How Rich is Rich?
2022 ж. 3 Қыр.
30 401 Рет қаралды
A lot of viewers have messaged to say that they agree with the message, but worry that Gary is suggesting taxing them more, so Gary takes a moment out to explain the the difference between Rich & Super Rich.
p.s. It was very, very hot when we shot this video.
SUBSCRIBE, SHARE & START A CONVERSATION
SOCIAL MEDIA:
WEBSITE - www.wealtheconomics.org
TWITTER - @garyseconomics - / garyseconomics
FACEBOOK - @garyseconomics - / garyseconomics
INSTAGRAM - @garyseconomics - / garyseconomics
TIKTOK - @garyseconomics - www.tiktok.com/@garyseconomic...
KZhead - @garyseconomics - / @garyseconomics
Performed by Gary Stevenson
GARYSECONOMICS
Produced by Simran Mohan
MOHAN MEDIA
I hope you become just as well known as Martin Lewis.
Thanks Rahad - me too!
I was thinking the same thing.
But hopefully more radical and political!
Who is Martin Lewis?
@@aluisious Martin Lewis is a consumer advocate who is single-handedly responsible for the greatest transfer of wealth from the super-rich to ordinary people in my lifetime. He founded moneysavingexpert - a consumer rights organization. In particular he published online forms showing how ordinary people could claim back billions in income from banks for fraudulent insurance schemes and illegal charges they were pushing on people.
I'm in that middle earners bracket, with a modestly valued house - I've been acutely aware for some time that the value of our property comes with very restrictive strings attached, and that the stark reality is that unless something fundamental changes in our social, economic and political systems, my children will struggle to ever leave home! :(
Just to expand on the Duke of Westminsters lack of tax, if he had paid Inheritance tax, his tax bill alone would have been equal to all the inheritance tax or all people within the UK from the previous financial year, he dodged it by his families tax planning, they left it in a Trust rather than his name. Even our Government must find this painful.
You might not know that in Cornwall and one other county, if a person dies without a will or family then that person's estate goes to tax dodging Charles piggy bank. Laugh on you brain washed followers. Also Charles made four billion pounds in 2023 from green energy from land that should be owned by the public not the crown. I wonder why he's always harping on about the UK being colder, poorer and hungry. He's making green back from his green energy. 😂😂😂😂😉
oh my
Gov don't find it painful because those enforcing it and within gov are doing the same.
I completely agree with your ethos. I was a highly paid worker for several decades; in the top 3% of earners, I think. Short of an inheritance tax or a property tax above a relatively high threshold I have no idea how you would move wealth from the very richest people - they hide their money so extremely well, via tax havens and chained companies in secretive states!
As an example, in Italy you get taxed annually on the size of your second homes, it's very expensive there to have property empires or multiple huge homes
It’s possible; but the will needs to be there. The key is to look at physical assets and tax based on the value of them. It’s not unreasonable to tax assets that generate income at much higher rates than income generated by work.
@@hairychris21 If I own, say, a house that is "worth" a million pounds, although I may have bought it 20 years ago for £200,000, how much tax should I pay every year? As we are at the moment, if I rent that house out for £30,000 a year, I would pay income tax on that rental income. But not on the capital value of the house. Let's say they imposed a 2% "wealth tax" payable by the owner every year, what happens if the owner is NOT renting it out, and so not making a penny income from owning this house. Where is the owner supposed to keep finding the money to pay this tax?
@@gilestoman2266 read my comment more carefully. I said; it’s not unreasonable to tax assets that GENERATE INCOME at higher rates than income that is earned through work.
@hairychris and how do you plan to put that in practice? Tax rental income at source? Then more small landlord will be forced out and replaced by corporate landlord who will have systems in place to avoid paying the extra tax. Rent keeps rising as they only care about making a profit for investors
We need more like this chap, all credit to him
That Would Be Me
IMO, you are rich if your assets yield a return that is greater than your living expenses. Therefore you become richer by doing nothing.
I was going to say the same!
Thank you, Gary, for your thought-provoking analysis. The situation can not continue in the way it is now.
Thank you Gary, great French heterodox economists say the same thing as you ! It’s such a joy for us French leftists, to see some British people realizing inequalities are the roots of economics problems … If American people could see the light as well the world might be saved …
I really enjoyed your accent, out of the ordinary, as well as the point of view, and the very punk message. Thank you.
Very mixed opinions on my accent out here, so glad to have a fan
Please could you talk more about how the rich are coming for the wealth of the middle class home owners? Now that the poor have been squeezed to their limit? I think people really need to get their head arounds how wealth transfers work and how rich investors seeking returns from assets will come for the assets (property) of the middle class. Probably starting with the lower-middle, those highly leveraged or exposed to rate rises. It's super interesting and you've opened my eyes to it.
I don't think he means that rich people are actively trying to take wealth from the middle class, as if they have some sort of plan. It's just that nobody with common sense would sit on tons of cash without doing something with it, the moment they go shopping for assets they must buy from someone who is not rich (assets owned by other rich people are not for sale). This creates a one way mechanism that over time concentrates all the wealth in few hands. What they buy is totally irrelevant, can be houses, stocks, bonds, land... as long as they buy and hold it's only going to get worse.
Omg, you make so much sense. I love listening to you. Thank you
Thanks Alison
Spot on Gary. Another Superb video. As always, I have shared on Twitter to bring more eyes to the subject
Finally, a voice for the People!
Some great points again. I worked in a hedge fund where the owner posted a copy of his tax return on his office door and was proud/boasted that he had paid the accountants who prepared it more than he paid the tax man...
Very good video. The point about tranfer of wealth through selling of property in order to realize wealth is such a great point.
I remember the guy on Question Time a couple of years ago complaining about high taxation whilst earning £80k. At the time, he was vilified. Yes, he earns more than most... But he's still at the mercy of his boss, market conditions etc. He is only a few months better off than someone of 20k. But most people don't get that, they just see their salary and see the bigger one and think "you're rich, you should be taxed more". Meanwhile, those not on PAYE with existing huge assets get off without criticism.
This is happening with the train strikes - the super rich building a narrative for the media to guilt trip those on 40-70k, so the majority on a lower salary turn against them simply for having a few k a year (all taxes at a higher rate) more. Meanwhile, the super rich are accumulating millions+ with no repercussions. It's like that analogy of the guy with a horde of cookies telling the guy with zero cookies that the person with 1 or 2 cookies is taking away his share.
I understand what you say about the value of your house and not being able to access that money. That was my argument when my 90+ year old mother was expected to pay care home fees at the end of her life based on how much her unsold house was potentially worth. And when it was sold it didn't make much more than half their "value"
Hi Gary. While I agree with the idwa . The question I ask is who would enforce this. Would it no have to change government as well to enforce this idea? Thanks for all your videos and information. Paul 🇮🇪
I think a major problem is we’re stuck with parliamentary democracy. In order to tax the wealthy you need a template to do it which is a political party. The current options will never add it to the agenda you’d have to start a one issue party as a protest then if you gain traction win win
Home ownership is going to get worse because it's starting to slow down so your average person will not be buying home due to money being tight, were as the rich will get them at a cheeper rate.
Exactly mate. The assets will concentrate in fewer hands. It'll also mean the crash won't last long either / will have a floor. Ie it won't become truly affordable. We need to tax wealth. And we need to build public housing
We need to be able to get people like you into an independent think tank to help the public get good information to make informed choices. Looking forward to reading the book.
Thank you Gary at last some explanation about the systems that the rich employ
Appreciate your videos, you speak so much truth. How do you solve the issue of ‘if we tax them, they’ll just go overseas…’ argument which is always trotted out when these things are suggested?
That's ironic as many of the corporations and hedge funds that are running this country come from overseas.
Drug dealers, fraudster etc... have a lot of money.... the police can freeze their accounts seize their assets.... tax evasion/dodging is also a criminal offence.... why are the same laws not applied to the super rich.... UK CORRUPT GOVT
I covered this in another video, here you go: kzhead.info/sun/Zc2Mo9mXp6l-hn0/bejne.html
Tell this to Keir Starmer wealth tax on super rich's property
Have you been approached by Enough is Enough?
I have not actually yet. I've been quite busy writing the book recently so have not been too involved, but I'd love to talk with them.
@@garyseconomics Wish you the best with the writing.
@@dtcarrick thanks Tom
@@garyseconomics would the book be about wealth inequality?
@@nad8038 Hmmm, what can I say. It is not really strictly about inequality, it is more of story/narrative driven autobiographical thing. But inequality is definitely going to be a big part of it.
In Russia home ownership rate 89%. Much higher than the uk (65%). Also homelessness rate in Russia 4 per 10k. homelessness rate in uk 54.4 per 10k. That’s more people homeless in the uk than in Russia and the uk population is much smaller.
There is no doubt that the shift in wealth is getting wider and will continue to do so during high inflation. Those with less will be squeezed more and more meaning they will have to sell anything of value just to survive and will never be able to buy a house. The rich will then buy it and add to that ever growing pot.
I totally agree Gary. As people also get priced out of their area, as in London, many will head to cheaper suburbs or other cities that are cheaper, which will perpetuate the issue. Unless the government build more affodrable homes, and council properties, the smaller housing stock is rising in value at a much larger growth rate than wages. Those with capital are buying up housing stock to renovate and sell on at profit (so many tv shows dedicate themselves to this now). This leaves people on lower wages stuck at the mercy of, buy to let landlords and the private market, neither of which are keeping rents down across the UK. The poorest are subsidising the rich and paying their mortgages or just outright being fleeced by a class of homeowners using the poorest as their pension fund.
Building "more houses" is simply not a solution without also taxing land and property.. All it does it makes the wealthy investors own more properties, which are going to be rented "at market prices", but in fact the prices are established by the rich investors who can do as they please, because a handful of them owns as much wealth as half the population. It's a price fixing syndicate, in effect. They can afford to keep empty properties, because the taxes on properties are too low to matter for them, if it means fixing higher rents.
@@silverlinings3946 use a wealth tax to make the super wealthy pay for their assets. Either people accept that their lives will be worse, or unite with groups such as Enough is Enough and put mess pressure on the government and Labour to consider policy changes. En masse the public have a lot of power, but people have to unite. The poll tax was the end of Thatcher and people power worked!
Manchester is becoming the same as London as the super rich have all invested
Love your shirt man, and thanks for these videos to enlighten us with your valuable knowledge. I have a six digit income, but I pay 50% tax.
Very rare we get a positive message here about my fashion - thanks!!
Gary, can you show some simulations what happens when the super rich pay tax on their inheritance, properties etc. to see where the money goes. Tax transparency is also an issue.
This would depend on how the money was spent. It could, for example, be used to reduce the taxes that ordinary people pay, especially the taxes that fall most heavily on the poorest like council tax or the lower levels of national insurance. In those cases the money would go to ordinary workers who would then use it to improve their quality of life. You could also use it to improve public services in which case it would raise the wages of public sector works, improving their quality of life, and also improving the broader economy by allowing them to have more money to spend. Putting money in the hands of ordinary workers, rather than the rich, has a multiplicative effect, as the ordinary workers spend the money, driving up the wages of OTHER ordinary workers, who then spend it again, as opposed to the rich who use it to buy assets FROM ordinary families, making ordinary families poorer over time. Maybe I'll make a video on this at some point.
@@garyseconomics Gotta educate the rich how their wealth should be distributed :)
@@vid_damp5519 I think you underestimate the intelligence of the rich. They already know how to spend their money (and other people's money too) to improve their own finances by exploiting their workers and customers, and often their business partners. What makes you think that they would suddenly grow compassion out of their greed?
@@silverlinings3946 Yeah I guess when I said "educate" I probably meant some sort of compulsory re-education and/or higher tax by policy, not expecting the rich to suddenly start giving away their wealth.
@@vid_damp5519 yes, I agree. Compulsory re-education camps for the rich, I like the idea 😄
Gary mate, another great vid. Perhaps when talking about “what is rich” we should also be bringing up elephant in room: what is “enough”? Where do needs end and wants begin? What is a minimum and maximum level of luxury that should be tolerated in 5th richest nation?
In the past economists have tended to use a multiplier as a measure of 'what is rich', so you would say a rich person/CEO of a company is 200* times better paid than the lowest paid worker within that company - *or 300 times, 400 times etc. That would be a social decision: what are you as a society prepared to accept? This suggests that if a full time shop worker at a British supermarket earns £17k, then the top pay for the boss would be approx £3.4m, £5m or £6.8m pa. (200, 300, 400 times). If the boss wants to be paid £8m pa then they should also raise the pay of the lowest paid within the business pro rata.
Gosh fascinating
Loving the videos. Very informative. Curious, I’m sure you covered this, but what would stop the super wealthy going elsewhere? Am sure a sensible answer just curious on your thoughts/analysis?
This might help: kzhead.info/sun/Zc2Mo9mXp6l-hn0/bejne.html
Let them leave we would be better off without them ! They are the very reason we are in this position. Pure greed. What has happened this year was planned 12 years ago.
Gary - have you come across Michael Hudson's work. Many books on financialisation- of which Killing the Host is a well known one. Just a thought. I was just listening to Kari Polanyi talking about her father's work on The Great Transformation - this would also seem to me to be a foundational argument why we should tax the very rich more. All bw - keep going - these inputs you make help working people understand what is going on.
Big Ups sir.
Do you think the rising cost of living will have any effect on house prices?
The slogan should be “tax the filthy rich” or “tax the filth” instead of “tax the rich”. Everyone would support that because no one would think themselves as the filth.
Totally agree. This would be a smart message.
Err… how come nobody has mentioned the vest? Look at the vest! Look how mental the vest is! It’s a purple drape vest! It’s amazing…
It has picked up a few mentions. I think it's interacting with the mic somehow.
@@garyseconomics serious point. I found you on the new statesman podcast and was really impressed with your analysis. You have a role to play in the political debate in this country and I think your channel is about to blow up. I encourage you to influence from the landing zone of the Venn diagram. Change can only be affected by bringing people with you so don’t fall into a “burn it all” trap… p.s. how do I order a Gary’s Economics purple vest?
@@rjm0234 haha no idea. I bought it years and years ago... Maybe from Top man! Maybe it doesn't exist any more!!
This might be slightly off the subject of personal wealth but I hear the energy producing companies do pay 40 percent tax. So the government gets quite a bit of money from the excessive profits made. It was mentioned on Radio 4. I would be interested in hearing what Gary makes of this. Thanks.
Hi H p, I partially address this in my latest video: kzhead.info/sun/eZSNnMNpfXVshI0/bejne.html
Just commenting for the algorithm so you show up in my feed.
Imagine a world in which the tax hierarchy was flipped upside down... Zero income tax below, say, £30k and instead 20% tax on all wealth above £1m (land, property, inheritance, etc) and no interest handed out on cash savings above £1m. It's not a growth model, but a maintenance model. Just throwing numbers out, so Gary I'd be intrigued to see a video in which you build that vision and what it would look like economically. It's great that you're highlighted how the system is broken, but the left is in desperate need of a vision of a real alternative for people to fight towards. Thanks!
I do agree with what you are saying, however just having assets won't solve this cost of living crisis. There is also the issue of low wages. Wages need to be able to cover living expenses and the still have some disposable income to invest in assets. No one should be selling their home to pay their heating bill.
🍻 Gary Your thoughts on PM Truss' 'remedies' for the Cost of Living Crisis, particularly with regard to NOT imposing a windfall tax on energy producers but also more generally.
Thanks SkyEcho, this week's video should answer your question: kzhead.info/sun/eZSNnMNpfXVshI0/bejne.html
@@garyseconomics Excellent! 🍻 Gary
The richest and powerful who are in control of the world powers and economics won’t give up their positions
63% marginal. Mention the non-monotonic tax bit for not even super high salary 100k-125k. It goes back down after. People don't believe you when you tell them.
Forgive my ignorance; How much wealth is available to be taxed from the super rich in the UK? How does this relate to costs for improving/maintaining services like the NHS? What are the mechanisms for taxing this wealth? Is it possible to do so without the super rich just moving wealth into mediums or assets that are more difficult to tax?
No it’s not possible to tax them properly without them leaving. Thats the problem. Talk is cheap.
Spot on.
Taxation is only part of the solution. Wealth is about owning assets. Assets have to be taken back into collective public ownership so income flows where it is needed and you don't enable massive strikes of capital. Assets should perform to the benefit of those that do the work to create them and live and work in those asset spaces. A return to a pool of social housing to enable people to be have housing stability when other parts of their lives are maybe not so stable. For people to collectively own the spaces where they work and to benefit directly from the wealth they create.
Whats your view on abolishing the non-dom regime? Greater tax receipts vs risk of not attracting wealthy individuals to the country...
interesting . My son asked me how much money he would need to be rich I said about 11 million in about 20 years time. Good luck to him. We are from the same background as you Gary.
You said people with very valuable houses can't utilise that value/wealth? - So equity release mortgaging and buying more houses / nice cars, extending the house and going on holidays. Is that not accessing the value? - I didn't really get the point you were making at the 8 minute mark.
You would be an asset to the @eiecampaign. You could really get the word out and the pressure on if you spoke about this at their rallies. Enjoyed your explanation 🙂
Hi Gary, have you heard about the idea of a flat rate (2%) financial transaction tax to replace income tax, VAT and profit tax? The maths has been done and this would generate far more revenue than the current taxation system, while giving the average earner much more spending power. This system would naturally draw more from large interbank transactions and financial market transactions. I would like to hear your thoughts on alternative taxation systems in general. Thanks
That sounds like a really interesting alternative
Thats a cool idea. Would rich people get round it by possibly trading other assets like gold in order to buy things?
Doesnt work. The profit in security transaction can be as low as 0.001%. If you put 2% tax. All transactions will stop on UK exchanges and move to brussels hong kong singapore dubai.
Loving the maroon vest g. Where's it from
I would love to see Gary and Bernie Sanders in conversation, I suspect that the common ground they share would be worth witnessing.
Eventually something will happen when a large number people are struggling to have a reasonable living and others own most of the wealth. In France and Russia they had revolutions.
If we can't accurately define which group we are trying to tax, then you have pretty much lost before you even start. Anyone worth over £100M, tax has always been optional. If we actually tax 10% on centi-millionaires and esp billionaires annually, there probably is no need to even have income tax. This also goes for mega-corporations that need to actually be taxed, instead of just the SME being taxed to death. If mega corporations like google, facebook, amazon, etc are actually taxed even 5%, we probably do not need to even tax the SMEs. We need to think about what we are trying to achieve. We are trying to reduce the gap between the very wealthy 0.01% and the rest. Why? Because the bigger the 0.01% wealth gets, the more everything gets outpriced for the average. So governments must use tax to reduce wealth at the 0.01%, to balance out society. Everyone in the West is taxed way too much as it is, and all this can be abolished if governments actually collect tax from the 0.01% using a flat 5-10% tax.
In the U.K. millions are suffering severe poverty and wealth/wage inequalities , until all of this is rectified across U.K. and the world no person should be allowed more than £2 million
But the UK used to have colonies. What happened to all the funds they looted there
The UK has one of the highest levels of income inequality in Europe, although it is less unequal than the United States.
My counterpart (college management level) in russia does not own a house, or a car, doesn't go on holiday and her clothes could fit into 2 suitcases . This after working for 20 + years. Her salary was a small fraction of mine and mine was pretty average.
I'm new to the channel - no one has ever explained to me why wealth inequality is a bad thing Can anyone explain why there's a problem with a small number of people making a tonne of money? Does it hurt me if someone else makes money?
Great video but the sound on most of your videos tends to be low.
90% tax on income over $10M annually. Current taxes on income below that. US did it for 30yrs. Totally changes the way business owners manage their business. It it no longer in their interest to squeeze wages so they can take the money out and give it to themselves.
Home ownership in uk is 65%. In Cuba it’s 90%.
When you never need to ask: "How much is that?"
To calculate your net worth you should also included any non-state pension you have. To work out the value of a final salary pension, take the yearly pension and multiply it by 20. If you are already taking your pension you should multiply the annual value by your expected lifespan in years. If you have a pension pot, just add the pot value to your other assets.
+1
Well if you "tax the rich people", meaning the people that own more than 3.5 million pounds, how precisely would you do that? Because almost regardless how you do that you would hurt people that does not have even close to 3.5 million. Because these rich people got many different assets, mainly property and shares in companies, so if you tax that you will hurt everyone that own property and shares. Unless you tax like they do for example in Norway, where everything you own is added up in your tax return and taxed at around 1% or whatever. So if you own 3.5 million you would be taxed 35.000 pounds every year regardless if you earn that kind of money or not. So how fair is that? Also if your assets is shares in your company your would have to either sell the shares, or take out huge dividends to pay the tax bill, meaning your company will get a disadvantage compared to companies that does not have this problem, and will be a problem when/if your company has to compete with companies that is run from abroad from a country that does not tax like this. If someone own an expensive house they may have to sell it to pay their taxes. It can be done of course, the question is how many is going to move out. In Norway they have this system, and every year rich people choose to leave and move abroad, mainly to Switzerland or any other country that does not tax assets in this way.
Please run for government they need more people like you
Wealth is basically society subsidizing a certain group of people.
If you can generate passive income over & above your spending requirements then you are infinitely wealthy
£3.5m would be too low, it captures the productive sector and the mega wealthy would escape it. If you take UHNWI (Ultra High Net Worth Individual) Level which has been defined as $30m+ in assets excluding family home and an income of $1m+ is a better level. However, Nations would actually have to work together to make sure people like that can’t move their assets beyond a single Country’s tax system.
I respect your mission but the people who make the rules make them to improve the lives of the people who make the rules
There shouldnt be any inheritance taxes
Wouldn't more social housing help as well?
The system during my lifetime has always been corrupt
I agree totally we must find away to tax the rich we must thete are ways we can also education to make people realise its to be a better person to soread wealth also my old mum use to say ypur wealthy if you have a roof over your head full belly but most of all loved and good health we beed to push thst veiw again gary im soreading the word your brill abd soooo clever
People just need educating. Rather than selling assets such as homes just borrow against them.
Tax the assets
Gary. I'm not rich but comfortable. Retired. I listen to you, look at you and your eyes. Are YOU happy as a person?
Tax expensive houses properly and companies: that is where wealth is.
Big fan of your content. Eye-opening but I'd love to see you produce some short-form content that concisely gets your point across so that I can share it with people that I know need to hear this message but lack the attention span. Maybe it could be your intro video. Something that explains the transfer of wealth and explains why in 60 seconds. Subscribe to find out more.
£3m doesn't feel like that much.. hold that in the bank or investments and you just feeel comfortable ( maybe )
RICH IS JUST BEING BORN POOR IS JUST A POSITION YOUR PUT IN....
CAGR of the wealthy should not be on average higher than CAGR of the less wealthy. This is the fundamental principle of taxation of rate of growth of wealth (multiplicate rate more important than additive)
Consumption tax is better. Trillionaire doing nothing ... investing in research etc. Do they need to pay tax? What is "income"? Why tax labour at all? All of these questions need to be asked. Income Tax is vestige of serfdom era. It does not make sense. We should effectively be taxing low income more since presumably we want to encourage high paying jobs not low paying jobs.
So you sayin "rich = ppl can live off their wealth without NEEDING to get a day job"? (cos some of them may work full time but not out of necessity.) Would love to have your one-liner definition of high-earner vs rich. Then you'll get less "r u gunna tax us?" thing.
It's when oil companies get 90p back on the pound but we can't find money to invest in green energy and nuclear power plants. That you know this country is ruled by the .1%
Seems to me the important thing to understand about wealth inequality is the 1% have a 1% which has a 1%. At each stage, the wealth multiplies. One implication is solutions must have the same multiplying character. So, for example, truly proportional taxation would have a rate for the bottom* 99% and a top 1% rate and a top 0.1% rate and a top 0.01% rate and a 0.001% rate. Currently we treat billionaires the same as people making £85k. *subdivided
Is that 3.5 million pound for the top 1% of adults or "households". If it's adults, then those "households" are probably worth far more
I think the govt should always tax people 20% richer then me always 🙂
Non dom shouldn't be a thing Off shore shouldn't exist
The year is 2030, I own nothing, have no privacy, but I am happy
Wasn't that Klaus Schwab?
@@1258-EckhartNo it was joeltreliving.
TAX THE SUPER RICH and give the people a Universal Basic Income!!
The richest are becoming our pimps !
I've been trying to say the same for years, and of course have been accused of envy. And yet I'm just fitting into the 2% of richest people in this country by your definition. I'm not envious, but I poor and built my wealth mostly myself. I have no idea why people who own a mortgaged property, don't think of deducting the sum of their mortgage from the value of their house, to realise value of their actual assets.
I think this will also lead to people supporting the more fascist movements in our countries. People think that the government is in total control of the economy at least in the US.
We’ve dropped down to being the World’s 6th largest economy, overtaken by India. Inequality seems to be working for them if this is the measure of success. B Johnson said inequality is necessary and poverty inevitable. How do we challenge this thinking when by the markers of success we currently go by it’s working?
I'm just in the 99th percentile and I'm not rich. Currency is so worthless to be (live the imagined life of) a millionaire you need at least £7,000,000 liquid.
Sorry Gary, this is a non starter IMO. Taxing people based on the value of the property they live in didn't work for Thatcher; it was her downfall. Taxing people on their accumulated wealth will be seen by the vast majority of the population as grossly unfair as you'll be taxing people twice. First when they earn it and then again whenever the Government decide to audit those accumulated earnings (wealth). Milton Friedman addressed this, citing the accumulation of wealth for family and children as the prime motivator in making people industrious. He says if you double-tax that way people loose incentive and blow it all on coke and hookers.
Guess it will be the collapse into widespread poverty then. I suspect it may well be tbh.
Do you mean richest 1% has 3.5 million in cash or total assets cash etc….
Assets
Cash is classed as a current Asset
Bri'ish philosophers be like:
The other side of my family not blood related have a family office and aways complain they are poor.. Their hedge fund is worth BILLIONS. It's so hard living on the other side of that. They won't even let me get a job there because I'm not posh.
Don't worry, they are all heading to the same place as you, just a different route. 😅