Chriskmee

Because that's the only way it will work? How do you expect businesses to exist and pay bills when they make zero money?

It's one thing to willfully sell some company shares to investors, it's another to be forced to give up more shares just to pay taxes on wealth because of those shares.

This brings up an interesting point though, let's say it's a private company worth billions, where one person owns 100% of the shares, do you force them to sell also?

People may not start a business with the intent to be a billionaire, but if we say that if you make it that far we will just tax you so much you will be forced to sell away your ownership, who would keep their company here when they get close to that? I think it's telling that many of the most successful worldwide companies are US companies.

So they can keep their ownership, but we are going to remove their way to loan money against it, and still expect them to pay billions in taxes without giving away any ownership? How do you expect them to pay billions in taxes when the only billions they have in value is company ownership? You are forcing them to sell company ownership to pay this ridiculous tax.

I'm not against giving people a chance, and helping them get that chance, but that doesn't include taking away houses from rightful owners and giving them away to homeless people. It's no coincidence that the homeless tend to destroy wherever they set up, so they need to set up in government run shelters that can handle it.

So you propose they pay you exactly the amount you make them, and the company goes broke in the process, so now you also make nothing since you don't have a job?

We don't really need giant companies? Ok, sure... personally I like my high tech options these large companies offer, and their ability to offer lower prices thanks to the economics of scale. If you want to pay more for everything then feel free to go to small companies, personally I prefer to pay less for the same stuff from large companies.

They don't actually sell stock in a lot of cases, they keep it and take out loans against it. That can only go so far though, if you are like the rest of the crazy people here and suggest we just tax billionaires until they are no longer billionaires, then that won't work.

Why not take the income of these business owners? Just like we take the income of everyone else? Why special rules for taxing this specific group of people you don't like?

So take away ownership of a company just because it's too successful? That wealth is mostly in company ownership, so are you really suggesting we steal away legitimate ownership in successful companies?

Yes to taking away wealth or the way to leverage it?

Wealth in this case is ownership in companies that have a massive worldwide presence. If wealth is ownership in the companies you own, then yes, I don't think they should be forced to give that up. What they decide to spend their wealth on is up to them.

What you are worth is less than the profit you make. If a company paid you exactly the money they made from you, they would make no money and cease to exist. It's really not that complicated.

It's like asking why do stores sell products for more than it costs them to buy. It's such a simple question that even you should know the right answer.

Care to elaborate about whatever point you are making?