this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2024
642 points (89.5% liked)

General Discussion

12071 readers
37 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy.World General!

This is a community for general discussion where you can get your bearings in the fediverse. Discuss topics & ask questions that don't seem to fit in any other community, or don't have an active community yet.


🪆 About Lemmy World


🧭 Finding CommunitiesFeel free to ask here or over in: !lemmy411@lemmy.ca!

Also keep an eye on:

For more involved tools to find communities to join: check out Lemmyverse!


💬 Additional Discussion Focused Communities:


Rules

Remember, Lemmy World rules also apply here.0. See: Rules for Users.

  1. No bigotry: including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
  2. Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
  3. Be thoughtful and helpful: even with ‘silly’ questions. The world won’t be made better by dismissive comments to others on Lemmy.
  4. Link posts should include some context/opinion in the body text when the title is unaltered, or be titled to encourage discussion.
  5. Posts concerning other instances' activity/decisions are better suited to !fediverse@lemmy.world or !lemmydrama@lemmy.world communities.
  6. No Ads/Spamming.
  7. No NSFW content.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dfc09@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Basically (and I'm not an expert here), the Uber rich get tax free spending money without taking big taxable salaries by leveraging their assets for super low interest loans. Current tax codes don't consider these loans as taxable income, but they're being used for the same things us peasants use our income for. By considering these cash flows as taxable, billionaires wouldn't be able to hide behind the "it's net worth not liquid income" bullshit these use to dodge taxes.

[–] geogle@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Would this mean we are taxed on the value of our houses should we have a mortgage on it.

[–] xenoclast@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

Possibly this could be prevented by having floor and ceiling limits to this. Could even exclude mortgages if you remove corporate ownership and limit taxes to multiple mortgage situations.

Although honestly the simpler the rules the better for everyone. So maybe some people get screwed in a couple areas but would still be way better off