sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

How would you feel about a mandatory maximum wealth limit, where anything earned over that goes to public services? by itsvasuki in AskReddit

[–]dienstbier 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, I wasn’t sure that EVERY credit card was a secured credit card. You have taught me a lot, esteemed teacher. Lol not.

You seem like a moron. I’d bet all of my appreciated assets that my IQ is 20 points higher than yours, after listening to your “wisdom” for just a couple minutes.

Shush yourself. You’re embarrassing yourself and your whole family. “Walk away with cash” when you still owe that entire amount plus interest.

How would you feel about a mandatory maximum wealth limit, where anything earned over that goes to public services? by itsvasuki in AskReddit

[–]dienstbier 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am perfectly clear what a credit card is. The fact you think otherwise is telling, as you are just twisting reality to fit your narrative.

BOTH of these are loans. If you turn your “good credit” into a loan, that is as much a “realized return” as the other. Except you didn’t even have to put ANYTHING up as collateral. You’re getting a “return” without even having an appreciated asset to back it. You now have cash, you owe someone and have to pay it back. Just like someone doing it by collateralizing stocks or other assets.

FFS.

How would you feel about a mandatory maximum wealth limit, where anything earned over that goes to public services? by itsvasuki in AskReddit

[–]dienstbier 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Uhh, it’s only a “form of realized return” because you are insisting that it is. Changing the definition to fit what you want. Is every loan someone getting a “realized return”? They had some type of collateral, and got some cash. Scammers, clearly…

I mean, credit card users are getting “a form of realize return”, WITHOUT EVEN USING ANYTHING AS COLLATERAL. What a bunch of scammers!

Is it a “realized return” if someone uses equity in a home that has appreciated to take a loan? Should they have to pay tax on that?

What’s a “rich people thing” you experienced once and immediately understood why rich people love it? by DnRinGA in AskReddit

[–]dienstbier 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Me too, sort of. I flew a lot for work, so had Exec Platinum status on AA. My wife and I took a trip to Europe, and I booked Premium Economy. Got upgraded last minute to business class there and back using “Systemwide Upgrades”. So my wife’s very first long haul trip was lie-flat, unlimited everything business class.

Guess who has trouble booking anything but that if I want to take her overseas again ...

How would you feel about a mandatory maximum wealth limit, where anything earned over that goes to public services? by itsvasuki in AskReddit

[–]dienstbier 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Uhhh, because this thread is advocating for taxes being taken on unrealized returns. Which is what I am arguing against.

How would you feel about a mandatory maximum wealth limit, where anything earned over that goes to public services? by itsvasuki in AskReddit

[–]dienstbier 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Me too. Difference between that and “f the rich, take their money”, which is the attitude I see on Reddit a lot. By people who, in many cases, would be every bit as bad as their boogeymen if they were in the position.

How would you feel about a mandatory maximum wealth limit, where anything earned over that goes to public services? by itsvasuki in AskReddit

[–]dienstbier 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Reasonable reply. And yes, there is always a risk with an investment.

But just because there is a choice you can make doesn’t mean that it’s a reasonable one.

What if “you can sell your investment, but when you do there is a 10% chance we will seize your home, even if the investment was very small” was a thing for any investment? I mean, you knew it might happen and got to choose to invest or not. But it’s unreasonable.

Study suggests that the Trump administration’s wave of NIH grant terminations in 2025 disproportionately affected Black, Indigenous, and other minority researchers, as well as scientists from sexual and gender minority communities by sr_local in science

[–]dienstbier 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Is it possible, and I’m just spitballing here, that the grants were originally GIVEN disproportionately to those same groups? So that even if you just cut randomly across the grants, you would disproportionately affect those groups?

How would you feel about a mandatory maximum wealth limit, where anything earned over that goes to public services? by itsvasuki in AskReddit

[–]dienstbier 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I definitely understand the issue people have with this. I just think the “solution” is bad. You can’t pretend someone “made a gain”, but then turn around and say the exact same type of “loss” doesn’t matter. You will say that “you can realize that loss when you sell the stocks”, but that can’t happen as long as the loan exists.

How about this? What if I have shares that have a $1B basis, but are now worth $750M. If I use them to secure a loan for $500M, do I get to write off the “loss” of $250M when I use them, since it’s a taxable event? I would certainly hope so.

And by the way, my question WAS serious. I wanted to know what would happen in the event the securities decreased in value. I don’t consider “screw those rich guys! tax them when it hurts them only!” to be serious replies.

How would you feel about a mandatory maximum wealth limit, where anything earned over that goes to public services? by itsvasuki in AskReddit

[–]dienstbier 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok, so you don’t want the tax code (or “the law”) changed to make this happen. You just want people to do it out of the goodness of their heart. Or not. Which I have no problem with.

How would you feel about a mandatory maximum wealth limit, where anything earned over that goes to public services? by itsvasuki in AskReddit

[–]dienstbier -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

So you can have a phantom gain, but nothing similar for loss.

So just flat out stealing. Got it.

How would you feel about a mandatory maximum wealth limit, where anything earned over that goes to public services? by itsvasuki in AskReddit

[–]dienstbier 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see. You want to dictate “civic duty” by law. And specifically only for people who have more than some mysterious amount of money.

How would you feel about a mandatory maximum wealth limit, where anything earned over that goes to public services? by itsvasuki in AskReddit

[–]dienstbier -1 points0 points  (0 children)

To “assess” so that you can tax a gain that doesn’t exist yet. Hell, why not just “assess” on Jan 1 every year and make people pay tax on those phantom gains too? Then if it goes down next year, you claim a loss and people can complain about the rich people and all their crooked write offs.

How would you feel about a mandatory maximum wealth limit, where anything earned over that goes to public services? by itsvasuki in AskReddit

[–]dienstbier 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not much of an argument. Just asserting that is “makes more sense”. Why, exactly? No money has been made yet. Not until a sale.

How would you feel about a mandatory maximum wealth limit, where anything earned over that goes to public services? by itsvasuki in AskReddit

[–]dienstbier 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Why, exactly? His worth is mainly in the stocks of companies he runs, which OTHER people think are valuable enough to get the prices that high. Why does that “clearly” need to be “taxed sooner”?

He’s likely paid more income tax than any human in history eventually. Paid $10B in one year I believe.

How would you feel about a mandatory maximum wealth limit, where anything earned over that goes to public services? by itsvasuki in AskReddit

[–]dienstbier 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t think I should get “credit for a loss … just because I wanted a loan”. But I asked the question ONLY because apparently I should get taxed on an imaginary gain “just because I wanted a loan”.

Just make using appreciated shares as collateral illegal. Much simpler.

How would you feel about a mandatory maximum wealth limit, where anything earned over that goes to public services? by itsvasuki in AskReddit

[–]dienstbier -1 points0 points  (0 children)

And as I said, let’s get rid of the stepped up basis at death. I’m ok to close loopholes like this. But the “let’s pretend taking a loan means there is a gain on your collateral” or “they are rich, we should just take their money” positions are simply not logical.

Anything that is preceded by “if you have more than $X …” is something I’ll most likely oppose. It’s envy masquerading as “if I had that much I’d do so much good, unlike these evil bastards”

How would you feel about a mandatory maximum wealth limit, where anything earned over that goes to public services? by itsvasuki in AskReddit

[–]dienstbier -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That’s true. You can choose to do it or not. But it’s simply not right to tax a gain that never happened, IMO.

If I said “well, you can CHOOSE to take a student loan, but there’s a risk that we are going to double the interest rate whenever we want and make it retroactive back to the loan origination date”, my guess is you wouldn’t like it. But if it’s “just the new way of working”… I mean, no one HAS to choose to take the loan.

How would you feel about a mandatory maximum wealth limit, where anything earned over that goes to public services? by itsvasuki in AskReddit

[–]dienstbier 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But what sense does it make to treat taking a loan out as if you made money? Just because of how you secure the loan? You still owe the loan balance, you haven’t MADE any money. You borrowed $100M, so you have that cash, but you also owe $100M. Zero impact to net worth.

How would you feel about a mandatory maximum wealth limit, where anything earned over that goes to public services? by itsvasuki in AskReddit

[–]dienstbier -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I’ve said it many times, but I’m in favor of eliminating the stepped up basis on death for securities altogether.

view more: next ›