maximum net worth...

[dtom67]

A raise in minimum wage is great, but what we really need is a maximum net worth...

[Skittles]

1. you're good

I am really fooled!

[cali]

2. no we don't. Just return the tax rates to what they were under Republican President

Eisenhower and the cap gains tax to what it was under Wilson.

http://news.yahoo.com/eisenhower-obama-wealthiest-americans-pay-taxes-193734550--abc-news.html

[ananda]

11. That is a good idea.

The unwillingness to pay taxes is a huge part of our national corruption, along with unnecessary wars, too large a budget on the wrong things like military-defense, and so much sociopathic meanspiritedness on the part of teapers and corporocrats.

[RudynJack]

3. No, we really don't.

Really, we don't.

I keep reading things here that make me think "wow... that's the worst idea ever".

And then someone like you comes along to let me know there's no upper limit on dumb ideas.

[dballance]

4. I Don't Think You Have to Worry About That Ever Happening

I can't think of a way congress could twist the Commerce Clause or their authority to tax to accomplish a max net worth. I can't think of under what provision of the Constitution they'd find the authority to do it.

[The CCC]

6. I Don't Think You Have to Worry About That Ever Happening

It is not part of the Commerce Clause. Congress has the authority to tax, and at any rate they so desire. They just need the political will to do it.

While it is true Eisenhower couldn't get elected today, neither could Kennedy.

[melm00se]

10. yes

Congress has the authority to tax

it took, however, the 16th Amendment for an income tax that did not have to be apportioned to the states by population. It also, by extension, allowed for the creation of a graduated/progressive tax system.

Taxing wealth (one of the key components of "net worth&quot would require, in my mind, a similar Constitutional Amendment which would be a struggle to get ratified. Operating without an amendment would certainly guarantee innumerable and protracted court cases and based upon the court make up of the courts, any such law would probably be struck down.

[EastKYLiberal]

5. Yep. You can't have a floor without a ceiling.

But the Eisenhower tax rates, I feel, would establish that ceiling.

[The CCC]

7. Yep. You can't have a floor without a ceiling.

Even under Eisenhower the rich were still rich. With an upper tax rate of 90% on a Billion Dollars. The remain 10% is still more money than most of us will ever see.

[tclambert]

8. That tax is on income, not wealth.

Taxable income, not actual income. The very wealthy often increase their wealth largely by the increase in value of their investments. Net worth might increase by a billion dollars while the wealthy person pays taxes on only a few million in income he couldn't hide. Unrealized capital gains have never been taxed (except by the estate tax, the "death" tax Republicans hate so much). If they sell off an asset, the profit on the deal becomes income (realized capital gains taxed at 15%). Dividends, another big source of income for the rich, is taxed at a maximum of 15%.

I find it ironic that these forms of "unearned" income are taxed at lower rates than "earned" income (something rich people don't have much of).

[tclambert]

9. I would like to see a maximum corporation size as well.

Too big to fail? Split it up into smaller bite-size pieces.