Yes, another insightful piece Kristian. But I believe a wealth tax is not only a hard task to assess but impossible to account for. Besides, it’s not wealth that we should be looking at. It’s money itself.
Look, if you work hard and earn more then in my view you are entitled to keep the fruits of your labour. But where I draw the line is money itself. That is presently allowed to hang onto as well. And thus holding if our money away from the rest of us is the problem why we are in a stagnant economy. Not wealth, just money.
When the government wants paying they don’t want stuff, they want money. We are no different.
The rich want stuff and money! And want and can hold both. I say hold asset hold goods and hold stuff! But money has to rotate around so it fuels our growth. That’s the starting point if you like, the passing of money back not from taxation where they get nothing in return but, from a fair exchange if SPENDING that money.
Look to get this you really need to get taxation. Our tax system is based on a monetary value attributed to SPENDING and the movement of money. In a fair exchange. And it’s fair to get an exchange of that money rather than it be taken in an unfair tax take.
In other words, make money move, and get asset in exchange that can either be enjoyed or sold on later in a fair exchange back for money. S prices any self employed businesses man knows full well. The CEO of Tesco’s exchanges goods for money and money for goods all the time! It’s not a new concept. But what it dies is rotate constantly that flow. But alas, the money the earn as profit is not necessarily SPENT and is kept and that’s then the cause of us all, the rest bring devoid of its use.
Now as an employer SPENDS on the wages and taxes of their employees the tax is triggered and paid to government. In the same way when we buy petrol it triggers vat snd fuel duty. So the common factor is SPENDING MONEY triggers taxes.
So if you SPEND more you earn more tax for the government to SPEND on the poorer end for them to SPEND back at Tesco etc. so SPENDING in a fair exchange is not only good fir all it gets more tax revenue. Because it’s the motion of SPENDING that triggers the extra taxes our government need to pay their way. It’s a win win,
But allowing money NOT to be SPENT is not good for our economy. It allows Tesco to hang onto money and not SPEND it back. They then put it in a bank or fund to lend to government to get more back and take even more snd more money out the system. Making us poorer them richer and never having to SPEND it back just keep loaning it back!
So we pay them more for NOT SPENDING it back!
Thats the issue Kristian. We are devoid of money! Not wealth. Money!!
You can easily tax money. It’s a known amount. Unlike Wesley gets an awful waste of time to try and calculate. We can gain enough tax for growth off SPENDING.
In fact, you can’t ever get growth from any economy without the SPENDING of money. That has to increase to give growth. No fronting, no growth.
This strikes me as a very intelligent and well thought-out critique of wealth taxes, which have a lure for many at a very superficial level. Unusually, a positive alternative is proposed. Its strikes me that we're in danger of arguing over shares in a static or dwindling pot, rather than seriously trying to enlarge the pot.
Yes, another insightful piece Kristian. But I believe a wealth tax is not only a hard task to assess but impossible to account for. Besides, it’s not wealth that we should be looking at. It’s money itself.
Look, if you work hard and earn more then in my view you are entitled to keep the fruits of your labour. But where I draw the line is money itself. That is presently allowed to hang onto as well. And thus holding if our money away from the rest of us is the problem why we are in a stagnant economy. Not wealth, just money.
When the government wants paying they don’t want stuff, they want money. We are no different.
The rich want stuff and money! And want and can hold both. I say hold asset hold goods and hold stuff! But money has to rotate around so it fuels our growth. That’s the starting point if you like, the passing of money back not from taxation where they get nothing in return but, from a fair exchange if SPENDING that money.
Look to get this you really need to get taxation. Our tax system is based on a monetary value attributed to SPENDING and the movement of money. In a fair exchange. And it’s fair to get an exchange of that money rather than it be taken in an unfair tax take.
In other words, make money move, and get asset in exchange that can either be enjoyed or sold on later in a fair exchange back for money. S prices any self employed businesses man knows full well. The CEO of Tesco’s exchanges goods for money and money for goods all the time! It’s not a new concept. But what it dies is rotate constantly that flow. But alas, the money the earn as profit is not necessarily SPENT and is kept and that’s then the cause of us all, the rest bring devoid of its use.
Now as an employer SPENDS on the wages and taxes of their employees the tax is triggered and paid to government. In the same way when we buy petrol it triggers vat snd fuel duty. So the common factor is SPENDING MONEY triggers taxes.
So if you SPEND more you earn more tax for the government to SPEND on the poorer end for them to SPEND back at Tesco etc. so SPENDING in a fair exchange is not only good fir all it gets more tax revenue. Because it’s the motion of SPENDING that triggers the extra taxes our government need to pay their way. It’s a win win,
But allowing money NOT to be SPENT is not good for our economy. It allows Tesco to hang onto money and not SPEND it back. They then put it in a bank or fund to lend to government to get more back and take even more snd more money out the system. Making us poorer them richer and never having to SPEND it back just keep loaning it back!
So we pay them more for NOT SPENDING it back!
Thats the issue Kristian. We are devoid of money! Not wealth. Money!!
You can easily tax money. It’s a known amount. Unlike Wesley gets an awful waste of time to try and calculate. We can gain enough tax for growth off SPENDING.
In fact, you can’t ever get growth from any economy without the SPENDING of money. That has to increase to give growth. No fronting, no growth.
This strikes me as a very intelligent and well thought-out critique of wealth taxes, which have a lure for many at a very superficial level. Unusually, a positive alternative is proposed. Its strikes me that we're in danger of arguing over shares in a static or dwindling pot, rather than seriously trying to enlarge the pot.