wrote a book on generational shifts in wealth, the quote the sticks in my mind is him and his wife talkingabout being worried their kids could not afford a house then thinking dam i am not sure they will even be able to afford to rent , postwar here Labour and conservative governments compeated to build the most council houses 200,000 a year at its peek averaging 100,000 over decade 1945 to 55 , that meant the average house price was 2.5 times the average wage not 8 times and curving upwards like it is now market rents came down to match council housing and substandard housing either had to be brought up to standard or rented very cheap, it helped decomodify housing so houses were a place to live rather than a way to extract wealth , oh and people invested in profitable areas of the economy not in the sprirling housing 'market' pushing up prices fro working people we need supply to equal demmand, its a win win win win win win, we had a crisies created the luftwaffe now we have just as big a housing crisis through selfharm, Labur partypolicy is to build 150000 council houses a year in britain , this will go a massive way to solving this problem

[@blindstagehand]

I agree we need a wealth tax now, I totally buy into what you're saying. Look, money's only any use when you spend it. If you tax people when they spend their money, then that is fairly taxing the wealthiest. I don't believe in all these other taxes, they are fire fighting measures or simple poverty traps (inheretance tax, council tax, windfall tax) ~ but if every transaction made with a card or any other electronic device and even cash incurred a 1% tax, that would be amazing for everyone (end of VAT, the government scheme to make businesses tax collectors, and the vile NICs and income tax ~ GONE!) You tax the demand at as small a rate as you can and then you have to entirely and evenly redistribute the money to the very bottom, the individual. Then we get a nice demand driven economy.

[@skippy6462]

The rich in control of the media. Hopefully you'll go on tour. How about a Ted talk? How about a newsletter? Website of all your videos? Daily shorts?

[@janetkelly7114]

Can you talk about trust funds which can only be accessed if you have money and where the proceeds are not taxed?

[@johnannan2506]

I love these videos Gary. They make TOTAL sense. One question, if the super rich sink their money into assets to grow their wealth, how do you tax the assets? Sorry if that’s a dumb question. 👍🏽

[@ricardofreitas3116]

What you talk here is the reverse distribution that was started in 2008. As you said on another video, the problem with capitalism is when you don't have a balanced distribution. My question is, can't be enough to stop that reverse distribution to have a balanced distribution? By the way, in my opinion that reverse distribution is not the essence of capitalism.

[@undercrackers56]

I believe that raising Income Tax Allowance is the best way to put money in the pockets of those who need it most. Tax rebates are a "cheap trick" of trying to buy votes and only works in the dull-minded. The big problem is that no matter whether Conservative or Labour, the Government takes it's financial advice from the wealthy and well-paid. Of course they want to become more wealthy and so their advice is biased.

[@glowwurm9365]

Close down all loopholes in and around IHT and raise it to meaningful amount. If we truly live in a meritocracy then nobody should be inheriting millions, shutdown the transfer of wealth from one generation to the next and prevent eh stockpiling of wealth and assets by an ever smaller class of ppl. I would personally lose out (my father being a paper millionaire thanks to house price bubbles) but like you Gary I grew up poor, I see the implications of our warped capitalist economy and things aren’t going to get any better whilst wealth is hoarded by a capitalist class.

[@biffotube]

Love your stuff Gary. BUT BUT BUT BUT. The classic Tory response to the notion of a Wealth Tax has always been, throughout my life (I’m 64): “if you do this all the wealthy people will leave and take their money with them.” (There are other “arguments” like “the politics of envy” etc but they’re not serious.) The problem is THAT THIS ARGUMENT CUTS THROUGH EVERY TIME. AND SO IT GOES ON. If you could do a video where you meet this argument head on that would be amazing. What is the best argument against this?

[@lauramcarthur9274]

He addressed this in one of his shorts. Assets (skyscrapers, land, housing, shops etc) will remain in our country so the wealth can't leave. He used the example of how Roman Abromavich couldn't just take his wealth generated by Liverpool FC with him. It had to be sold and the asset remained in UK.

[@Mizztah_D]

I love this so much

[@willmosse3684]

How do you actually implement a wealth tax? It sounds good, but what is it in practice?

[@KJ-js7pi]

Have you tried sharing your viewpoint with traditional media outlets? Like maybe writing an Op-Ed or appearing as a guest on a radio/tv show? A wealth tax is what the UK needs.. even it's just a temporary one

[@peterscott6818]

Hi again Gary I have seen a lot more of your videos now and they are brilliant. Thanks so much for them. A request - could you do a video that relates inequality to the nature and climate crisis? It seems to me that the crisis is mostly caused by the very rich consuming a lot and creating emissions. There’s a common stat - the richest 10% cause 50% of emissions. If we are making millionaires and billionaires so much richer then we are feeding the crisis and hastening the breakdown of civilisation. Taxing wealth could provide not only money to pay nurses etc properly but also to insulate houses and retrofit homes instal heat pumps making energy usage less etc. That’s my perspective. What do you reckon? Is that something you can address?

[@0532phillipjoy]

So Gary, taxing City transactions is just not going to cut it?

[@Cemti92]

Wake up guys Share Share. Who is going to lead the labor party? Not Starma...... Wake up

[@craigkinney853]

dude I'd love to have a chat with you about your opinions on this. one person you should get in touch with for a excellent debate is mark blyth. love his lectures. any way , wealth tax is a great option but how do we tax the rich if they are able to use instruments not available to your average person to hide their cash? my second point and this is the hum dinger and always get the snobby people in a absolute rage is simply. if we dont make things we don't have an economy. it the manufacturing jobs that help provide reasonable salaries and training with the opertunities to move up the ladder within organisations where the employees are typically not university qualified. having had a debate in regards to brexit with someone who works in fiance they said " who cares who makes thingymajigs and wotsits" the last video of yours I watched you told the story of your boss said you would come back when the money ran out. they were totally out of tune about what and where you were coming from .this is the same from my comment above. people jibber on about the loss of manufacturing and how its no big deal. who made the table you eat you dinner at? who made the computer you are reading this message on? look around you at all the things that you use everyday to run your life and think who made this and how many other people need things to do their job. I don't think I have enough space here for all the stuff that's in my mind.

[@sajidqureshi3307]

Hi,...qustion,..? Would Gary consider running for the position of Chancellor of the Excecheker..?? After Rishi Sunak goes,?

[@PrimoStracciatella]

I wouldn't want to be a billionaire in a world with a high poverty and crime rate. I'd have to hide in my super luxury estates, stay on my super luxury yachts or fly from one super luxury paradise resort to another. We already have walled-in luxury resorts in poor countries where the local community lives in huts with no access to the most beautiful parts of the island because there the rich drink their daiquiris in their safe environments without having to face the poor. I'd rather give some of my wealth and thus support the people with low income and rebuild the middle class. This would create an overall healthier environment, happier people who can live a decent life, happier families, less divorces because parents can make ends meet, less crime, less drugs and many more positive effects. Of course I wouldn't be as wealthy then, maybe I wouldn't be a billionaire anymore but I still would have hundreds of millions and probably sleep better at night.

[@farmerwadams]

@GarysEconomics do you reckon this is feasible? A Universal Transaction Tax - kzbin.info/www/bejne/hZqmdKWqjcqJo9k

[@jonc67uk]

I really like this, but the Arctic & Antarctica are both in abnormal heatwaves & the environment is destabilising rapidly. Consumer capitalism is the real killer, so how do we deal with that?

[@dermolado3351]

Have you seen Kwasi's latest mini budget...seems like these guys are hard of hearing or they are just heartless...what do you say?

[@peterklauza1481]

Is Starmer brave enough to try it?

[@icrlp0570]

Hang on did you drop a coin at the beginning like 50 cent

[@garyseconomics]

Always

[@blindstagehand]

Gary, what's your take on this idea I have for a real Capitalist Democracy, do you think it's any good? Voting with ballots is for suckers, voting with money is a much better idea. Don't fund the industry, fund the individual and the individuals will fund the industry, a demand driven economy. 'The People are The Government' is about equality and voice, it is a flat democracy because participants are equally funded and is achieved with Conditional Basic Income in a Congressional Crowd Fund. 'The Economy is The Congress' is about diversity and opportunity, it is a parabolic democracy because wealth is distributed unevenly and is achieved with Unconditional Basic Income. All this is paid for by a 1% transaction tax on goods and services, that over time could render all other taxes obsolete. All transactions is all transactions, should that include interest transactions? I say so. Money based democracy is a political filter that has many advantages over ballot based deomcracy; it is non-binary, dynamic, periodic, forgiving, altruistic, responsive, immediate, diverse and eliminates many causes of corruption. In it's simplest terms, all tax revenue in a period is divided equally into each Citizen's Crowd Fund Account, and Politicians run Campaigns in the Congressional Crowd Fund the citizens buy into. Money based voting leads to good decision making. Ballot based voting leads to strong leadership. Together they make a powerful combination. Apart, they are not as powerful as together. The Congressional Crowd Fund politically adehers to three principles of Democracy; Everyone has an equal vote/amount of money, Participation is not obligitory, and the way that you vote is Private. If someone does not participate in a period, the value of the participants' vote is proportionally increased. Peoples privicy is theirs alone to make public, although in certain circumstances, greater transparency may be desired or required. [For example if you were a Tory whip and wanted to force your membership to vote against their will and those of their constituients on a subject like, say, Fracking.] The Congressional Crowd Fund could be introduced as a filter gradually by applying it to Foreign Aid. Foreign aid campaigns advertise in the Crowd Fund and the Citizens fund these campaigns on a monthly basis. Campaigns would be required to provide accountability through the Blog and Accounts section their campaign, they would need to maintain credibility because a Citizen can always change their mind next time round. Money based voting leads to good decision making. Ballot based voting leads to strong leadership. Together they make a powerful combination. Apart, they are not as powerful as together. When you vote with money, it becomes clear the Crowd Fund is a managed micro economy. This is why I say The Economy is The Congress. Dental care is arguably not covered by the NHS in England. It is far better in this case to fund the individual rather than the industry. When I was 7 I got a filling on the NHS, not because I needed one, but because that was how the dentist got paid,.. nuts! Much better give the individual some money so they can just pay the Dentist when they need to see the Dentist. Is the Dental industry in any trouble? No, because it's private. This is why UBI is parabolically democratic in a real economy. Emergency services such as A&E, Defence, Fire, Police and fundamental services like central banking, foreign affairs, civil service and justice do need to be managed at a national level with strong leadership and solid mandate. Issues such as infrastructure, rail, road, energy, big national projects that require alot of money, and some aspects of law, should be proposed and presented in a Congressional Crowd Fund, if not for full but partial funding. It's amazing how many propositions could be mitigated by simply saying "Start a campaign in the Crowd Fund, and see who buys into it?" for example: 'Give mothers £8k to stay home with children' (Telegraph 2022.10.23) I say decide that democratically in the Crowd Fund by seeing who buys into it. Being able to start a Congressional Crowd Fund Campaign is something any citizen can do. Issues such as bin collection, education, general health (seeing a doctor, teeth), housing and nourishment, the need for a mobile phone, keeping yourself clothed, socialising, fitness, should be individual choices, funded by UBI in partenership with private enterprise. These are decisions individuals should make for themselves. If you want a Ferrari, you could theoretically start a campaign in the crowd fund, but I think you would soon see it was democratically unlikely, and you're going to have to do something about it yourself. However in reality... the Crowd Fund is essencially altruistic, has to have some benefit to the community. So, thankyou, that's my idea for a Capitalist Democracy, I would love to know your thoughts. * AI, Technological Unemployment & UBI kzbin.info/www/bejne/eYHVlmCtq6tpjq8 * Tom Seeley: Honeybee Democracy: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gJ_Rm4xuZ5iYY9k

[@vvwalker7261]

You have been betting on these things for 30yrs? Aren't you 35!?!

[@charliestephenson2950]

Hi Gary, do you believe that the country is better off with mass home ownership, and is a healthy and affordable rental sector bad for the economy as a whole? Owning a house is also expensive and piles debt onto people. Just curious, as I don’t often hear much about this topic…

[@garyseconomics]

I believe that broad WEALTH ownership is essential for a healthy economy with good living standards for the majority of people. That does not in theory necessitate broad home ownership as there are many other forms of wealth, such as land and commercial property, as described in my video What Is Wealth. However, in the UK very few people hold any significant amount of wealth without owning property. Under such a setup broad home ownership is pretty much a proxy for broad wealth ownership. In theory people could be financially comfortable via, for example, large holding of commercial property/stocks and shares whilst also renting, but this is currently very rare in the UK.

[@charliestephenson2950]

My issue with home ownership as a wealth barometer in the economy is that it provides very little economic value to the economy as a whole in terms of jobs and employment and ultimately taxation. If more people understood how to invest in companies I believe that would provide better value to the economy as a whole. I recognise that it is idealistic as investing in companies is more risky, but if people also had more disposable income due to cheaper property prices, then the risk might not be such a big factor..

[@pauladams1829]

❤

[@GreenLarsen]

+1

[@londonman8688]

wealth is destroyed by inheritance tax .. if you want more wealth dont try to tax aspiration

[@londonman8688]

there is nothing worse than a city trader feeling guilty

[@PrimoStracciatella]

Oh shut up.

[@anselledmont9614]

No "progressive" tax rate. That's simply two wrongs for the price of one. How about taking away the special loopholes the greedy politicians have made for the uber rich? We had a 90% rate in the USA and that is simply looting by law... a bad law of which we have many. Taxing income is the wrong approach, tax ALL sales. Just my opinion.

[@knowledgeis5855]

Should we not just have a LOW flat rate tax across the board for individuals and corps. No possible evasion. Over proportionant taxing of the wealthy will lead to less incentive to innovate and this less jobs created by the very same wealthy. The solution is not higher taxation rates but the wealthy and corps actually paying the same percentage as everyone else. This will lead to lower rates for all. Downside is ghe corps will move to other jurisdictions where rates are not equal and evasion possible. Needs to be a global effort 😕 And then there is lobbying and corruption behind the scenes to keep this system ticking along to serve the wealthy.

[@widebleek8138]

The problem is, it is not about inequality. It is something else! Guess what that is?

[@haydnlawrence8167]

Your solution to wealth inequality is to take the money that was pumped into the economy under QE and give it to the poor, who will in turn spend it , which will stimulate the economy and in turn create jobs . We’ve been buying stuff we don’t need with money we haven’t got for decades. Credit cards have funded a debt bubble. As for creating jobs , the global job market is shrinking by the day due to mechanisation .

[@vis7139]

Nah, mechanisation brings with it new jobs as well as destroying old ones. The people who run the internet and machines, they didn't exist without mechanisation. What's screwing the economy is the gap between rich and poor. When a rich person gets money, they buy assets - like houses and shops. That pushes the price up for everyone else, because rich folk can just splash the cash so why wouldn't sellers charge more if they can get it? The government pump money around the economy, but it always ends up in the pockets of the rich. This energy bill fund by Liz Truss - that's going from taxes straight to the rich, and we have no way of clawing it back in taxes (because we don't tax assets). So the rich buy more assets, and the cycle continues - people get poorer because they can't afford to buy as much.

[@haydnlawrence8167]

@@vis7139 I agree , technology brings with it high skilled jobs but makes low skilled labour intensive jobs redundant. The hard truth is as the population becomes more stupid high skilled technical jobs become more difficult to fill . The last 2.5 years have shown us the average iq must be below 80 . What assets do the rich buy that are not taxed ? According to your metrics people get poorer because they can’t afford to buy more stuff ? What ?

[@vis7139]

@@haydnlawrence8167 You gotta remember that money isn't real assets. If I give you £5, and I give a rich guy £100, and the price goes up by £20, you got poorer even though your bank balance went up. It's the difference between nominal pay and real terms pay. Scale that up to the super rich - when they get more money what do they do with it? They buy assets - like houses, buildings, cars, jewelery. That pushes up the price of those things, because they're happy to pay more for them. You got a few quid more, but the price of everything went up above what you got paid. So even though your bank balance is a bigger number, the rich got richer, prices went up, and you still got poorer because you can buy fewer assets.

[@haydnlawrence8167]

@@vis7139 You didn’t/couldn’t answer, what assets are not taxed ? Rich people do not pay tax . Taxes are for the little people. Rich people not paying tax is not the problem , the problem is the government stealing money ie taxes from the rest of us . We need the gangsters in government and councils to stop robbing us . The sooner the whole stinking system collapses the better.

[@kevinsyd2012]

Nonsense. The poor will just buy more tattoos and burgers that will do little to boost the economy. They will not save or invest. Spend, spend, spend on crap is the mantra of the poor

[@londonman8688]

how much of your welath have you given away

[@londonman8688]

what is rich ?

[@londonman8688]

this will just be a tax on the middle class in london .. stop pretending it is a super rich wealth tax

[@PrimoStracciatella]

What tax are you talking about? He's proposing a tax on the wealthy, not pretending anything.

[@londonman8688]

@@PrimoStracciatella oit is how you define wealth. labour will go after the middle class who cant escape because they know they can get billionaires

[@londonman8688]

@@PrimoStracciatella middle class does not make you wealthy

[@kevinsyd2012]

Wealth is difficult to measure exactly (property, fine art, land, antiques) so how can you tax it? You can only tax income from that wealth as it is defined and easy to measure. Also the wealthy do not directly own their assets: they use Trusts, limited companies and other legal means to hold their assets. If they don't own it you can't tax them so a wealth tax will never work