Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Metacomet who wrote (209609)	11/27/2012 1:16:03 PM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543916

Unless there is a "wealth" tax, a flat tax will hurt the upper middle class because many of the truly rich don't earn income per say. Mitt was earning his "income" as capital gains. We have a property tax but again, rich will play games to get a lower basis intended to help another group. Reagan was (in)famous for his "ranch". He didn't raise cattle - he leased the excess land to someone else so that he could claim ranch status for his manor. I think the number was 100 head or so by statute. The property tax rate for ranch land is something like 10% of that of a property like I own. Since most people don't have much wealth, a wealth tax tends to minimize the growth of wealth in the extremes that we see.