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

Wealth is accumulated income which is subject to income tax so wealth a different dimension, so even if you expect an additional tax that grows at the same rate? The units are incoherent.


sort by: page size:

The conflation between income and wealth in policy papers like this confuses me.

Income is not the rate of change of wealth. Wealth can appreciate significantly without being reflected in taxable income.


> wealth = income - consumption

No, income - consumption is net increase in wealth. Those are all flows. Wealth is a stock. Wealth taxes are periodic taxes on the value of the stock, income taxes are taxes on the flow.


Wealth is different from income.

Wealth distribution isn't the same as wealth though.

Wealth is different from GDP.

Wealth and income are not the same thing.

Income and wealth are two different things.

Are you talking about wealth or income?

Those numbers are in two different units: wealth is $ and GDP is $/time. Increasing wealth/income ratio could mean people are saving more.

> Even you use the words interchangeably.

How so? Wealth is the aggregate, the individual assets have value. What's inconsistent here?


Wealth is not the same thing as income, like speed is not the same thing as distance traveled.

GDP is the national income.


Income and wealth are quite different topics...

Key word there is wealth. Income is different.

You have conflated wealth and income.

Eh, it's a fuzzy topic, because wealth is essentially income at the top end. But yes, you're correct.

wealth == accumulated assets, but wealth != income

High-income people are frequently wealthy (outside of incomes derived through lottery winnings), but the two are not equal in their political views - those sitting on their wealth will be in favor of income taxes (since they barely have any), those who work for income will lean in favor of asset and consumption taxation (property, estate and sales taxes).


I think in this sense "wealth" is just "number of units of currency in your bank account". Perhaps you mean you question what "value" actually is? I would definitely agree with that.

Wealth is the integral of income minus expenses plus net unrealized gains over time. The latter two terms are pretty significant in the overall calculus, if you’ll pardon the (partial?) pun.

Income is not the same as wealth. They are correlated, but you're blurring lines. The wealthiest individuals accrue a negligible amount of their wealth from income. And the power law relationship between wealth and stock ownership doesn't end when you cross the 90th percentile either.
next

Legal | privacy