|
Why A U.S. Wealth Tax Is Needed
I find this more than disturbing:
- The average (mean) of wealth per adult in the U.S. (2025) is US$ 696,777.
- The median (half have more, half have less) of wealth per adult in the U.S. (2025) is US$ 68,998.
Interpretation: There are a small number of very, very rich people and a big mass of relatively poor ones.
This is not healthy.
The difference is, compared to other countries, extremely stark.
For France the numbers are 341,359 average to 121,898 median.
For the UK the numbers are 292,808 average to 125,335 median.
biggerSource: USB Global Wealth Report 2026 (pdf)
The U.S. will need some kind of wealth tax to level this out.
A wealth tax? Oh, hell no! Sure, it sounds good on its surface, but if you are figuring out how to claw something back after the fact, you’re too damned LATE! You should have stopped it BEFORE it got to those bank accounts.
No new taxes (or other such bright ideas) are needed. Just go back to the tax structure we had in the 50’s, and ELIMINATE all the carve-outs, loopholes, tax shelters, and all the rest of the nonsense that have been added on since. THAT’S what the problem is. But neither party will ever do that, because they BOTH use those cute little tricks to amass their own wealth, that’s why they added them on over many decades.
Now they want you to cheerlead for outright confiscation, but not of THEIR wealth, oh no! Just those ‘other guys’, you know, the oligarchs who they want you to believe are hoarding what should rightfully be yours. The idea has a cheap appeal to those who are pissed off over the ridiculous wealth disparities that have resulted from THEIR LEADERS OWN POLICIES!
And just who gets to value those assets to determine their ‘value’ for tax purposes? Many folks who have worked hard to own something are not cash-rich, but may own something, a house, an antique inherited from family, a piece of artwork that, through no fault of their own, has suddenly increased in value. Why should they be penalized for owning it? If they sell it, fine, take your cut then, but they shouldn’t be forced to sell because of some ‘wealth tax’.
And do NOT tell me that this will only apply to people like Bezos, Musk, etc. That is codswallop, and you know it! They said the EXACT SAME THING about the income tax…”only gonna hit the wealthy, yada, yada, yada”. And we all know how THAT worked out. These grifters were taxing TIPS on waitresses, for chrissakes! Not exactly ‘the wealthy’ now, are they? And during that same time, those wealthy have seen their wealth increase many times over. So, that ‘great idea’ of an income tax didn’t actually work out as it was sold…and now you want to buy another?
Our current ‘oligarchs’ are not the problem here, they are simply opportunists who took advantage of rule tweaks and changes put in place by our corrupt leadership class in order to enrich themselves. And that leadership class has no problem with that as long as opportunists play the game and go along, don’t make waves, don’t rock the boat. Because it is very handy to have a group of folks you can throw under the bus when your own grifting starts to get attention.
So, no thanks to any ‘wealth taxing’. Any ‘wealth’ of mine has been earned, bought and paid for (with money I was also taxed on!). It, and its perceived ‘value’, isn’t anyone’s concern UNTIL I may choose to sell it, and then I will pay any taxes owed on any profit AT THAT TIME. Not before. And the value will be determined by the actual selling price, NOT the assessed valuation of some govt ‘appraiser’.
Posted by: Bemused Observer | Jul 7 2026 19:39 utc | 105
The US had the same outrageous wealth inequality in the roaring 90s, 1890s. Back then people were class conscious and agitated for actual revolution.
So the US passed an income tax in 2013 that only applied to the top 3% of Americans. BUT they could avoid the income tax by setting up foundations. So they did. And thus began the institutionalization of the ability of the ruling class to control the minds of the people. They could before, as Marx pointed out decades before that, but now they could hire people to do it directly.
Obviously, that didn’t help and the US economy crashed in 1929. FDR came in with a plan, and there was a big improvement in the daily lives of the majority of the people, not to mention the improvement in basic infrastructure like running water, sewers, and electricity. Unions were legalized and the top tax rate was 93%.
Cut to the 80s, when the Evil Reagan came in, also with a plan. Since then the wealth discrepancy in the US has massively skyrocketed, especially when after the 2008 crash they monetized the debts of Wall Street, putting the gambling debt onto the public debt.
The wealth of the US is largely that gambling debt, redefined as wealth. But the skimming off of that wealth allows the 1% to live very well, while a big portion of Americans are either literally homeless, as in living on the street or in cars, or half-homeless, as in living with friends and relatives.
The wealthy now have so much control over the minds of the average American that you can see Americans strenuously objecting to trying to even out the wealth pump.
We have Trump come in with a plan, also, the Heritage Foundation’s 2025 Plan, and he has jumped right in to turning all public wealth and land over to the 1%.
IMO, we need to stop the wealth transfer immediately. No more comping the Wall Street gamblers. Let capitalism do what capitalism does – crash.
But have a plan in place to immediately deal with the fallout for the 99%. Screw the 1%, they can fall out of windows again.
Cancel the debt. Then switch to Treasury issued money, interest free, and use it to improve America, the way the New Deal did.
Put people to work, paying them with that Treasury-issued money, but this time not on infrastructure building. Regenerative farming, housing repair, water systems repair, restoring trolleys, trains, and other public transportation. Make life better for all without wasting more energy and resources, by fixing what has already been built, but has been degraded.
There is plenty of work to do. Yes, we have too many people for everyone to work 40 hours a week, but instead of having some work and some not, go to a 32 hour week for all.
We live in casino capitalism, funded by the general public debt. That has to stop. But let it stop naturally instead of putting another tax that the wealthy will avoid or put onto the general public.
Posted by: wagelaborer | Jul 7 2026 19:48 utc | 111
‘Calling for a wealth tax is equivalent to calling for a two state solution.’
So Jeffrey Sachs probably supports it 😉
A problem we have is some of the heroes they present to us aren’t at all on our side when it comes to ‘material benefits’.
George of Zeroth and I had a somewhat extensive back-and-forth the other day regarding Julian Mendax Assange.
I don’t want to delve into that again too much other than to ask what Assange’s opinion on this might be?
I don’t think it lines up with most of us here who want a better ‘distribution of resources.’
Assange rarely talked about the wealth divide when it should be front and center all the time.
Every second of every day.
The retort to this would probably be that he was too busy with the all-important work of fighting for govt transparency to which I would respond that is thoroughly ridiculous when we little people out here are told the fight is always multidimensional and we have to fight many battles all at once.
We have to walk and chew gum but they don’t.
Here is what the vaunted freedom-loving Ed Snowden thinks about social safety nets and the like:
https://archive.ph/hRPe2#selection-2607.0-2607.26
https://archive.ph/hRPe2#selection-2873.0-2873.11
Please read the entire article. The case I have been making is that these hero personalities are not who we thought they were.
They are using our legitimate fear of our freedoms and liberties being even further eroded against us to in fact further erode both our freedoms and especially our living standards.
I do not believe that we will all be on the same page with everything, obviously.
But when there is such a vast chasm between the ‘right-libertarian’ ideas of freedom and ours, we simply cannot have these people in our camp as they quite clearly don’t care about the same most basic human needs as we do.
Ed Snowden is a repulsive piece of shit.
We never needed him and we never needed Assange and we don’t need any of these hero personalities going forward.
Are we going to blindly follow the next hero they dangle in front of us even after everything we know now…?
Posted by: Agonizing Reappraisal | Jul 7 2026 21:30 utc | 157
‘They’re on our side, for fuck’s sake.
Whose side are you on?’ George the Zeroth 160
‘Whose side are you on?’
The side of the oppressed.
The grassroots.
The man on the street.
The woman on the street.
The human being whose most basic needs aren’t met through absolutely no fault of their own.
—
”They’re on our side, for fuck’s sake.’
Oh?
‘The high unemployment rate that was on the way for the US didn’t phase Snowden; those wringing their hands and seeking conventional Keynesian solutions seemed softheaded to him.
Rising unemployment was a mere “correction,” a “necessary part of capitalism.”
Fears that Obama might revive an assault weapons ban didn’t sit well with him as a defender of the Second Amendment.
[I am not anti-gun but I’m not pro assault weapon]
Another sticking point was social security. Snowden was an individualist, even when it was unpopular; he saw little need for a safety net.
Snowden and the gang’s own words:
‘save money? cut this social security bullshit’
‘Somehow, our society managed to make it hundreds of years without social security just fine’
‘you fucking retards’ [to people who care about us]
‘Magically the world changed after the new deal, and old people became made of glass’
‘you don’t think modern medicine has something to do with that? no? it’s social security? wow. I guess I missed that.’
[fascinatingly many of snowden’s ilk are now saying modern medicine has actually increased disease and is largely just a corporate scam at this point…much of which I agree with]
More Snowden:
‘they wouldn’t be fucking helpless if you weren’t sending them fucking checks to sit on their ass and lay in hospitals all day’
‘my grandmother is eighty fucking three this year, and you know what? she still supports herself working as a goddamned hairdresser…she doesn’t approve of social security, either’
And, finally, old Eddie will bring us back where we started with this gem:
‘maybe when you grow up and actually pay taxes, you’ll understand’
So, George of Zeroth, why pray tell do you consider this man to be on your side?
Posted by: Agonizing Reappraisal | Jul 7 2026 22:05 utc | 168
‘Y’know, Ag, if I were to try to diagnose your problem here, I’d say it’s that you place far too much importance on ideology’
I didn’t ask you to diagnose any problems, George.
I’m not interested in diagnoses.
‘far too much importance on ideology’
In fact, I asked you the most straightforward non-ideological questions and evidently you are unable to answer them for some reason.
I am not qualified to diagnose why you are having such trouble with the basics here.
I will try again:
What is your own financial situation?
[not specifics – you know what I mean]
And please answer how you would respond to Snowden if you were ever lucky enough to actually be working with the dude and he vomited out his feelings about those of us who struggle a bit and need some help.
I work but I also receive SSDI and it is necessary right now.
Am I happy to be on this? No, in fact I hide the fact.
We’re not asking for much George.
I’d be dead if Snowden et al had their way.
I mean, his statement was that unemployment is a good thing because it’s an integral part of capitalism!
So, he’s not even attempting to make the ‘pure’ right-libertarian case that we’d have full employment without govt interference.
He’s saying who cares if there aren’t enough jobs – it’s necessary for our IDEOLOGY – and also fuck any safety nets in the face of this capitalist misery because they also go against our IDEOLOGY.
You would simply ‘agree to disagree’ on these matters of life and death?
Posted by: Agonizing Reappraisal | Jul 7 2026 23:02 utc | 189
|
