Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

Seems like we're conflating wealth with income?


view as:

Wealth is just the generative form of income expenditures.

How do you tax the "wealth" that is being able to get free food from a food bank, or a monthly check from the government?

How do you tax a bunch of experiences and education?

I dont think we should tax "wealth" when it's just a choice of what to do with post tax income. And pre tax investments are taxed on their exit (eg 401k)


> Nassim Taleb makes some good points about that here[2], for instance, ~ 70% of Americans will spend a year in the top 20% and only ten percent of the wealthiest five hundred American people or dynasties were so thirty years ago.

In this specific instance wealth vs income matters because the above statement is true of income, but very untrue of wealth.


What makes you think it's untrue of wealth? 80th percentile wealth in the US is a net worth of ~$500k. That's where most people are at retirement when your house is basically paid off and there is money in your 401(k).

But the higher percentile people. For example the 1 in 1000 are at $43 million dollars in wealth.

  Net Worth Percentile Net Worth
  10.0% -$962.66
  20.0% $4,798.06
  30.0% $18,753.84
  40.0% $49,132.21
  50.0% $97,225.55
  60.0% $169,550.64
  70.0% $279,594.27
  80.0% $499,263.50
  90.0% $1,182,390.36
  95.0% $2,377,985.22
  99.0% $10,374,030.10
  99.5% $16,115,373.00
  99.9% $43,090,281.00
Source: https://dqydj.com/net-worth-brackets-wealth-brackets-one-per...

> ~ 70% of Americans will spend a year in the top 20%

The 80th percentile is the top 20%. Nobody said anything about the average person ever being in the top 0.1%.


https://dqydj.com/net-worth-by-age-calculator-united-states/

The median net worth for a 60-64 year old is 225k a far cry from 500k. And 66% of the population have less than 500k at that age.


You're assuming "retirement" is still at 65, but increasingly it isn't. The median is actually highest at the oldest age group on that chart.

Everybody also forgets to include the net present value of social security (basically an annuity you were forced to buy), which is a disproportionately large amount of the net worth for lower income people both because they don't have as many other assets and because the income cap limits how much it adds to the net worth of the people at the top. (Though people would generally have a higher net worth without it; it pays back less than you'd have from investing the same money in an index fund.)


The numbers don't change much at all for 80+.

Not to mention lots of people won't live until 80 much less 60.

And adding social security would increase the % of people who had 500k but would also increase the net present value of individuals @ the top 20%.


Legal | privacy