Are national wealth taxes worthy of debate and consideration in a hypothetical country with America's levels of deficit and inequality? Yes.
Are they legal under the US Constitution without an amendment? I do not think so.
So if you're legislative agenda is "I want to do the following 20 things and bank on a national wealth tax to pay for it," I'm worried that your actual plan is to spend several trillion dollars, have your entire tax plan wiped out by the Supreme Court in 18 months, and wind up with WWII-era deficits during a growth period with elevated interest rates, which is going to increase the cost of money and make everything even less affordable.
And that is ... not an affordability agenda.
Not an accurate headline. The Court allowed states to ban biological males from women’s sports regardless of their gender identity. A biological girl would be welcome to play on a girls team even if she identified as a boy.
George Washington playing sixth fiddle shows how much brain rot exists in this country.
Neither Obama nor Trump is mor admirable than George freaking Washington.
When Ken Griffin and Citadel left Chicago:
Total 3-Year Impact: $846M in lost taxes + $2.65B in lost spending = $3.5B economic hit to Illinois/Chicago (not including philanthropy losses).
This is a colossal failure on the part of the Biden admin (and antitrust hawks generally). The government stopped Spirit from merging with JetBlue over concerns about ticket prices. So instead the low-price company will just shut down instead. A total faceplant.
This is the best interview/conversation I’ve seen in a long long time. I know it’s impossible to watch anything for 40 minutes these days, but if you can just watch the final 20 minutes, you won’t be disappointed. Sasse’s thoughts on social media and technology = must listen.
Roughly 220 billionaires reside in California. They employ roughly 10 million people. If a wealth tax passes, everyone with a billion-dollar idea will think twice about whether they want to build that business in California. But that isn’t even the most dangerous part.
When this turns out to raise less money than expected, the bar will be lowered to $100 million. Then $50 million. Then $10 million. Then $1 million. They’ll call it “the millionaire tax.” And since ~80% of the California population isn’t a millionaire, they’ll vote it into existence because “it doesn’t affect them.”
But many of those “millionaires” are providing jobs. Housing. Innovation. Buying products and services. They’re a net economic benefit. If you discourage them from living in California, they will leave. Then it becomes a downward spiral where they have to tax everyone else to stay afloat.
Not saying the system is perfect. But a simpler solution might simply be: spend less money and encourage more people to move back / create a billion dollar idea.
One of the great political moves by the left in recent years has been convincing a large portion of America that "the rich" don’t pay taxes and it’s all poor people, when the exact opposite is true.
The Top 1% pay 46% of all income taxes.
The Top 10% pay 76% of all income taxes.
Hey Eric I’d never heard of you but quick google search said you were literally removed from House Intelligence Committee for having your office infiltrated by a Chinese spy named Fang Fang😭😭 Can’t even make it up. Maybe sit out the National Security lectures. Politicians man🫣
The SEC has had 10 different duos who have rushed for 1,000 yards in the same season.
Only 1 duo has done it twice (Felix Jones & Darren McFadden), while Auburn has the most different duos to accomplish this feat (3).