upvote
Regarding "moral compromise," many in this thread are missing the forest for the trees. The trees are taxi drivers and airbnb noise complaints, the forest is a policy environment that is absurdly tilted towards capital:

- Ordinary income has sky-high taxes compared to capital gains, and you don't even have to pay the taxes on capital gains if you don't realize them!

- Inelastic labor supply mismanaged into increasingly soggy demand, mathematically tanking wages

- Attributing credit for job creation to capital without attributing blame for job destruction to capital

there are more, but these are all Political Economy decisions that didn't have to be this way. They are this way because people with money and power wanted them to be this way and were willing to morally compromise to get them this way.

reply
I think it's necessary that capital gains are only taxed when realized - anything else would be an accounting nightmare full of loopholes. However we could define more things as forms of realization - using it as collateral should count as realising it, and maybe casting certain shareholder votes that affect you financially
reply
If I can pay property taxes on the unrealized value of my house, a notoriously illiquid asset with a notoriously subjective and noisy valuation, then billionaires can pay property taxes on their galactic piles of unrealized gains, which are more liquid than a firehose and easier to value than a $2 bill. This could crash the economy if done too aggressively, but the same can be said of every important economic decision ever made.

We've been pushing all the money into the capital economy and all the taxes into the labor economy and this can't go on forever.

reply
Property taxes are a completely separate kettle of ill-considered fish.
reply
> PG's response can be boiled down to "nuh uh"

Worse, it's just a long post trying to show that doing math with a calculator somehow disproves real-life ethics.

reply
> that "earning" a billion dollars cannot be done without some moral compromise.

What did George Lucas do?

LeBron has to be worth a few hundred million. What did he do?

reply
I came to read well constructed rebuttals like this.
reply
> Sure, if you start off with $2 million and double it 9 times, you end up with $1 billion. Exponential growth is a powerful thing, so it comes as no surprise that maintaining a large growth rate over time very quickly grows a starting sum into a much larger pool of money.

Reminds me of this post I’ve seen making the rounds recently about a welder at SpaceX who was making $28/hr becoming a millionaire.

They keep emphasizing he’s a welder, the system works, and at the verrrry end mention he was issued 10k in stock a decade ago at SpaceX and held until it IPO’d the other day. The only “lesson” here is “if you own stock and stock go up you get lots of dollar bucks.”

They keep emphasizing “he’s a hardworking welder.” My response is “great! Let businesses take a lesson here: give all your employees a chunk of the company. Let’s all share in the success!”

But that’s obviously not their point.

reply
I don't think they hid the point that he was issued stock? I thought it was pretty obvious? Which is why they're talking about it now, because the value of those stocks shot up because they went public
reply
Yet they keep talking about an emphasizing how he was a hardworking welder first when, frankly, it’s borderline irrelevant to his being a millionaire.

The thumbnails often just tell the welder story, for instance. It’s very clever (misleading).

reply
Yes! What's wild is that the story is a microcosm of what's wrong with the economy as a whole, where his work was worthless in comparison to his winning lottery ticket, which itself was (charitably) 10% due to SpaceX achieving its original mission and 90% due to investor optimism about AI datacenters in space.
reply
> My response is “great! Let businesses take a lesson here: give all your employees a chunk of the company. Let’s all share in the success!”

Don't >95% of tech companies offer stock options or equity, from startups to FAANG?

reply
A cursory search says 74-90% (in the US), but also that’s just tech companies and usually you need to be early. It’s also often in the form of options that take years to exercise and companies have gotten very creative lately in how they screw people out of them.

Looooots of caveats here.

reply
deleted
reply