Twitter | Search | |
mcc
Earlier today Bill Gates in an interview said he doesn't like Elizabeth Warren's wealth tax because he thinks he will have to pay "$100 billion" and he will have to do "a little math"(?). That sounded wrong, so I did the math. Text version:
Reply Retweet Like More
mcc Nov 6
Replying to @mcclure111
Note: I am not licensed to give tax advice in any state, and may have made errors. Bill Gates, if he is reading this, should not take tax or investment advice from me. Fortunately for Bill Gates, Elizabeth Warren has offered to explain it to him personally
Reply Retweet Like
mcc Nov 21
Replying to @mcclure111
By the way, here's a good visual demonstration of how misleading the logarithmic scales in my tweet at the top of this thread are. The quantities of money involved when you're talking about a Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos are seriously difficult to think about
Reply Retweet Like
Creatrix Tiara Nov 8
Replying to @mcclure111
My question when it comes to claims like "XYZ has $100 billion" is how much of that is actual cash flow and how much of that is just a paper valuation? "Worth $100 billion" is very different from "has $100 billion in easily-liquidated assets".
Reply Retweet Like
mcc Nov 8
Replying to @creatrixtiara
I think this question would be a real concern if we were talking about an actual wealth confiscation but for a wealth tax it's not the same thing. In the wealth tax a paper valuation is what's being taxed, and the tax only requires 2-3% of yr assets be liquidatable within 5 years
Reply Retweet Like
@hirojin@dev.glitch.social Nov 7
Replying to @mcclure111
at which % is income taxed (under Warren's plan)? I'm most European countries it's taxed at 50+% for people earning such obscene amounts of money also, money earning money is taxed, at least in Austria, dunno yet about Germany
Reply Retweet Like
mcc Nov 7
Replying to @hirojin
Warren's plan is a wealth tax, which means you're being taxed on your net worth and not on how much you're making. Gates is retired so his normal taxable income is probably $0 and that would be the same in any country (maybe he makes some money from speeches idk/idc)
Reply Retweet Like
Tom Forsyth Nov 8
But that's not what he said. Stop reading the cascades pull-quotes and watch what he actually said, in context:
Reply Retweet Like
mcc Nov 8
the text of the teddy schliefer tweet seems to match exactly the words in the video
Reply Retweet Like
agtmadcat Nov 7
Replying to @mcclure111 @ALWyvern
I don't get how everyone is reading this so strangely. He said doubling the amount he's paid in taxes is totally fine, but going up an order of magnitude would feel, to him, unreasonable. I think that's a sensible view.
Reply Retweet Like
mcc Nov 7
Replying to @agtmadcat @ALWyvern
I think the important thing about the wealth tax is not that it's a change in magnitude but that it's a change in *nature*. Right now you can more or less escape the effects of taxation by simply making enough money that your income looks to the government like investment income
Reply Retweet Like